Biotech

A healthy workflow names the program hypothesis, maps preclinical and translational milestones to the next financing or partnering decision, and then builds clinical and regulatory readiness in parallel. The work gets expensive when those streams only meet at the deadline.

A sequence I would actually hand to a teammate:
1. Clarify whether the value is in the platform, the lead program, or the operating model.
2. Map preclinical and translational milestones to the next financing or partnering decision.
3. Build trial operations and regulatory preparation in parallel with scientific execution.

Useful operating references:
- NCATS translational science spectrum: ncats.nih.gov/translation/spectrum
Useful for keeping research work tied to concrete translational stages.
- scvi-tools: github.com/scverse/scvi-tools
Open source probabilistic tooling for single-cell and spatial omics work.

If your team has a better workflow, post it with the context around team size, constraints, and exactly where the process tends to break.