How To Lead A Strategy Realization Office In Life Sciences

About this episode

Guest-host Susanne Kerins sat down with Sachin Raje to explore strategic execution for pharma & life sciences — specifically what it takes to lead a Strategy Realization Office (SRO) inside a major pharmaceutical organization.

Sachin is Director, Strategy Realization Office, MRL Global Medical and Scientific Affairs at Merck. He brings deep experience mentoring on project management, complex program management, setting up PMOs, and establishing and managing Strategy Realization Offices across life sciences companies and beyond.

This episode is part of Cora's ongoing podcast series on strategic portfolio management for complex industries. Stream or download below.

5 key takeaways from this episode

• The SRO is not just a renamed PMO. It earns a seat at strategy planning — deciding which projects should exist in the first place, not just managing ones already approved.

• Life sciences companies face a distinct execution gap. Pharmaceutical manufacturing and drug development require PhD-level subject matter experts as project leads, creating a market dynamic that sets life sciences apart from financial services or manufacturing.

• Strategic planning must connect to benefits realization. Unlike traditional PMOs, the SRO links every project to organizational goals and tracks whether those goals are actually met.

• Cultural barriers and virtual teams are reshaping management strategies. The shift to distributed, diverse teams changed the skills PMO leaders need — from facilitation tools to cultural intelligence.

• Capital projects and smaller projects both need governance. Whether managing large-scale transformation or smaller projects, life sciences organizations need risk management frameworks that match the complexity of their regulatory and compliance obligations.

Highlights from Episode 143: “How to Lead a Strategy Realization Office in Life Sciences” with Sachin Raje

Sachin Raje's path to strategic planning and pharma strategy

Susanne Kerins:

Can you give us a bit of insight into your background? How did you get into project management and strategy realization?

Sachin Raje:

The journey was very interesting. I started my career in electronics engineering and then led my own company in computer-aided design in India — a completely different field. I wrote a couple of books in that area and never thought I would end up in the US.

Once there, I recognized I needed a different skill set. Project management turned out to be the link between computer-aided design and my new path. I got into project management in the early 1990s.

In the late 1990s, I got a chance to set up what I called a project management office — without knowing the term existed. From there I set up several more. Then program management came into vogue. I headed a small company that set up PMOs for mid-sized organizations, which gave me a baseline view of the real problem areas in PMO structure across industries.

The strategy realization office was a natural evolution. When I joined Merck's MRL Global Medical and Scientific Affairs — a 20,000-person group going through a massive transformation — we needed something to manage change differently. I started the SRO concept in 2017. Gartner defined the term in 2019.

We refused to be called a PMO because we were doing things differently. That was the point.

How Life sciences Companies approach the market differently from other industries

Susanne Kerins:

Is there much of a difference within the PMO across different industries, or are there similarities across the board?

Sachin Raje:

PMOs come in multiple flavors. You can have a functional PMO, an enterprise PMO at the top setting direction, or a project-specific PMO — say, for a company divestiture. PMI classifies three types: a low-touch PMO providing templates and guidance, a mid-tier PMO setting stage gates and process, and a high-touch PMO that manages all your projects directly.

What makes life sciences companies distinct, from my experience, is that PMOs tend to support three specific project types. The first is operational projects — coordination-driven work closer to product development. The second is led by PhDs and MDs, where subject matter expertise is so central that leaders must be seen as peers within the scientific community.

The third is bespoke, transformational programs unique to the organization — the kind of capital projects and strategic initiatives that require a different level of governance.

What's different in the pharma market compared to financial services or insurance is that the focus isn't always on budget as the primary constraint. Time management and coordination are the real levers — keeping highly educated scientists focused on their work while the project management function handles the rest.

Breaking form the baseline: a fresh strategic approach separates the SRO from the PMO

Susanne Kerins:

Do you see the PMO evolving into the SRO, or do you think they'll stay separate going forward?

Sachin Raje:

There's space for both. It's not that the PMO grows up to become an SRO — the SRO isn't an automatic next stage of evolution. What differentiates it is the seat at the strategy table.

Traditional management consulting teams would develop a strategy, hand it to the organization, and execution happened at the next level down. Strategic execution tried to bridge that gap. The SRO goes a step further — it sits where leaders decide whether a project is worth doing at all, tied directly to goals, benefits, and pharma strategy.

The PMO never quite had that seat before. The SRO's break from traditional PMO thinking starts with one question: should this project exist? That's a different role from managing projects that are already approved. Benefits realization — discussed in PMO circles for at least 15 years — finally gets real traction inside an SRO because the office aligns to organizational goals, not just delivery milestones.

That said, the two aren't mutually exclusive. SROs can absorb some PMO functions for strategic, one-of-a-kind programs. For everything else — templates, consistency, process maturity — the PMO still has a clear role.

C-suite investment confirms the strategic execution gap in pharma

Susanne Kerins:

Would you agree that the rise of the SRO signals that C-level leaders are now more invested in project management — and see it as imperative to strategy delivery?

Sachin Raje:

Absolutely. The realization has become firm: you cannot hand a project down from the top and expect results without someone in the middle asking whether it's actually required.

Some initiatives don't need a project structure at all — they're continuous improvements or operational changes. The SRO's role is to make that call. Business leaders who understand both strategy and implementation now need a formal seat at the table.

Organizations that have given them that seat are seeing better alignment between their strategic options and their actual delivery capacity. That's where the SRO addresses the execution gap that has existed in pharma strategy for years.

Future challenges and management strategies for PMO leaders in 2026

Susanne Kerins:

What does the PMO look like in 10 years' time — not quite the SRO, but different from what it is now?

Sachin Raje:

Several things will have to change. The pandemic — as much as everyone references it — changed PMO fundamentals in ways that won't reverse.

Teams are more diverse by default. Virtual work expanded the talent pool across geographies, time zones, and cultures. That's the new baseline for project teams in 2026 and beyond. With that diversity comes the need for different facilitation skills — virtual tools and techniques built for remote collaboration, not just sticky notes on a whiteboard.

Stakeholder engagement will become more pronounced. Who the project is for — and what they actually need — has moved front and center. Change management has grown more complex because cultural barriers mean the same words land differently across teams. Even that level of awareness is now a required skill for project managers, not an optional one.

For life sciences companies specifically, those layers of complexity sit on top of an already demanding regulatory and compliance framework. Technology is helping bridge some of those gaps, but the organizations that will lead are the ones that build the right management strategies around their people — not just their tools. Procurement of the right skills, not just the right software, will define who closes the execution gap first.

See how cora supports strategic execution for pharma & life sciences

If the strategies these companies are pursuing — linking project delivery to pharma strategy, closing the execution gap, managing capital projects across complex regulatory requirements — reflect the challenges your organization faces, Cora is built for exactly this work.

Cora gives PMO and SRO leaders in life sciences the visibility, control, and alignment they need to move from strategy to delivery at scale. From risk management and compliance tracking to portfolio-level insights and strategic planning, the platform is designed for organizations where the stakes of getting it right are high.

Request a demo to see how Cora works for life sciences organizations like your, or explore our Strategic Portfolio Management Software to learn more.

Show Notes

Connect with Sachin on LinkedIn

Bonus: Learn why Cora has been named in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Strategic Portfolio Management by accessing a complimentary copy at corasystems.com/magicpmpp