TRUST IN INDUSTRY

clatteringlippsBiotechnology

Dec 5, 2012 (4 years and 8 months ago)

223 views

Reinhard Angelmar

The Salmon and Rameau Fellow in Healthcare Management

Professor of Marketing

INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France




The International Pharmaceutical Regulatory and Compliance Congress

June 6
-
7, 2007

Sheraton Brussels Hotel and Towers, Brussels, Belgium

INDUSTRY IMAGE AND TRUST
FROM A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE

2

INTERNET ASSOCIATIONS

0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
and "unethical"
and "evil"
"Pharmaceutical companies"
"Tobacco companies"
"Oil companies"
Mystery benchmark
Google Search, May 8, 2007

3

Strong
Industry
Brand equity

INDUSTRY BRAND EQUITY


Seek, pay for, and adhere to medical
treatment


Political support for industry



Prescribe medicines


Political support for industry




Industry
-
friendly policies




Favor medical treatment and pay fair
prices for medicines


Political support for industry



Supportive of industry



Positive coverage of industry


Political support for industry


High industry
awareness

Strong,
favorable,
unique
associations

Benefits of a Strong Industry Brand Equity

Consumers
(voters)

Physicians/
HC profess.

Policy
makers

Payers

Media

NGOs

4

COUNTRY HEALTH EXPENDITURE

(% of GDP)

5

HEALTH EXPENDITURE FINANCING: 2004

6

CHANGE IN SHARE OF PUBLIC SPENDING
ON HEALTH: 1990


2004

(ranked by 1990 public share)

7

Age
-
related change in public expenditure:
EU15
-

2004
-
2050 (% of GDP)

Source: The impact of aging on public expenditure. Projections for the EU25 Member States,

Report of the DG ECFIN, 2006

8

Source: Eurobarometer, Feb 2007

Fieldwork: Nov
-
Dec 2006

Source: Eurobarometer, European Social Reality, February 07

ISSUES OF CONCERN FOR EUROPEANS: EU25

9

DRUG SPENDING AS PERCENT OF TOTAL
HEALTH SPENDING, 2004

38.5
29.6
27.6
27.4
24.8
23.1
22.8
22.0
21.1
20.9
18.9
18.9
17.7
17.7
17.4
16.3
14.8
14.1
13.0
13.0
12.8
12.4
12.3
12.3
11.5
11.3
10.4
9.5
9.4
8.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Slovak Republic (3)
Poland
Hungary
Korea
Turkey (1)
Portugal
Spain
Czech Republic (2)
Italy
Mexico
France
Japan (3)
Canada
OECD
Greece
Finland
Iceland (2)
Germany
Austria
United Kingdom (4)
Australia
Ireland
Sweden
United States
Netherlands (2)
Belgium (3)
Switzerland
Norway
Denmark
Luxembourg
(1): 2000; (2): 2002); (3): 2003; (4) OFT estimate. Source: OECD Health Data 2006

10

ANNUAL GROWTH IN EXPENDITURES (1998
-
2003):

Total Health and Pharmaceuticals

11

MAIN HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURE
COMPONENTS

Countries ranked by total share of in
-
patient care of current expenditure on health


12

SELECTED STAKEHOLDERS

Pharma
-

cies

Physicians

Other

service

providers

(comple
-

mentors)

THIRD
-
PARTY
PAYERS:
Public /
Private

Em
-

ployers

Consumers
(Patients) /



Employees /
Taxpayers

PHARMA
COS

Mktg
Authorization
Agency (e.g.,
EMEA)

Product / Service Flow


Financial / Payment Flow

Price
approval
authorities

(e.g.,
Ministry)

HEALTH
TECHNOLOGY
ASSESSMENT
CENTERS

13

THE POWER GAME


Change in relative power


Traditionally strong stakeholders become less
powerful


Traditionally disempowered stakeholders become
more powerful


Pharmaceutical industry’s relative power
declines


Zero
-
sum game perception heightens conflict
between health care sector players


Conflict is resolved in favor of players that


are more powerful


have stronger brand equity

14

COMPONENTS OF INDUSTRY

BRAND EQUITY


R&D /


Innovation


Safety


of


Medicines


Pricing


Sales


&


Marketing


Value

of


medicines

ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
ENGAGEMENT WITH STAKEHOLDERS
TRANSPARENCY
TRUST

Patient
outcomes

Healthcare
cost impact

Aggressive
-
ness

Ethics

Price level of
medicines

Access to
medicines

Industry
profitability
In

Development

Regulatory

Post
-
launch

Choice of
disease areas

R&D costs (vs
marketing
costs)

Industry

s
role in
innovation
OVERALL ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY (FAVORABILITY)
15

DETERMINANTS OF TRUST

HIGH CAPABILITY
-

COMPETENT

LOW CAPABILITY
-

INCOMPETENT

ALTRUISTIC MOTIVES

SELFISH MOTIVES

16

SURVEY RESULTS

17

Perception gaps


between beliefs and reality


between beliefs of different
stakeholders



18

PERCEPTION GAPS: US

Consumer estimates of cost to bring average drug
to market (percent of respondents)

Percent agreement that drug companies make drug
development decisions based on ‘unmet need’

Percent agreement that drug companies have sufficient
programs in place to monitor their products’ post
-
market
safety profile and public health risks

Percent agreement that drug companies need to
improve transparaency in reporting clinical trial results

19

PERCEPTION GAPS: US (cont’d)

Percent agreement that drug companies spend to much
on drug promotion

Percent agreement that DTC advertising provides
complete and useful information to consumers

Percent agreement that drug companies can be too
aggressive in promoting unapproved uses of their products

Consumer estimates of the amount of overall U.S.
healthcare spending comprised by prescription drug costs

20

PERCEPTION GAP:

Credit for the discovery of new
medicines, EU survey

11
11
15
23
41
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
The Pharmaceutical
Industry
Doctors
Local or National
Government
Hospitals and
Medical Schools
Other Medical
Professionals
“If you had 10 units of credit for the discovery of new medicines, how many of those 20
units would you assign to each of the following:”

Source: Pfizer, 2004

21

PERCEPTION GAP:

Pharmaceuticals in % of total HC costs

Average
38
%

18
13
22
20
16
11
0
5
10
15
20
25
More Than 50%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% or Less
Percent of

Health Care Cost

Survey average: 38%

Source: Pfizer, 2004

OECD Average: 18%

22

OVERALL ATTITUDE
TOWARD THE INDUSTRY

23

ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY: EU Elites

1%
1%
3%
7%
18%
17%
24%
21%
4%
2%
3%
1%
4%
6%
14%
14%
28%
19%
6%
4%
4%
6%
27%
18%
20%
20%
5%
1%
2%
1%
3%
8%
16%
18%
25%
23%
3%
2%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TOTAL (Mean = 6.35)
NGO (Mean = 6.45)
Media (Mean = 6.29)
Gov't (Mean = 6.33)
Extremely
Unfavorable

Extremely
Favorable

“How do you rate your overall feelings toward the pharmaceutical industry? Please use a scale
from one to ten, where one means you feel “extremely unfavourable” and ten means you feel
“extremely favourable” toward the industry.”

Source: APCO/EFPIA, 2005

EU Policymakers (n=147): EU Parliament, Commission, Council Permanent Representatives

NGOs (n=80): international organizations, think tanks, trade and professional associaitons,
health NGOs, patient organizations

Media (n=88): Pan
-
European and key national specialized and non
-
specialized media

24

How favourable or unfavourable is your overall opinion or impression of the
Pharmaceutical Industry?

ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY: UK MPs

0
20
40
60
80
100
S96
W96
S97
W97
S98
W98
S99
W99
S00
W00
S01
W01
S02
W02
S03
W03
S04
W04
S05
W05
S06
Favourable
Unfavourable
Base: All MPs asked, Summer 1996


Summer 2006

16%

General
Election

67%

%
Favourable/

Unfavourable

General
Election

General
Election

Source: MORI / ABPI, 2006

25

ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY: UK MPs

42%
39%
39%
38%
36%
36%
32%
31%
29%
27%
19%
19%
11%
6%
16%
15%
9%
13%
29%
12%
22%
38%
28%
18%
20%
36%
19%
36%
32%
39%
46%
65%
44%
46%
53%
54%
67%
68%
Biotechnology

Favorable

Pharmaceuticals

Oil exploration and production

Agriculture

Energy

Unfavorable

Nuclear energy

Chemicals

Base: All MPs

Gas

Supermarkets

Nuclear Decommissioning
and clean up

Construction

Petrol

Banking

Accountancy

Mobile phone operators

Debit cards

Pensions

Water services

Credit cards

Source: MORI / ABPI, 2006

26

For each of the following industries, please rate your overall opinion or
impression of them, according to the scale shown
-

Pharmaceutical companies

DECEMBER (1) 2006

OPINIONS OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIES




ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY: UK GPs

7%
35%
33%
21%
6%
Very unfavourable
(1)
Slightly unfavourable
(2)
Neither favourable
nor unfavourable (3)
Slightly favourable
(4)
Very favourable (5)
Base: All respondents (200)

Mean Score = 3.2

Source: GfK / ABPI, December 2006

27

For each of the following industries, please rate your overall opinion or
impression of them, according to the scale shown


DECEMBER (1) 2006

OPINIONS OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIES




ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY: UK GPs

3
3.6
1.4
2.7
2.6
3
3.1
2.9
2.8
3.2
Pharmaceutical companies
Banking
Chemicals
Food
Car
Oil & petrol
Rail
Tobacco
NHS
Local PCT/SHA
Base: All respondents (200)

MEAN SCORE

Source: GfK / ABPI, December 2006

28

ATTITUDE TOWARD INDUSTRY:

UK General Public

How favourable or unfavourable is your overall opinion or impression of
the pharmaceutical industry?

Base: General Public 1991
-
2006

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Favourable
Unfavourable
%

Year

14%

51
%

Source: MORI / ABPI, 2006

29

REASONS FOR POSITIVE or

NEGATIVE ATTITUDES


30

-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Mean Favourability

Mean Familiarity

Familiarity and Favourability


General public

Base: All respondents (1,997), Summer 2006

Bankin
g

Food

Pharmaceuticals

Chemicals

Oil & petrol

Car

Rail

Tobacco

31

INDUSTRY POSITIVES: EU Elites

Percent of Respondents
49%
38%
4%
4%
3%
3%
8%
1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
THERAPEUTIC BENEFITS/CURES
ILLNESSES/SAVES LIVES
R&D/INNOVATION
QUALITY OF PRODUCTS
GENERALLY CONTRIBUTES TO SOCIETY
WEALTH CREATION AND EMPLOYMENT
PHILANTHROPY
OTHER
NOT SURE
On the question of the pharmaceutical industry, people often express both

favourable

and unfavourable impressions. On the positive side, what is the
main reason that people might regard the pharmaceutical industry favourably?

Source: APCO/EFPIA, 2005

32

INDUSTRY POSITIVES: UK GPs

9%
6%
5%
6%
7%
7%
7%
7%
12%
12%
15%
27%
32%
Produce/develop new/valuable/good products
(Spend a lot/good in) research and development
But still profit motivated
But dislike some of their marketing practices
Doing an important/good job/service
Sponsor/help with education
Necessary industry
Are generally ethical/adhere to a code of practice
Help/support us/our profession
Like/respect/knowledgeable representatives
Efficient/well organised/have good procedures (unspec)
Other
Don't know
“Why do you say that you have a slightly/very favourable opinion of the
pharmaceuticals industry?”


Base: All who have a slightly or very favourable opinion of the pharmaceutical industry (82)

DECEMBER (1) 2006

OPINIONS OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIES




Source: GfK / ABPI, December 2006

33

INDUSTRY NEGATIVES: EU Elites

48%
11%
10%
9%
7%
5%
5%
4%
3%
2%
17%
1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
PRICES TOO HIGH/EMPHASIS ON PROFITS RATHER THAN
HEALTHCARE
MARKETING STRATEGIES/EXAGGERATES BENEFITS
ATTITUDE TOWARDS/LACK OF R&D FOR 3RD WORLD/POOR
UNETHICAL/IGNORES OR HIDE SIDE EFFECTS
ABUSE OF MONOPOLY POSITION/INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
DENIES ACCESS TO 3RD WORLD/RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTING
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - GENERAL
LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - TRIAL RESULTS
ANIMAL TESTING
LACK OF HEALTHCARE KNOWLEDGE/DRUG SAFETY
OTHER
NOT SURE
On the negative side, what is the main reason that people might regard the
pharmaceutical industry unfavourably?

Source: APCO/EFPIA, 2005

34

INDUSTRY NEGATIVES: UK GPs

2%
4%
4%
4%
4%
8%
8%
8%
10%
13%
15%
33%
46%
Profit motivated/large profits/profit
before patient
Biased/misleading/not enough
information/research
Dislike
marketing/advertising/promotions
Corruptive/unethical/underhand/do
not trust them
Pushing expensive/unnecessary
drugs
Too many \me too\" drugs"
Representatives are
slimey/pushy/untrustworthy
Expensive/will not reduce prices
Dislike patent extension
Third world disease creation
Have/set their own agenda
Other
Don't know
“Why do you say that you have a slightly/very unfavourable opinion of the
pharmaceuticals industry?”


Base: All who have a slightly or very unfavourable opinion of the pharmaceutical industry (52)

DECEMBER (1) 2006

OPINIONS OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIES




Source: GfK / ABPI, December 2006

35

Innovation

Pricing

Transparent Communication

Philanthropy

Health Outcomes

Safety

Engagement

Profitability

Source: APCO/EFPIA, 2005

REPUTATION IMPACT and

INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE: EU Elites

36

Stakeholder Divergences: EU Elites

Innovation

Pricing

Transparent

Communication

Philanthropy

Health Outcomes

Safety

Engagement

Profitability

Innovation

Pricing

Transparent

Communication

Philanthropy

Health Outcomes

Safety

Engagement

Profitability

NGO

Media

Government

Innovation

Pricing

Transparent

Communication

Philanthropy

Health Outcomes

Safety

Engagement

Profitability

Source: APCO/EFPIA, 2005

37

TRUST IN INDUSTRY

38

TRUST IN INDUSTRY: US Adults

Source: HarrisInteractive. Online survey: 2,010 U.S. adults, October 4
-
10, 2006

2003

2004

2005

2006



%

%

%

%

Supermarkets

40

42

39

34

Banks

35

40

34

31

Hospitals

34

35

34

28

Computer software companies

22

25

22

23

Computer hardware companies

27

29

27

20

Airlines

20

22

17

16

Packaged food companies

23

23

21

14

Electric and g
as utilities

n/a

n/a

14

14

Online retailers

n/a

n/a

16

11

Life insurance companies

11

15

10

11

Telephone companies

12

13

11

10

Car manufacturers

14

18

13

9

Pharmaceutical and drug companies

13

14

9

7

Health insurance companies

7

9

9

7

Managed care c
ompanies such as
HMOs

4

5

5

4

Oil Companies

4

4

3

3

Tobacco companies

3

4

4

2

None of these

37

32

37

40


"Which of these industries do you think are generally honest and trustworthy


so that
you normally believe a statement by a company in that industry?"

39

76%
79%
76%
73%
73%
76%
23%
20%
22%
26%
27%
24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Trust
No trust
TRUST IN INDUSTRY:

France


General Public

Source: IFOP/Leem, 2007

«

Faites
-
vous tout à fait confiance, plutôt confiance, plutôt pas confiance ou
pas du tout confiance aux Entreprises du Médicament?

»

40

TRUST IN INDUSTRY:

Physicians in 5 countries

Agreement with «

trustworthy

»

as a descriptor of the pharmaceutical industry

Source: Harris Interactive, 2004

41

NUMBER OF TRUSTED SALES REPS:
GPs in Germany

Source: INSEAD Survey, 2007

42

TRUST IN INDUSTRY INFORMATION


CREDIBILITY AS A SOURCE OF
INFORMATION ABOUT HEALTHCARE: EU






%

University medical centers




51

National association of doctors


40

New healthcare alliance/doctors, pharma companies,

pharmacists, patient groups


35

Patient advocacy organizations


35

National association of pharmacists


31

National association of pharmaceutical


research and manufacturing companies


26

Government agency


21

Leading pharmaceutical company like


Merck, Pfizer or Novartis



14

Source: Pfizer, 2004

43

TRUST IN INDUSTRY INFORMATION:

UK GPs

4%
2%
5%
5%
6%
19%
21%
22%
34%
39%
47%
55%
63%
65%
68%
Doctors
Colleagues
NICE
Prescribing advisors
Pharmacists
Medical media
Internet sources
PCT/SHA
Pharmaceutical companies
Government organisations
NHS Direct
Nurses
Patient help groups
Consumer media
None of these
Which, if any, of the following sources, do you generally trust to provide helpful and
reliable information about medicines?

Base: All respondents (200)

DECEMBER (1) 2006

OPINIONS OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIES




Source: GfK / ABPI, December 2006

44

CONCLUSIONS


Perception gaps


Between beliefs and reality


Between industry beliefs and stakeholder beliefs


Attitudes toward industry


The proportion of persons favorable / unfavorably toward the
industry varies between 4:1 to 2:1 approximately, depending on
the surveyed population


Compared to other industries, the pharmaceutical industry is
well regarded in Europe


Strongest positives associated with the industry:


R&D/innovation


Patient outcomes


Strongest negatives associated with the industry:


Pricing


Transparency


Sales & marketing practices


Significant number of persons do not trust the industry

TO CHANGE THE WORLD WE HAVE TO
CHANGE OURSELVES