Insights

Part 2: Characterising Knowledge — Turning Information into Strategic Power

In pharma, knowledge is scattered across regulatory databases, legacy reports, vendor networks, and people’s heads. But not all knowledge is equal. Categorising it into “known knowns”, “unknown knowns”, “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns” is a strategic act. It transforms an amorphous blob of data into a map of confidence—and vulnerability.

This characterisation process, however, isn’t about ticking boxes. It demands honest interrogation. For example, if a team believes it “knows” the safety profile of a molecule based on limited data, this should be flagged as a political known known—an area where belief may outpace evidence. Similarly, if assumptions about trial timelines are based on outdated recruitment data, these too must be challenged.

Approach:

• Identify and expose all project assumptions.
• Use structured facilitation (e.g. external consultants) to unearth buried insights.
• Be wary of overconfidence cloaked in consensus.

Takeaway: Good decisions come from knowing what is known, what is guessed, and what is assumed. Assign labels to your knowledge—and you’ll assign value to it.

By Mike Florence, Volker Moeckel, Stephen Bingham