Leen Kawas: How to Turn Team Disagreements Into Scientific Breakthroughs

In the high-stakes world of biotechnology, where breakthrough discoveries can take decades and billions of dollars to develop, the instinct is often to avoid conflict at all costs. Teams focus on consensus-building, stakeholder alignment, and smooth operations. But this approach may be fundamentally flawed when it comes to driving innovation.

Leen Kawas, Managing General Partner at Propel Bio Partners, has built her career on a different philosophy. Her approach to building effective teams suggests that productive conflict, when properly managed within psychologically safe environments, becomes a powerful catalyst for scientific innovation.

“We built a team that did not think about barriers. We only thought about solutions and how we can do things better, differently,” Leen Kawas explains about her leadership approach during her previous role as CEO. This mindset, focusing on solutions rather than obstacles provides a framework for understanding how conflict can drive breakthrough thinking in scientific environments.

 

The Innovation Paradox

 

Scientific innovation thrives on challenging assumptions, questioning established methods, and pushing boundaries. Yet many scientific organisations create cultures that discourage the very disagreements that fuel discovery. Teams become focused on harmony rather than truth-seeking, leading to groupthink and incremental improvements rather than breakthrough innovations.

Research consistently shows that teams with psychological safety—where members feel safe to speak up, ask questions, and disagree without fear of negative consequences, significantly outperform those without it. In psychologically safe environments, conflict becomes a tool for exploration rather than a threat to team cohesion.

Leen Kawas’s team-building philosophy aligns with this understanding. When evaluating candidates for her organisations, she looks for individuals with what she calls a “beginner’s mindset;” people who “approach each problem individually and don’t use the mindset that led to the problem to solve the problem.” This approach inherently invites productive conflict by encouraging team members to challenge existing assumptions and methods.

 

Building the Foundation for Productive Conflict

 

The key to harnessing conflict as an innovation catalyst lies in creating the right environment. Leen Kawas emphasises several foundational elements that enable teams to engage in productive disagreement.

First, she prioritises empathy and support within her teams. “Offering empathy and support to team members is crucial,” she notes. “I carve out time to listen to employees’ concerns and offer encouragement and resources.” This foundation of trust enables team members to disagree with ideas without feeling personally attacked or unsupported.

Second, Leen Kawas advocates for transparency in leadership.

She believes leaders should share their values and motivations with team members, helping them understand the decision-making framework. This transparency creates clarity about objectives, allowing teams to engage in conflict about methods and approaches without confusion about ultimate goals.

Third, she emphasises the importance of breaking down silos. During uncertain times, she notes, “every CEO should regularly assess potential company risks” and “break down silos and encourage collaboration.” When teams operate in isolation, conflict becomes destructive because different groups lack shared context and objectives.

The Beginner’s Mindset Advantage

 

Leen Kawas’s preference for hiring people with a “beginner’s mindset” reveals a sophisticated understanding of how cognitive diversity drives innovation. She appreciates “people who are innovative, and they look to learn from everyone.” This approach deliberately introduces productive tension into teams.

When team members approach problems without preconceived notions about “the right way” to solve them, they naturally challenge established methods. This creates conflict between new approaches and existing processes, but it’s conflict that drives innovation rather than personal animosity.

“People just starting their career bring a unique, fresh perspective. That’s as valuable as someone who’s doing the same thing or working in the industry for 20 years,” Leen Kawas observes. This diversity of experience levels creates natural friction points where different approaches can be tested and refined.

 

The Patient-Centric Catalyst

 

Leen Kawas’s patient-centric philosophy provides a powerful framework for productive conflict in biotechnology. “We are developing therapies. We are changing people’s lives. Once you achieve that, the financial value is going to follow,” she emphasises.

This focus on patient outcomes creates what researchers call “task conflict” and disagreement about methods, processes and approaches while minimising “relationship conflict” that damages team dynamics. When teams share a common commitment to patient benefit, they can engage in vigorous debate about the best path forward without questioning each other’s motivations or competence.

During her time leading a biotechnology company, this patient-centric approach led to innovations like arranging onsite meals for Alzheimer’s patients and their caregivers during clinical trials. This solution likely emerged from productive conflict between operational efficiency concerns and patient experience priorities.

 

Diversity as a Conflict Multiplier

 

Leen Kawas’s emphasis on diversity amplifies the innovation benefits of productive conflict. She notes that diverse teams bring “different perspectives” that lead to better problem-solving, but these different perspectives also create more opportunities for productive disagreement.

“I’m not just investing in women or minorities; I’m investing in diversity because this will bring the best innovation and the best returns,” she explains. This diversity creates cognitive friction that, when properly managed, drives breakthrough thinking.

In her portfolio companies, this diversity-driven conflict manifests in different ways. At Persephone Biosciences, the company’s use of “diverse and inclusive, population-scale, observational clinical trials” likely creates productive tension between different methodological approaches and patient population considerations.

 

Managing Conflict for Innovation

 

The challenge lies not in avoiding conflict but in managing it productively. Leen Kawas’s approach suggests several key strategies for leaders seeking to harness conflict as an innovation catalyst.

First, she emphasises the importance of creating a “sense of fun” in the workplace. “We look for people we’ll enjoy working with,” she notes. When teams enjoy their interactions, they’re more likely to engage in productive debate rather than personal attacks.

Second, she focuses on building resilient leaders who can model productive conflict behaviour. Resilient leaders, she observes, “display high-level active listening skills, enabling them to accurately discern their team’s dynamics.” This skill becomes crucial when guiding teams through productive disagreements.

Third, she advocates for giving team members “flexibility and authority to accomplish important tasks.” This autonomy enables teams to test different approaches and learn from productive conflicts without requiring constant management intervention.

 

The Innovation Imperative

 

In biotechnology, where the stakes are measured in human lives and billion-dollar investments, the luxury of avoiding conflict doesn’t exist. Leen Kawas’s approach suggests that leaders must actively cultivate environments where productive disagreement drives innovation.

Her philosophy of building teams that focus on solutions rather than barriers provides a roadmap for scientific organisations. When teams feel psychologically safe to challenge assumptions, propose alternative approaches, and engage in vigorous debate about methods, they’re more likely to achieve breakthrough innovations.

“Track the success and satisfaction of your customers (in life sciences, the patients). That’s going to drive value,” Leen Kawas emphasises. This focus on outcomes rather than process harmony creates the conditions where productive conflict can flourish.

 

The Competitive Advantage

 

Organisations that master the art of productive conflict gain significant competitive advantages in scientific innovation. They’re more likely to identify flawed assumptions early, explore alternative approaches, and develop more robust solutions.

Leen Kawas’s success in taking her previous company public and building Propel Bio Partners demonstrates how this approach translates to business outcomes. Her emphasis on psychological safety, diversity, and solution-focused thinking creates the conditions where conflict becomes a catalyst for breakthrough innovations rather than a source of team dysfunction.

The future of scientific innovation may well depend on leaders who understand that conflict, properly managed, isn’t something to be avoided, it’s something to be harnessed as a powerful force for discovery and breakthrough thinking.