Pharmed: Vigilance Case Study

Vigilance means keeping an eye out for possible hazards. The name is quite appropriate for a program that is being designed to monitor adverse drug events associated with a pharmaceutical company’s products. However, it is impossible to achieve a state of vigilance when you are embroiled in conflict with the very teammates that are supposed to be helping you achieve that state.
In the case of PharMed, their attempts to implement their adverse event software, Vigilance, was doomed from their initial meeting. They did not allow enough face to face time between team members as a whole. They also failed to allow subteam members time to meet and discuss both prior lessons learned and current approaches to implementation. This oversight was the first of many in a chain of events that led to significant internal conflict and threatened not only the Vigilance project, but the merger as a whole. Their choice of project leader who lacked the skills of a transformational leader was also a failure. That one choice became the source of much conflict generation.
Multiple simultaneous conflicts were occurring that were poised to doom their entire effort. Conflict was occurring between team members located in the United States and France. Conflict was occurring between members of the Drug Safety Division and the Information Services Division.
This delay was secondary to the U.S. team’s failure to seek assistance earlier in dealing with the project manager. Subteam sponsors should be able to identify the lack of communication and help steer the project back on course. The company should invest in a team building retreat. This will help strengthen relationships which will improve communication between teams. These interventions should result in the completion of Vigilance, thereby allowing for proper adverse event monitoring in the name of patient