See on Linkedin

When people think of “scientific risk” in diagnostics, they often picture a lab-coated scientist deciding whether to run one more verification test before launch.

But at board level, scientific risk is broader. It’s about deciding:

• When is the science strong enough to back with serious investment?

• Which risks are worth taking and which could sink both the product and the company?

• How do we balance proof-of-concept with proof-to-investors?

Here are the core ways a diagnostics board can keep scientific risk under control without killing innovation.

1. Understand Where Science Meets Strategy
A novel biomarker panel or AI-driven imaging tool might be scientifically exciting, but without a clear clinical need, regulatory pathway, and reimbursement plan, it’s a gamble.
Boards need to see the entire chessboard from assay validation timelines to the realities of getting NHS or Medicare reimbursement before greenlighting further spend (Bain & Company, 2023).

2. Don’t Underestimate Development Risk
In diagnostics, one failed verification run can delay a product by months. A single out-of-spec reagent batch can set you back to square one.
These aren’t just lab problems they’re investor problems. Delays can erode confidence, burn through runway, and trigger bridge financing at the worst possible moment (Ernst & Young, 2024).

3. Finance is a Scientific Risk Multiplier
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: great science can still fail if the company runs out of cash.
A board’s role is to make sure the funding plan is tied to the science plan. That means stress-testing financial models against regulatory delays, market-entry slowdowns, or unforeseen validation challenges.

The best boards I’ve seen ask: “If this milestone slips by six months, how do we keep the lights on without killing shareholder trust?”

4. Build a Risk Radar, Not a Risk Post-Mortem
Some boards only hear about problems after they’ve happened. That’s too late.
High-performing boards work with leadership to create early-warning dashboards for scientific, operational, and financial risks. These give enough time to course-correct without panicking investors or partners.

5. Encourage Boldness, But Demand Exit Criteria
Diagnostics is a high-stakes, high-reward field. You can’t remove risk entirely and you shouldn’t try. But every bold move should have a pre-agreed point at which you either double down or walk away.

That discipline keeps investor capital focused on the most promising opportunities and stops sunk-cost thinking from taking hold.

Final Thought:
In diagnostics, science and finance are two sides of the same coin. A breakthrough on the bench is worthless if you can’t fund it to market. Equally, raising capital without credible science is a short road to reputational damage.

Boards that manage both dimensions with equal skill give their companies the best shot at turning innovation into impact and investor belief into sustainable growth.

References
Bain & Company (2023) Diagnostics: Competing in a Shifting Landscape. [Online] Available at: https://www.bain.com(Accessed: 8 August 2025).
Ernst & Young (2024) Medical Technology Outlook: Risk and Growth. [Online] Available at: https://www.ey.com(Accessed: 8 August 2025).