Known For Its Good Chemistry, Du Pont Goes Multidisciplinary

WILMINGTON, DEL.—When Du Pont executives first tried to recruit Mark Pearson back in 1982, he didn't take them seriously. After all, he reasoned, with no corporate history of ground-breaking work in molecular biology, what would the company do with a director of one of the National Cancer Institute's molecular biology laboratories? "Besides," he adds, "they were a chemical company." Not any longer. Within the past five years Du Pont has embarked upon new ventures in electronics, imaging, and even life sciences—for example, protein structures and agricultural science have been added to the company's portfolio alongside the more traditional businesses of polymers, chemical structures, and petroleum. That's why, six years ago, corporate management set out after molecular biologist Pearson. And that's why Du Pont called his bluff. It seems that even though Pearson didn't take his recruiters seriously, he managed to tell them what he thought a molecular biology outfit ought to look like. "Of course I had my ready-made wish list glued on the inside of my head," he admits. So he "gave them a plan that was interesting and that I thought they wouldn't be interested in pursuing in a million years." Du Pont not only hired him, it granted his entire wish list. Today, as director of molecular biology for E. L Du Pont de Nemours & Co., Pearson heads a group of 200 researchers working on projects more often associated with a pharmaceutical concern or biotech startup than a chemical conglomerate. They're developing an AIDS virus diagnostic, for instance, and are trying to understand the mechanisms of genetic recombination. "Five years ago the people doing breakthroughs in molecular biology would have said, 'Du Pont who?'" acknowledges the company's senior vice president of technology, Al MacLachlan. Yet, within its short lifespan Pearson's group has been responsible for producing Du Pont's new DNA sequencer, the Genesis 2000; it has designed one of the first test kits for AIDS; and it has played a major role in the first sequencing of the AIDS virus. So what's happening at Du Pont? A great deal, as the company plows more money into R&D, and recruits scientists from what is, for it, new fields—physics, biology, ceramics, mathematics, and electro-optics. All this didn't begin the day before Pearson came on board; planning for Du Pont's diversification began in the late 1970s, and by the mid-1980s the staff working in basic research had nearly tripled, notes Du Pont's director for central research, Richard Quisenberry. The changing-and broadening-profile of the community of Du Pont scientists has, in turn, forced the company to institute some major shifts in that part of the corporate culture that embraces its scientists. "Every day is a new testing period for us," says Quisenberry. "People want to know that [when Du Pont commits to a new effort] we really mean what we say." Collaborations New evaluation systems have been instituted for scientists and programs. And involvement in more swiftly advancing fields is pushing scientists in the basic and applied research divisions into closer and more immediate collaborations. Witness creation of the Genesis 2000, for which it took Du Pont only 44 days to merge its basic research scientists on the project with the product development group and build a lab where both groups of scientists could work on a prototype instrument. "That's unheard of at Du Pont," asserts Quisenberry. "It usually takes 44 days just to get through the paperwork to establish a new lab." Meanwhile, according to several sources, the fact that the new R&D divisions are receiving most of the attention and almost all of the growth in resources has led to some resentment among traditional Du Pont chemists. In short, the road to new business—even with all of the resources available to a multibillion dollar corporation—has been a little bumpy. But top management has long realized that, despite these inevitable growing pains, new ventures are vital to the company's future. The diversification has its roots in a strategic plan derived by Du Pont during the 1970s, at a time when the company was suffering from diminishing profitability in its traditional businesses. Patents were running out, competition within the U.S. (from Dow and Monsanto, for example) was increasing, and European chemical concerns (like Britain's ICI and Germany's Bayer) for the first time were becoming significant forces in the international market. Then the oil crisis came along. Because the chemical companies not only rely on fuel to keep their plants operable, but also derive many of their important raw materials—like benzene, ethylene, and cyclohexane—from the first stage of the refinement of petroleum, "profitability really went to hell in a handbasket," recalls MacLachlan. "So, throughout the mid-1970s, we conducted a soul-wrenching analysis to [determine] where we were and what we could do about it." The plan that was developed called for a strengthening of core businesses and divestiture of others. But it also focused on establishing a presence in new, high-growth areas. To do so, Du Pont pursued several strategies. The first was to pump big bucks into recruiting the best and the brightest to head the new divisions. But, as Pearson's skepticism indicates, even Du Pont's deep pockets and reputation for preeminent basic research in the chemical sciences weren't enough to convince superstars that Du Pont was making a longterm commitment to the new businesses. "I realized that they had the money," says Pearson, "but didn't believe that they necessarily knew what the game [of molecular biology] was about." Upon taking a closer look, however, Pearson was pleasantly surprised to find that Du Pont had been conducting a few isolated biological research projects-research in agriculture and virology, for instance-since the mid-1960s. And he was impressed with the quality of biologists already on board. Within a year, he had consolidated these groups—some 30 researchers—under the new wing of molecular biology, and hired an additional 70 scientists. Today the ranks of his group have doubled again. Sponsorship Another tactic pursued by Du Pont to make a name for itself in a broader range of sciences has been to increase sponsorship of basic science in academia. "That's where the vast majority of research [in general] is being conducted," notes MacLachian, adding that commercial applications of this science are, therefore, up for grabs. The company has met with more than a little success with this strategy. Take the deal recently signed with the University of Houston. In return for $4.5 million, Du Pont acquired all license rights to applications of the work done with 1-2-3 superconducting compounds in Paul Chu's lab over the next three years (see news brief, page 10). Du Pont's third strategy has been to challenge the best of its own scientists to help plot a course in new ventures. To head an effort in ceramics—a vital part of the new electronics division—the company in 1985 turned to Uma Chowdhry, a materials scientist who had been working in Du Pont's catalysis group since 1977. Though the challenge clearly wasn't as risky a move for one already within the company, Chowdhry nonetheless first looked for—and found—signs that the company was serious about the endeavor before signing on. "They were bringing together all of the different businesses that were already serving the electronics business in one way or another, and plans were put in place to build a large facility at Research Triangle Park, N.C., devoted to ceramic packages," recalls Chowdhry. Based on this evidence of a major corporate commitment, Chowdhry says, "I felt comfortable about going out and hiring people to do basic research in ceramics." Today, this interdisciplinary group of scientists works closely with other groups in electronics, developing materials systems for hoàsing integrated electronic chips. The common thread in all these strategies may be a companywide willingness to spend money. Steve Brenner, whom Pearson recruited from the NIH four years ago to head the structural biology group, says that the financial resources available at the chemical company translate into greater stability, greater resources, and greater freedom than are available in other laboratory environments—an equaton whose sum enables him to carry out more, and better, science. Deep Pockets "It's a real plus for people trying to do modern biology to work in a corporate environment which is very well buffered from the economy, and where a single success or failure isn't going to mean life or death for your organization," says Brenner, noting that much of his staff was recruited from biotech startups. Likewise, Du Pont's deep pockets have brought a wealth of high-tech talent and instruments—such as a 600 MHz NMR instrument (currently on order) and high-speed computers—to facilitate Brenner's research. Being able to use computers as experimental tools without worrying about cost enables his group to try things that they couldn't afford elsewhere, he says. Brenner points specifically to work his group is pursuing in investigating the structure-function relationship of proteins like the ras oncogene product; streptavidin, a natural protein that forms the basis for many current diagnostic assays; and proteins involved in the electron transport chain. Finally, because he is no longer tied to the peer-review funding process, Brenner feels that he has more freedom to pursue more daring, unusual avenues of research. "I have found a real willingness [on the part of Du Pont management] to allow people to explore and to stick their necks out and try risky things-for a reasonable period of time." But the monetary commitment—so unexpected by scientists like Brenner who are coming from the public sector—has been the easiest part of venturing for Du Pont. Little in science is as capital intensive as the chemical industry, says Quisenberry, where "you'll sink three-quarters of a billion dollars and four years into building a plant before you produce a pound of the chemical." Much harder, though, have been the cultural changes required. For Dii Pont, learning to allow its programs and people the freedom to fail, and shuttling new science from the lab to market swiftly—which Du Pont must do if it is to be competitive in fast-moving areas like biotechnology—have been somewhat difficult pills to swallow. "Trial and error has not traditionally been valued—or tolerated—at Du Pont," says Quisenberry. "Part of the new corporate culture we're trying to instill is that we're willing to accept failure by introducing new ideas into the marketplace earlier than we would have before." At least, he adds, in low-capital-intensive areas like biotechnology. Expert Review Du Pont's lack of experience in these new areas has also forced the company into a greater reliance on academic systems in evaluating competence and accomplishment of a scientist. For the life sciences and electronics, the company has commissioned a panel of experts from academia and the nonprofit sector to review Du Pont programs and scientists three times a year. Also within these new disciplines, especially biology, says Quisenberry, "Rarely do we hire a principal investigator who doesn't have at least one or two postdoctoral appointments; often they'll be faculty members." While the motivation behind this policy is an increase in the lenel of research expertise desired, an interesting upshot is the shift in age of the scientists Dii Pont now finds to be attractive recruits. Ten years ago the average age of new investigators was 26; last year it was 34. Establishing new ventures hasn't been all easy for the recruits, either. Both Pearson and Brenner complain that they are having a difficult time convincing management that they need a regular infusion of new blood-specifically, in the form of postdocs—if they are to keep abreast of new ideas in biotechnology. And both indicate that dealing with corporate hierarchy can be frustrating. "It's a company that tends to have task forces and committees and meetings too often when what we really need is a decision maker," says Brenner. Despite the 44-day wonder in getting design and production of the Genesis 2000 in gear, for instance, some members of the molecular biology group feel that, if Du Pont management had been more experienced with speeding biotech breakthroughs to market, the whole project could have moved even faster. And although Pearson is generally pleased with the support he has gotten thus far, he nonetheless indicates that in a head-to-head race with Genentech to clone and express an unknown protein, "we would have to rely on good luck to make it happen." The group having the hardest time swallowing management's culture change pifi, though, is the traditional chemist, who may have been with the company for years but has not gotten the money, resources, or attention that a Pearson, Brenner, or Chowdhry get- and isn't producing anything quite as sexy as the Genesis 2000. "During the early part of this decade, the life sciences grew at a rate of 20% per year, while the traditional materials and chemicals divisions grew only 2% per year. So I'm sure there is some resentment there; there has to be," acknowledges Quisenberry. "But it wasn't a case of starving one [area of research] to feed another many topnotch developments continue to come out of these traditional groups." "It's the new-boy-on-the-block syndrome," says Brenner, who indicates that he has encountered some of this resentment. "We've been golden boys for four or five years and gotten most of what we need to get going, and now they're waiting for us to prove ourselves." But others, like Chowdhry and Pearson, indicate that as the different groups of scientists get more exposed to the work being done by the others, all are gaining a new appreciation for the problems that can be addressed through an interdisciplinary approach. "The educational process that comes with exposure, collaboration, and understanding has been healing," says Pearson. "The clear-cut distinction [between biology and chemistry] that existed at time zero has become muted. Some of the bright young chemists have become focused on problems in biology, and have made real contributions to some of our projects. This, in turn, has made it easier for the biologists to accept that the chemists bring something important to their science. It is the amalgam of both cultures and both kinds of technology that is going to lead to really new products, and really new materials." And that's what Du Pont is betting on.

Known For Its Good Chemistry, Du Pont Goes Multidisciplinary

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of