Anavex Life Sciences Corp (AVXL)

[nidan7500]

Talon..thanks for the excellent observation here..

However, these examples of leadership with strong communication and persuasiveness are not a effective yard stick of leadership in Christopher Missling case. In the cases of each of your cited personalities they needed leadership to advance a mission or product to success. Dr Missling on the other hand, needs management skills in the business, financial and regulatory area to advance a drug through very controlled development. No amount of electric or eloquent pep talks will advance the FDA process faster or with any higher probability of success. The drug lives or dies on its own effectiveness. The amazing fact is, that CM has put 2-73 on stage in an astounding number of CNS "plays" and has a number private, academic and government entities as benefactors. He and Anavex have accomplished this with little fanfare much to the chagrin of a number people on this board. A possible better comparison would be to another quiet German, Warner VonBraun.

So though we agree on much, even the need for Anavex Management to communicate more often, I would not classify it as a "fatal flaw". Let success by the end of the year speak for itself. Meanwhile, there are a good number of Bio/Pharmas that have over promoted their drugs and are now having to leave the field of battle with their tails between their legs!!

After many years of international studies in regulatory operational environments I have also observed a key point touched on by Talon. Many national cultures have developed their own management/leadership rule sets. Americans tend to view every action according to American rules/laws/practices and , in this case, guidance docs. Americans project our interpretation of the RULES. For example, FDA inspectors are trained to judge leadership effectiveness based on the actions they take. I can say with certainty that German, Swedish, Japanese in country management practices are not anything like American practices, even though the rule/required outcomes are identical. Actions that might be considered unethical in daily American practice will not work and would be instantly called out in American business are common (cultural) practice in other business cultures. Anyone doing regulatory work WW could cite many examples of this fact. Dr. M. may be (I believe he is) applying his own hybrid business management culture. The one rule set that stands out is his judgement on when and what should be communicated. It's complicated.