How to Build a Commercial Launch Team for a New Drug

Having placed leaders into roles like this repeatedly, we wrote this to give a practitioner’s view rather than generic advice. Building a commercial launch team means assembling capabilities in the right order, well before approval, for a product whose final label, timing, and competitive context are not yet fixed. The launches that go well are usually the ones where market access, medical, and commercial leadership were in place early enough to shape the launch rather than merely execute it.

Build Before the Picture Is Complete

Launch teams must be assembled while the label, approval timing, and competitive landscape remain uncertain, which means hiring leaders capable of building plans that flex rather than executing a fixed blueprint. The alternative, waiting until the picture clarifies, leaves insufficient time to secure access, prepare the field, and establish medical engagement. Companies that launch well accept this uncertainty and hire leaders comfortable operating within it, rather than delaying until the ambiguity resolves and then compressing everything into the final months.

Sequence by Lead Time

The correct sequence follows how long each capability takes to become effective rather than organisational seniority. Market access requires the longest runway, since payer evidence, dossiers, and engagement cannot be compressed. Medical affairs needs time to build relationships and support pre-launch scientific exchange within appropriate boundaries. Commercial leadership must be in place to build the organisation beneath it. The field force, by contrast, can be recruited and trained relatively quickly and should generally come last. Companies that sequence by hierarchy rather than lead time consistently find access underdeveloped at launch.

Size the Field Organisation to the Prescriber Base

Field organisation size should be determined by the concentration of the target prescriber population, not by ambition or comparison with competitors. A product prescribed by a few thousand specialists needs a small, technically sophisticated team; one aimed at broad primary care needs scale and reach. Over-building the field organisation is expensive and difficult to unwind if uptake is slower than forecast, while under-building limits reach. This decision should follow a genuine analysis of where prescribing will occur rather than a default assumption about what a launch looks like.

Coordinate Rather Than Layer

Launch failures frequently stem from functions operating in sequence rather than together: medical generating evidence that access did not specify, commercial building messages the label does not support, access negotiating without commercial input on volume assumptions. The launch leadership team should be assembled and working as a group early, with explicit coordination on what evidence is needed, what the label will likely permit, and how access and commercial assumptions interact. This coordination is easier to establish before people are under launch pressure than during it.

What This Looks Like in Practice

A company building a launch team hires leaders comfortable planning under uncertainty, sequences by lead time with market access earliest and the field force last, sizes the field organisation to the actual prescriber concentration, and gets the launch leadership working as a coordinated group well before launch pressure begins.

The Mistake Employers Keep Making

The most common mistake is sequencing by hierarchy, hiring the commercial leader first and letting them build downward, with access and medical following. Because access has the longest lead time and depends on evidence decisions made earlier still, this ordering reliably produces launches where the product is approved but coverage and evidence are not ready. The company organises by org chart rather than by critical path.

Launch Team Build Sequence

The Bottom Line

Build a commercial launch team by lead time rather than hierarchy, placing market access earliest because evidence and payer engagement cannot be compressed, sizing the field organisation to actual prescriber concentration, and getting launch leadership coordinating as a group before launch pressure arrives. The employers who hire well here are the ones who respect what makes the role specific, and search accordingly.

Related Reading

For more, see Executive Search for Specialty Pharma Launch Teams, What Makes a Great VP of Market Access in Pharma, Recruiting for Rare Disease and Orphan Drug Companies.

Tanya Gallardo

Managing Director, Executive Search & AI Talent Strategy

Tanya Gallardo is the Managing Director of Executive Search & AI Talent Strategy at JRG Partners, leading C-suite and Board engagements across key growth sectors including Technology, Financial Services, and Manufacturing.

With over 18 years of experience specializing in disruptive technology leadership, Tanya is recognized as a leading authority on talent architecture for future-focused executive roles, such as the Chief AI Officer (CAIO) and Chief Digital Officer (CDO). Her expertise lies in accurately assessing the cultural fit and technical depth required to ensure a high return on investment (ROI) for critical leadership appointments.

Prior to her role at JRG Partners, Tanya held senior roles directing global talent acquisition strategies at a major publicly-traded technology firm, advising on organizational design and succession planning for emerging executive functions. She is a recognized speaker and contributor to industry events, sharing data-driven insights on executive compensation, leadership development, and the measurable business impact of C-suite talent.

Connect with Tanya to discuss your executive search needs.