DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "The Corporate Reputation of Pharma in 2018 - The Patient Perspective - USA Edition" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.
The views of 137 US patient groups:
- 59 specialties.
- 56% have a national geographic remit; 19% are international; 10% are regional (states within the US); 15% are local.
- 63% of the 137 US patient groups responding to the 2018 survey worked with at least one pharma company (the 2017 figure was 64%).
The 2018 Corporate-Reputation survey, undertaken between November 2018-February 2019, was answered by senior executives from the patient groups (on behalf of their groups). Each patient group carries the same weight in the results (irrespective of whether the patient group is large, medium, or small in size).
US patient groups are increasingly positive about pharma's corporate reputation - but even more so about that of biotech
US patient groups took a more positive view of the corporate reputation of the pharma industry (as a whole) in 2018 than in 2017 - with 44% of 2018's respondent US patient groups stating that the industry had an Excellent or Good corporate reputation (32% said the same in 2017).
For the six years since the analyst has analysed the pharma industry's corporate reputation in the US (from the perspective of US patient groups), that overall corporate reputation has remained consistently lower than the corporate reputation of the pharma industry worldwide (as assessed by patient groups worldwide) - until 2018. During 2018, for the first time, the corporate reputation of the pharma industry in the US outperformed that of pharma in the rest of the world (albeit by only a small margin)
Biotech does even better among US patient groups. Over the past six years, the biotechnology industry has consistently held a higher corporate reputation among US patient groups than the pharma industry (for example, in 2018, 53% of respondent US patient groups said that biotech had an Excellent or Good corporate reputation, compared with 44% saying the same about pharma). Biotech's corporate reputation, from the viewpoint of US patient groups, is also above that of the corporate reputation of the biotech industry globally, as assessed by patient groups worldwide.
A number of comments made to the 2018 Corporate-Reputation survey by respondent US patient groups indicate an increasing bias against big pharma', in favour of more medium-sized companies-including biotech.
Why do US patient groups mark down big pharma?
The November 2018-February 2019 Corporate-Reputation survey of patient groups was conducted while hearings on drug pricing were being carried out by the US House and Senate. Major pharma companies gave evidence before the various committees (and even key patient groups appeared). The proceedings were closely followed by the media. Companies in the spotlight tended to find that their corporate reputation declined among US patient groups answering the 2018 survey (though the corporate reputation of four of the big companies-Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche/Genentech-was not so affected).
Only 8% of 2018's 137 respondent US patient groups thought the pharma industry Excellent or Good at having fair pricing policies (the equivalent worldwide figure was, at 9%, about the same).
Who topped the corporate-reputation ranks in the USA in 2018?
Ranking is measured by patient groups familiar with a company (and includes a company's patient-group partners). Such patient groups provide feedback on the public-domain persona of the companies.
- Lundbeck ranked overall 1st for corporate reputation in 2018 among the 30 pharma companies featured in this 2018 US report. Lundbeck also ranked 1st in 2018 in the US for ten of the 12 individual indicators of corporate reputation.
- Despite a bias against big pharma exhibited by some of 2018's respondent patient groups, Pfizer ranked overall joint 2nd for corporate reputation in the USA in 2018 (up five places from overall 7th in 2017). Pfizer achieved this ranking due to its being given high scores for three of the 12 indicators of corporate reputation: provision of patient information (for which Pfizer ranked 3rd in the US in 2018); transparency of pricing policies (2nd); and transparency in the funding of external stakeholders (2nd).
- Takeda (including Shire, acquired by Takeda in 2018-2019) also ranked overall joint 2nd for corporate reputation in the USA in 2018. Takeda's highest rankings at individual indicators of corporate reputation were: patient safety (2nd); and patient-group relationships (2nd).
- Genentech/Roche ranked overall 4th for corporate reputation in the USA in 2018. Genentech's highest ranking at individual indicators of corporate reputation: high-quality products (2nd).
- Again, despite the bias against big pharma, Novartis ranked overall 5th for corporate reputation in the USA in 2018. Novartis' highest ranking at individual indicators of corporate reputation: provision of high-quality patient information (2nd).
Some companies witnessed significant rises up the US rankings in 2018. Acorda, for instance, jumped 15 places (from overall 21st in 2017 to 6th in 2018). Similarly, Novo Nordisk increased its ranking by 14 places (from overall 25th in 2017 to 11th in 2018). Such results reinforce the idea that US patient groups often seem to prefer smaller pharma companies.
- Boehringer Ingelheim
- Bristol-Myers Squibb
- Daiichi Sankyo
- Eli Lilly (Lilly)
- Merck & Co
- Merck KGaA (EMD Serono in the US)
- Novo Nordisk
- Roche (Genentech in the US)
- Takeda (Shire)
For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/69ll3k