Q

Your new Leadership team is structured slightly differently to how ICON and PRA are currently structured as separate companies. Can you talk to us a little about how you approached the formation of your teams and what the guiding principles were?

Steve: Certainly a lot of thinking, a lot of consideration, a lot of discussion with a lot of people went into the thinking of the team. We have two great companies coming together – that’s the first thing I wanted to say. So the raw material out there, the management talent and ability, I think was unprecedented and I was delighted to be able to have that option as we moved the group together. So the principles we looked at were bringing together the best of both. Certainly on the operational side, we brought in two leaders from PRA and two leaders from legacy ICON to run the two groups; we’ll talk a little about how they’re structured in a moment. On the GBS (Global Business Services) side it’s broadly the ICON group and there are some considerations there in terms of us being an Irish company and the need to reflect that in our structure and in my direct reports. But we really wanted to move in a way that allowed our customers to get the delivery that they were getting and ensure that they continue to get that. So the focus on customers, the guiding principles around execution and delivery and not disrupting current teams was very important in our thinking there, and making sure that as we go forward we continue to do that – we continue to deliver for our customers and that we really do no harm. Initially there will be minimal changes on our project teams and our ability to deliver. That was the major part of our thinking and then, as I said, there are some other aspects that came into our thinking as well.

Looking at the Global Operational groups that will be led by Tami Klerr and Barry Balfe, why did we create a structure that is organised by customer segment and how do you see these two groups interacting, particularly in instances where there are overlapping customers?

Steve: That’s an important question. We’ve certainly seen our market develop, really over the last five years in a way that the smaller companies – everyone recognises that there are the Biotechs and the smaller mid-size companies – is really where a lot of the innovation in drug development is coming through and where a lot of the capital is being spent. So we thought that it was important at this point to reflect that and to make sure that our delivery mechanism was able to focus in that area. Traditionally our PRA colleagues have been very much initiators and drivers in the Biotech and small mid-size space. They also have large pharma as well of course. On the other side of things with ICON, we’ve traditionally been more large pharma, but we’ve also developed into the small and the mid-size as well. But going forward, we wanted to have those two groups working in those different segments and the centre of gravity in those two different groups evolving in those segments, so that we really are delivering for the small and the Biotechs and in the large pharma. And they’re different segments, they have different requirements, they have different customer relationships, different needs and I think it’s important to reflect that. So we wanted to do that in a way that didn’t disrupt the current work that we have. There’s going to be a lot of overlap, no question about that. And collaboration and partnership across the groups, not just with our large pharma and small and mid-size, but right across the operational areas and with GBS is going to be a very important part of what we do. And that’s why I’ve chosen the leaders that I’ve chosen because I know they can collaborate, I know they can partner and I know they’ll work extremely well together.

Upon closure we become the world leader in Functional Service Provision. In some of your conversations with Samir Shah, who will lead this service area, what’s your vision for this group?

Steve: My vision for this group with Samir in charge is for continued growth and world domination! We want to crush our competitors in this space. Both companies have done extremely well in this space and have moved forward dramatically over the last few years. The PRA team is very strong, Barry Balfe and our functional DOCS group have also made huge strides over the last few years, and putting them together really creates a world powerhouse. So I expect us to really dominate this market going forward and for that to be the entrée into other relationships, preferred providers and partnerships, not just within the functional area, but in the full service area as well. So I really see this group being an entrée for us into bigger and broader partnerships, right across, particularly, the large pharma space.

Global Specialty Services will combine a number of service areas – namely Labs, Early Phase, Commercialisation and Outcomes, Symphony Health & Site and Patient Recruitment. Can you talk to us about the rationale in bringing those two groups together under the leadership of Nuala Murphy?

Steve: Nuala obviously has a lot of experience in the full-service area. All of these groups are going to be really relevant to our full-service offerings and solutions. So that’s important that we offer that. They’ll be working closely across the two big battleships – large pharma and our small, mid-size & Biotech groups. And so the ability for them to work, to collaborate, I think is very important. That’s one rationale for it. Secondly, on the Decentralised Clinical Trial (DCT) front, Kim Boericke and her team have been driving that and will continue to drive that, working with Doug and the Symphony group, which I think is a very important component, and of course Alison and our Site and Patient Recruitment group. Bringing those functions together in that group and really putting a very close eye and a very close focus on building our DCT offering, and working that across the large pharma and Biotech, is going to be a key part of our strategy and something that I was very conscious of, as we put those teams together under Nuala.

Moving on now to innovation and information, how will Kent Thoelke’s role as Chief Innovation Officer interact with Tom O’Leary’s role as Chief Information Officer?

Steve: In a word – very closely. I’m delighted to have Kent on board. He’s an industry expert in that innovation and forward-thinking area and it’s fantastic to have him driving our innovation going forward. He’s going to push us as an organisation, he’s going to challenge us as an organisation, which I think is very important for us. We need to be challenged. And of course Tom and his team – and not just Tom, but also Nuala, Barry and Tami – will also have the requirement to help to operationalise some of the thinking, some of the ideas and some of the innovation that Kent comes forward with. So it’s going to be an interesting dynamic there and again I think the ability and requirement to work together, to collaborate, to partner, to push ourselves and push our organisation going forward will be key. The DCT side of things, remote based monitoring, the technology that’s available now across the industry needs to be brought together. We need to put together some really compelling offerings in that space, with our data capabilities and our patient site and data area, to really move forward our customers’ programs and really move forward the ability for us to offer these sorts of solutions. I think Kent is going to be leading that charge, really pushing us all to get behind him and to operationalise that, and that’s where I expect Tom and his very capable team to bring that forward and to make that something that really differentiates us from our competitors in the future.

Steve: It is an important consideration. Certainly on the operational side, we brought together a number of the PRA Operations leaders – Ted Broering in Early Phase and in Bioanalytical Labs, Doug has come in on the Symphony side of things – along with Jim Miskel, who’s leading our Central Labs and Alison in Site & Patient Recruitment. Then of course in the large pharma group we have Barry and Tami has Biotech and mid-size and then Samir on the FSP and Nuala who has Specialty Services. So that’s very much been a combination.

On the Global Business Services, there are a couple of reasons for going with our leaders in Dublin. One is that our Global Business Services model in the ICON space over the last 10 years or so has worked very well for us. I’m very conscious of that being a very successful model that’s essentially been led by the folks that I put in charge there, and they are based in Dublin. That model has worked well, I want to continue that model and it’s a model that I think can work well across the combined organisation. We’ve been able to generate greater profits, we’ve been able to generate larger earnings per share and that’s allowed us to reinvest money and reinvest capital, not just with our people, but also with our systems and with our organisation and it has helped to grow our organisation. That model has been successful and I want to continue to invest that money in our people and in our process and in our systems.

The second, and it is a secondary consideration but is nonetheless a consideration, is that we are an Irish organisation and we do need to reflect that in the fact that a number of our executives are based in Ireland. That’s just a fact of life. We have a very positive tax rate – in and around the 12-14% – that’s something that we benefit from as an organisation, again allowing us to generate greater profits that we can reinvest. But to do that and to continue with that tax rate, we need to have a significant proportion of our executives, and our decision-making arm in Ireland. Our Board is based in Ireland, our Chairman is based in Ireland and as you can see, a number of our executives are based in Ireland, and that’s important for us. It’s a secondary consideration, we need to run the company as we would a global organisation, but it is a consideration that we needed to factor in as we brought these two organisations together and we’ve done it in that way.

Finally, what can employees expect when the new leadership team comes into effect on Day One and when will we start to see some real movement around integrating both companies?

Steve: I think it’ll be a phased approach, it’s going to be an evolution. Day one there won’t be much change, literally day one. Certainly, in the large project teams, customer delivery units, we don’t anticipate dramatic changes. We’re going to move forward slowly with them and they will come together realistically over the next 12 – 24 months. In the Global Business Services area, things will probably move a little faster, where we’ll be looking at making those adjustments and bringing those organisations together a little bit quicker, there’ll be an opportunity to do that. And then there’ll be some other areas that will probably be somewhere in between. But I would certainly see a sort of three phased approach. Phase 1 will probably be the first year or so, ‘til about the middle of 2022. Phase 2 is where we’ll probably adjust the organisation a little bit more and we’ll get into 2023 and then we’ll probably not be through this until early 2024. This is going to be a period of time where we’re going to need to continue to move and continue to evolve the organisation. The focus will continue to be on delivering for our customers, winning new work, bringing forward these creative and innovative solutions that Kent and Tom and the team will be helping us to bring forward and deliver. But it’s very much going to be steady as she goes. The old Hippocratic Oath of “do no harm” is something I’m very conscious of as we move forward in this next phase of our growth and our development and our evolution. It’s something that I think we all need to be aware of. Customers expect us to continue to deliver their work and that’s a really important principle for us going forward.