Change management is notoriously difficult. One of the reasons may be because the organizations are making the same errors all over again and they do not learn from good or bad experiences. I have seen the same pitfalls across the biopharmaceutical sector to various extent. The new executives coming in, big ideas are flashed out, and then everybody is asked to implement what they were told. The results: poor or just plain bad. Even if the initial implementation phases go pretty successfully, the sustainability of the change is usually short-lived.
Effective communication builds trust, is critical to the success of any project and represents one of project management’s most important responsibilities. Excellent communication within the project team and between the project manager, team members, and all external stakeholders is essential and is correlated with a high team performance. 
Per definition of 
Every drug development program is led by some type of the team leader. Such position may have different names in every organization (e.g. asset, team, program, project lead, etc.). The primary accountability of that individual in all pharma organizations is yet similar: to deliver the program to support the R&D strategic goals and direction. 
During my career, I think I have seen it all. Great leaders and pretty awful ones but still, for some reasons, being allowed to lead parts or whole organizations. It is easy and intuitive to understand the dependency between the quality of companies’ leadership and productivity of those organizations. Happy and engaged employees produce more and are more creative, and innovative. Yet, not all the companies seem to get that simple connection. 