Partner Evaluation Workbench
BD and alliance partner evaluation with traceable evidence.
Shortlist it, send it over — we come back with the shape we'd actually recommend.
What partner evaluation workbench actually is.
Structured profiling of BD and alliance candidates, scientific signal, execution capability, strategic fit and risk concentration, with audit-grade rationale behind every recommendation.
Built for BD&L teams where the cost of a soft yes is a multi-year alliance you cannot quietly unwind. The point is a defensible rationale, not a fresh deck per IC.
- Scored partner profile per candidate
- Rubric with weighting and bar surfaced
- Shortlist with ranked rationale
- Audit trail of the assumptions each call rests on
- Outcome register tying alliances back to performance
Add the pieces you'd want and we'll build a shortlist you can review, reorder and send over. No pricing wall, no commitment — we come back with what we'd actually recommend, including anything you don't need.
Approach, modules, delivery.
Move through the tabs to see how the work runs, what it's made of and what lands at the end.
Inputs
- Candidate landscape, big pharma, specialty, biotech, platform and academic plays for a defined asset and deal shape
- Scorecard framework with axes, weights and written criteria (Scientific signal · Execution capability · Strategic fit · Risk concentration)
- Evidence ledger, every score traceable to a source (launch precedent dataset, citation network, patent landscape, ROE field data, ESG signal)
- Diligence question set per candidate, prioritised Critical / Important / Watch
- Deal scenarios with NPV deltas, upfront ranges and a control-retained score the committee can defend
Method
Partner Evaluation Workbench is the surface where BD and alliance decisions are made and defended. Candidates are profiled against a written scorecard, every score is anchored to a source in the evidence ledger, and diligence questions are sized and assigned rather than left to a hallway conversation. Deal scenarios are tested on the same model the committee sees, with NPV deltas, upfront and control retained on one row. The workbench writes into Asset Decision Hub, the Founders Decision Log, TPP Studio, Regulatory Intelligence Hub and Signal Watch so the recommendation is operational, not a slide.
Assumptions
- Scorecard axes and weights are agreed at the BD-committee level, not invented at the meeting.
- Evidence ledger inputs are versioned and refreshable when launch precedent data, ESG feeds or patent landscapes update.
- Deal-scenario NPV deltas are driven by the same forecast and model that sit behind the Asset Decision Hub investment case.
Limitations
- Partner-fit is partly relational and cultural, the workbench makes the basis explicit but cannot replace face-to-face judgement.
- Public-source signals lag private information; high-weight signals are flagged, not treated as ground truth.
- Cap-table and runway data on private biotech candidates carry uncertainty bands.
Think this belongs in your scope?
Add it alongside anything else that fits, then send the shortlist over. We'll reply with the shape we'd recommend — sequence included, and the parts we think you can skip.
Build what comes next.
Whether you need growth, answers or capability, VISFO helps you move earlier and faster.