It depends...
If the context changes, your desire changes. Ignore that, or embrace it.
This probably tells you more about me than it is meant to, but my favourite people typically respond to a straightforward question with 'it depends'...
Because it usually does depend. Should we go for a broad population or a niche? What is the forecast? What should I wear tomorrow? On that forecast, are you sure that you're fifth to market with no differentiation, or could you be first if you did something different? On 'what to wear', are you headed back to the office or somewhere where rain might ruin things?
There's a reason we at IDEA switched from that 'traditional' consulting model a while back (apart from our antipathy towards management consultancy). It was based on recognising that fundamental truth - the best path to market option for an asset depended not just on your definition of 'best', but who 'you' are... That realisation that the same five options presented to five different companies could all have a receptive audience - do they already have a portfolio, in which case some risk could be desirable, or a niche might suit their current marketed portfolio really nicely; are they underfunded, in which case a less costly path; are they agile, in which case they might understand the opportunity in a bolder path... So, why would we presume what they'd want a priori? What if they don't know what they want until they see the options? Our job at IDEA is to present realistic, feasible, desirable options - what the client desires is, of course, up to them...
Why is this so important? Well, look at the pie charts here:
It's OK - you can squint at them and get the point... These are the sources of revenue in 2020, by drug, for the top 30 pharma. The first thing: there are no two the same. This chart reveals the same:
Some are hugely diverse, in terms of revenue. Some are reliant on old drugs to a huge extent, some are broadly spread across therapeutic areas. There is no average pharma company. So, if you go to the core IDEA question: if you gave the same asset to these 30 companies in phase I, would you expect them to all end up in the same place? 'No' is the obvious answer, not just because of their varying capabilities and competencies, but also because what they would want that asset to do is a variable... Some would be portfolio stacking, some would want to keep it alive for the shareholder story, some would be OK taking risks...
Is there a right path for any asset? No, because it depends... But, our industry continues to believe in there being a 'right' way, and that all drugs must be treated the same way. If you ignore context, however, you're already ignoring that most fundamental truth: necessity is the mother of invention, whereas desire, perhaps is the father of innovation...
(If you'd like higher res pdfs of these images, just let me know)