IEGP ( Integrated Evidence Generation Plan) Lead, Strategic Evidence Generation & Dissemination, Medical Affairs, Japan
About this opportunity
At Johnson & Johnson, we believe health is everything. Our strength in healthcare innovation empowers us to build a world where complex diseases are prevented, treated, and cured, where treatments are smarter and less invasive, and solutions are personal. Through our expertise in Innovative Medicine and MedTech, we are uniquely positioned to innovate across the full spectrum of healthcare solutions today to deliver the breakthroughs of tomorrow, and profoundly impact health for humanity. Learn more at https://www.jnj.com
Job Function:
Medical Affairs Group
Job Sub Function:
Medical Affairs
Job Category:
People Leader
All Job Posting Locations:
Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan
Job Description:
Position summary:
IEGP lead serves as a key partner to MAF-TA to support developing cross functional IEGP (Integrated Evidence Generation Plan) and to manage study progress such as study milestones and budgets by ensuring the governance and process.
Optimize overall J-IEGP framework to realize 4 areas of key deliverables such as governance, alignment with region/global, roles & responsibilities in each function, and operational excellence in evidence generation.
Lead IEGP planning through yearly business cycle such as LRFP, Business Plan, and global/AP IEGP review.
Work with key internal stakeholders such as MAF-TA and AP IEGP lead to guide developing high quality and comprehensive IEGP with J-IEGP framework including KBQs (Key Business Questions) development, evidence gap assessment, KRQs (Key Research Questions) clarification.
Be actively part of IEGP discussion to facilitate the development of high-quality KBQ/KRQ and feasible study plans by closely working with internal experts (Data Scientist, Data Management, and VE&A, etc.) as well as MAF-TA.
Manage the progress of all evidence generation activities in MAF including study milestones and budget to ensure timely delivery of study results.
Organize capability training such as study design and execution.
Promote innovation and cross functional collaboration.
Required/preferred experience:
3 years of experience on RWE (e.g., Medical Affairs, HEOR, Clinical Operations) required.
Excellent skills in collaboration, influencing and communication required.
Presentation skills and business acumen required.
Knowledge of local regulations and practices related to evidence generation (regulatory, ethical guidelines, etc.) required.
Experience of evidence generation activities in life sciences preferred.
Experience of effectively working in a matrix environment preferred.
Education:
Bachelor of Science degree required.
Ph.D. in life sciences preferred.
Collaborating divisions/partners:
Therapeutic area teams at MAF, Market Access Division, R&D Division, regional/global counterparts
Job details
How this role compares
Computed from every other active Medical Affairs role in our database, not just this employer's listings.
We currently track 1121 comparable Medical Affairs roles across 136 biopharma companies.
Salary context
225 of 1121 peers report a salary range (USD, annualized)
Peers share this role's job function. This posting doesn't list a seniority level, so peers aren't narrowed by seniority either -- the range below may span more levels than usual.
Where these roles are based
Top locations among the 1121 comparable roles
+ 59 more countries
Seniority mix
652 of 1121 peers have a known seniority level
Therapeutic area mix
392 of 1121 peers have a known therapeutic area; the rest are genuinely unlabeled, not hidden
Similar opportunities
The closest matches from our peer group, ranked by how similar they are, not how well you'd qualify for them -- treat this as market context, not a guaranteed shortlist; a weak match is labeled as one below.
Notify me about similar jobs
Get an email when we spot other openings like this one – same job function, comparable seniority, roles you'd actually want to see.
How we calculate "similar"
No black box, no LLM guesswork: a deterministic score built from four normalized attributes. Here's this role's own peer group at different match levels, so you can see the mechanism, not just the result.
Every comparison starts from the same 100-point budget: 25 for working in the same function, 40 for the same therapeutic area, 20 for the same or adjacent seniority, 15 for the same country. A dimension we can't confirm on both sides contributes nothing, never a guess, never a free pass.
0 points, never a partial guess. A role we know almost nothing about beyond its function bottoms out at 25%; it never inflates to 100% just because there's little to compare against. Seniority uses a defined ladder (Associate → Manager → Associate Director → Senior → Principal → Director → Senior Director → Executive/VP) so "Director" and "Senior Director" count as adjacent, but "Director" and "Executive/VP" do not.