Should Science 37 prioritize expanding its decentralized clinical trial platform to new therapeutic areas or focus on deepening capabilities in existing areas?

Introduction

The key trade-off for Science 37 is whether to expand its decentralized clinical trial platform to new therapeutic areas or focus on deepening capabilities in existing areas. This decision involves balancing growth opportunities with resource allocation and expertise development. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining the current product landscape, potential impacts, key metrics, and experimental approaches to inform a strategic recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Based on Science 37's current market position, I'm thinking there might be untapped potential in existing therapeutic areas. Could you share which therapeutic areas we're currently strongest in and their growth rates?

Why it matters: Helps assess the potential for deepening capabilities vs. expansion Expected answer: Strong in oncology and neurology with 20%+ growth Impact on approach: High growth in existing areas might favor deepening strategy

• Considering our business model, I assume we operate on a per-trial or subscription basis. Can you confirm our primary revenue streams and their contribution to overall revenue?

Why it matters: Informs how expansion or deepening might impact financial performance Expected answer: Mix of per-trial fees (60%) and subscriptions (40%) Impact on approach: Higher subscription revenue might favor expansion for diversification

• Looking at user adoption, I'm curious about our current market penetration. What percentage of potential clients in our existing therapeutic areas are we currently serving?

Why it matters: Indicates room for growth in existing areas vs. need for new markets Expected answer: 30-40% market penetration in primary therapeutic areas Impact on approach: Low penetration might suggest focusing on existing areas

• Regarding our technical capabilities, how modular is our current platform? Can we easily adapt it to new therapeutic areas, or would significant development be required?

Why it matters: Assesses feasibility and resource requirements for expansion Expected answer: Moderately modular, some customization needed for new areas Impact on approach: High modularity would favor expansion strategy

• Considering our team structure, do we have specialized teams for each therapeutic area, or a more generalized workforce?

Why it matters: Influences our ability to quickly ramp up in new areas or deepen expertise Expected answer: Mix of specialized and generalized teams Impact on approach: More specialized teams might favor deepening strategy