Interview with the vice president for IT and operational development of Biocad Evgeny Pochkayev

Evgeny Pochkayev: The complex of the reasons led us to this solution. But mainly, it was connected with the fact that in the western solutions only the certain accumulated experience of many companies which was applied in them some time ago is offered. In these solutions there are no disruptive ideas. Relevance of experience which is included in industrial solutions, most often approximately five-year prescription. And by the time of when it is replicated in many software products, it does not give any competitive advantage any more. The functionality put in standard software solutions of the western vendors was relevant and could give competitive advantages about five years ago. Now it discards back more likely and increases a gap between market leaders who use digital technologies for obtaining competitive advantage, and those who are based on past experience.

It can be compared to how in the presence of at the moment iPhone X to us still suggest to use iPhone 4 because this solution which proved.

We have the experience and examination, and the functionality which is very long time ago known is uninteresting to us. We are ready to invest in own solutions to do them by the most flexible and it is easy to adapt them for a dynamic environment. Standard solutions of the western producers are very heavy in adaptation. Will pass from one to several months so far we will be able to implement some new features according to trends in the market. And in the solutions we could make it at any time.

In the solutions we are not limited to any internal settings which are in the proprietary software: neither platform limits, nor licenses, nor features of its implementation. The need for flexibility and speed of reaction to external changes dictate need to have own flexible software.

Evgeny Pochkayev: More likely, it was the solution of company management about 2-2.5 back. New IT strategy in which IT had to occupy a role of the engine of changes, optimization, increase in efficiency was accepted. Then from the analysis of external conditions understanding of need to do the solutions was also born. This idea from IT department proceeded, but it was supported also by the top management.

Evgeny Pochkayev: At us not so many different implementations were initial 2.5-3 years ago to say that we transferred something from the western platform on own development and on the open source software. It is conditionally possible to select two big classes of systems which can be constructed in our company on solutions of the western vendors.

First of all, it is software, connected with the difficult equipment which we receive. For example, bioreactors, fermenters and another. These are difficult mechanisms with which in delivery there is a proprietary software. In such cases we do not interfere with "iron", and we use that API or the interface which provides zheleza producer.

The second - we can use some proprietary solutions which are obviously market leaders. In particular, CRM solutions based on SalesForce. It hardly has competitors in view of the flexibility, configurability, adaptivity and an opportunity to solve all range of problems which can be required from CRM systems. And it has convenient API for integration with other systems. We are able to afford to use such flexible solution. It can be configured within half an hour-hour, to start quickly any new process. In this case instead of creation of own solution it is simpler to us to use already ready.

If at some point we face restrictions of platforms of this sort, then we are ready to go towards independent writing of necessary functional units. But we do not see still big economic effect of their replacement.

Thus, by and large, from foreign software we practically had no migrations. There were more migrations from one version of the platform on another. For example, in a case with 1C.

Evgeny Pochkayev: Yes, in general, there are also no Russian solutions any more. We generally have a custom development directly for our tasks. It, on the one hand, adds excess labor input, and on the other hand, gives us a free hand in terms of restrictions and problems which can be put in the software products developed by some third party. Therefore we most often create own solution of which afterwards we do configured, configured and easily supported "box".

Evgeny Pochkayev: I think that about 80-85%.

Evgeny Pochkayev: Not to do without operating systems. We should buy operating systems Windows Microsoft Office. On the user computers to get rid of this software impracticablly in view of compatibility of software versions. If we, for example, passed on OpenOffice, then creation of some big documents would bear a number of difficulties. After all open source product not so qualitative and transferable, as products Microsoft.

Besides, we prepare different documents, including for external partners who still seldom use open source solutions. With respect thereto to pass to an open format not only in text documents, but also in tables and the presentations – it is problematic because of the arising questions of compatibility.

Evgeny Pochkayev: There are two main algorithms of licensing of the majority of the proprietary software. The first – when you regularly buy licenses and annually prolong them. And the second option is a lump sum payment for licenses then you pay every year for technical support some percent from their cost. It different vendors can have 15%, 20%, 30%, differently.

In the first case, paying constantly for the license, you formally constantly invest in developer company of this software, and transfer to it including the knowledge, practices. It turns out that actually you invest money in development of a third party. The Biocad company positions itself as the company of knowledge. It is the main value which we create, and not only in pharmaceutical area, but also in the field of IT, HR, legal issues and other areas. Therefore we are not supporters of to invest money in development of examination of third parties, especially western which just earn from it.

In a case with the second method of use of the proprietary software, you pay every year for some mythical completions and updates of a system: you do not know how many it will be specific updates, you will be needs this functionality or not as far as it reliable and is how compatible to the previous versions. Actually, you annually buy a pig in a poke. Therefore it is better to make investments in own development and precisely know that you receive in what terms, with a quality assurance.

We had an example when SCADA developer of systems - the Wonderware company - suggested us to pay for the new version which will appear in a month or through two in advance. At the same time that will be included into this version, nobody in the company could answer a question.

Yes, we buy SalesForce. In this case we buy examination because it is dynamically developing product in which invest, including, and other players of the market. We are ready to use it. And the rest are meanwhile not ready.

Evgeny Pochkayev: There are three main alternatives: create the solution, purchase proprietary or not do anything of listed. In the latter case there is a visible economic benefit – in economy of means, you did not spend them. But then there is a strategic question - whether we can dare not to automate some functions whether we will lose in competitive advantages because of it? And if such question really costs then it is necessary to solve what way to go.

There are situations when it is necessary to try quickly something, to check hypotheses. In this case can be profitable to take some solution for a month, to test it and to develop further strategy. One-month investments for testing of hypotheses can be afforded.

Our company in a similar situation tries to go way of testing of hypotheses on own solutions. We created platforms on which we can do it quickly, developing a system literally in 1-2 days on a small number of users. We seldom use the proprietary software for check of the ideas.

The example of cost effectiveness analysis can be given on the information pharmaceutical quality system. We carried out market research and tenders, and left that own development cost to us cheaper approximately by 4-5 times in comparison with what was offered by the western vendors. At the same time vendors limited us in our wishes, and those solutions which we made, on functionality much exceeded their offers. Therefore absolute economic justification of this solution for the company is obvious.

Evgeny Pochkayev: To development we have two approaches: we write some systems completely, and we give creation of some on outsourcing. Most often on outsourcing we give blocks which do not bear in themselves any specialized knowledge, examination. If examination is important, then we try to do. Developers in pure form at us only 10-11 people. Most likely, the staff will still be increased as the quantity of tasks at us increases.

From our company usually some architect is responsible for a system in general, for its development, and separate blocks are given to external contractors. Our company works with 6-7 contractors. Periodically they change, new come, old leave. General as it is accepted to call him, we have no priority contractor.

Evgeny Pochkayev: First of all, practically any of the current platforms will not satisfy our requests on performance. Very few people use servers with such architecture which is necessary for the high-loaded calculations on bioinformatichesky software. The standard virtual machines intended for deployment of different corporate IT systems are generally used.

In addition to performance with leased resources there is also a security issue. In data center under control of us there are no excess people, we provide completely safe circuit. There is also an economic aspect: total cost of ownership of our solution on five-year perspective is cheaper, than lease exactly the same capacities in third-party data centers. We counted it in a current rate of dollar.

Evgeny Pochkayev: Our own computing resources on our tasks are many times more productive, than those which we rented earlier. If earlier any calculations at us were executed in 2, 3, 4 weeks, then now they are executed approximately in 2 hours. At the same time our cluster works with nearly 24x7. There are no idle times, and moreover – on it even queue on accomplishment of tasks is gathered.

At the same time, during creation of medicines it is possible to accelerate not all processes. Existence of computing clusters, for example, does not save the developer in any way from need to carry out real clinical trials in full, meanwhile modeling in virtual environment does not allow to replace them. In the future, probably, it will become possible, and then the speed of creation of drugs will be much higher.

Now we can accelerate only separate development stages: primary stages like drug discovery and drug design. Here reduction on time can be a miscellaneous – and up to 2-3 months, and up to 10-12 months, depending on solutions with which medicine is created. Besides that all development cycle of medicines and their output to the market can take up to 7 years.

Evgeny Pochkayev: I do not think that I agree with this statement. More likely, there is a transition trend from use of global, large-scale "systems monsters" to the integrated microservice structure which allows to react to all external changes quickly enough. And it is unimportant on what specific solution the company creates microservices. It is possible to take ready-made solutions, it is possible to create them independently. The main thing that the microservice architecture gives the chance flexibly and quickly to adapt changes of all the information ecosystem.

Some companies as opposed to it still try to implement ERP SAP, Oracle, 1C and other systems, transferring to them all processes in the company that limits flexibility.

In Biocad, for example, now more than 50 different microservices, systems, subsystems, modules integrated among themselves via the universal bus of data exchange – Enterprise Service Bus. We developed universal connectors via which any service can be connected to this bus and is added to our information ecosystem.

For example, small services like calendars, the order of the taxi, armoring negotiation, planning of meetings and so on. From more serious, for example, - service for accounting of all processes, registration of medicines.

Microservice approach allows to include or exclude easily service, to replace or finish it. It is much simpler to finish small service, than a huge system in which a set of interrelations.

Evgeny Pochkayev: I think that the Chief information officer in the modern world should be somewhat a futurist, the predictor. It should have vision that will be demanded not only here and now, and in 5-10 years and later. What technologies will be demanded what problems business will need to solve, data which will be necessary for business after a while. So it should not try to catch up, and on the contrary, to move the company forward.

In a case with implementation of any system says the fact that after implementation this system still continues to work and bring value in the form in which it was developed about its success, but does not require alteration or replacement at once as soon as we finished the project. Value should be created after already directly implementation. If there is no it, then it turns out that you were late with implementation of this system, and again everything should be remade. And it means that at the first stage of planning you incorrectly set the object, incorrectly saw what should be executed. The IT director-visionary at a planning stage correctly sets the purposes.

It is one of characteristics of the modern Chief information officer. Others - to be aware of the last trends, new products, to be the leader of opinions in the industry. Plus cross-functional knowledge when it is not enough to be just the specialist in IT are demanded now, and it is necessary to have still applied knowledge in that area in which you work. Then you will be able correctly to adapt processes of digitalization to the purposes and tasks of the company. In ours, the company, for example, it is the areas connected with pharmaceutical development, a production process.

Evgeny Pochkayev: Probably, speed of perception of changes. Young Itshnik is in promptly changing environment now. For example, versions of Windows or Office changed so often in the 90th years as it occurs now. New versions of software, new frameworks, platforms, solutions appear now much more often. It demands from modern people of much faster adaptation to these changes. And the speed of these changes will increase. Therefore if you want to be a leader, you should change several times quicker. Probably, it meanwhile main difference.

Those who were brought up for 10-15 years earlier not always behind such speed are in time. On the other hand, possible plus of more adult generation Itshnikov is that in them data are put much with higher quality. In view of the fact that now it is necessary to know many different things, it is not possible to put base already practically. There was a time 10-15 years ago to explain the basic principles as that it is arranged how works, to tell about evolution of the different systems, approaches. This my assumption.