Partner
Europe has never lacked scientific excellence. It continues to produce world-class research, respected regulators, leading pharmaceutical companies and some of the world’s most innovative biotechnology businesses.
Yet increasingly, the greatest economic value generated from European science is realized elsewhere.
This is not because Europe produces weaker science. It is because it controls less of the system that transforms scientific innovation into enterprise value. The first half of 2026 exposed a different question. It is no longer simply where innovation originates. It is where it is financed, developed, validated and commercialized, and where its value is ultimately captured.
The implications reach far beyond strategy. They are shaping the leadership decisions that boards, investors and management teams must make.
The competitive landscape is changing
Several developments during the first half of the year illustrate the direction of travel.
GSK’s $10.6 billion acquisition of Nuvalent strengthened its position in targeted lung cancer through two late-stage programs under review by the US Food and Drug Administration. It was a strategically attractive acquisition. It also reinforced the enduring strength of the US ecosystem. Specialist investors, deep capital markets, experienced leaders, FDA-centered development and commercial execution combine to create companies that global pharmaceutical organizations want to acquire.
China is reshaping the same equation from another direction. AstraZeneca’s agreement with CSPC included $1.2 billion upfront for rights outside China to a portfolio of obesity and diabetes programs. It also provided access to further assets, AI-enabled discovery capabilities and novel delivery technologies. This is not simply another China market story. It reflects an ecosystem increasingly able to originate globally relevant innovation at speed and scale.
None of this diminishes Europe’s strengths. Europe remains home to some of the world’s most successful pharmaceutical companies and continues to generate outstanding science. The question is not whether Europe can produce globally competitive businesses. It is whether it does so consistently enough across the wider innovation ecosystem to retain a greater share of the value it creates.
The scarce resource is no longer science
Scientific quality remains essential, but it is no longer the primary differentiator.
Increasingly, the scarce resource is the ability to convert scientific innovation into enterprise value.
That requires capabilities well beyond discovery. Companies must raise capital in the markets that matter, design clinical programs that regulators and partners trust, and anticipate manufacturing risk before it becomes critical. They must also negotiate partnerships without giving away long-term value and build commercial capability before
launch becomes the constraint.
A company can possess exceptional science and still underperform. It may lack the leadership, governance or organizational maturity required for its next stage of development.
The constraint is often no longer the molecule.
It is the organization surrounding it.
Execution is becoming harder to separate from leadership
This changes the questions that boards should be asking.
Leadership requirements change as companies move through different stages of value creation. The executive team that builds a successful Series B platform may not be the team best equipped to navigate pivotal trials, global regulatory interactions or commercial launch. The capabilities that create value before proof of concept may also differ from those required for partnering, financing or international expansion.
One consequence is that leadership itself has a shorter half-life. As companies evolve, the capabilities around the board table and within the executive team must evolve too.
The same principle applies to larger pharmaceutical organizations. External innovation is not a strategy in itself. Long-term success depends on sound judgement about what to build, acquire or partner, and what not to pursue. These are leadership decisions before they are portfolio decisions.
Pricing and AI are reshaping competitive advantage
Recent developments also show how quickly the environment around life sciences companies is changing.
The United States’ Section 301 investigation into Germany’s pharmaceutical pricing framework shows how pricing has moved beyond market access. It now sits at the intersection of healthcare policy, industrial strategy, trade policy and investment. Companies that still regard pricing mainly as a downstream commercial issue risk missing a factor that increasingly shapes investment and long-term competitiveness.
Artificial intelligence presents a similar lesson. Roche’s acquisition of PathAI was not simply an investment in software. It was an investment in the regulated workflows where clinical evidence is generated, validated and used to influence patient care and therapeutic development. The advantage lies less in the algorithm than in controlling the environments where AI creates measurable value.
Asking better questions
Many organizations still assess themselves against a value chain that is evolving faster than their leadership structures.
Boards and executive teams should therefore ask different questions.
Is our leadership team built for the next value inflection rather than the previous one?
Do we possess the capabilities required for our next financing, regulatory or commercial
milestone?
Where will future value actually be created, financed, validated, manufactured and
ultimately captured?
Which assumptions underpinning our strategy still hold true, and which deserve to be challenged
These may appear to be strategic questions. In practice, they quickly become questions of leadership, judgement and organizational readiness.
Europe’s opportunity
Europe’s opportunity is significant.
The continent possesses exceptional science, entrepreneurial talent, established pharmaceutical leaders and globally respected research institutions. Those strengths remain real.
The challenge is to capture more of the value those strengths generate. That will require organizations able to evolve as quickly as the markets around them. It will require boards willing to challenge established assumptions and leadership teams whose experience fits the next phase of value creation, not the last.
Scientific excellence will continue to create opportunity.
The companies that consistently outperform over the coming decade are unlikely to be those with the most promising molecules alone. They will be those with the leadership, governance and strategic judgement to transform scientific innovation into enduring enterprise value.