 | A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy (PH108)
Increase the effectiveness of your LCM Strategies: With pipelines diminishing and generics becoming more aggressive, pharmaceutical companies must maximize their brands’ value and time on the market. Strategic and well-orchestrated lifecycle management efforts are crucial to maintaining a brand’s long-term health. Cutting Edge Information’s report A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization analyzes the inner-workings of lifecycle management strategy, development and implementation processes. This study provides companies with the tools to improve their lifecycle management efforts by exploring top pharmaceutical companies’ LCM structures, processes, best practices, strategies and tactical approaches. The report makes its case with metrics and techniques for launching effective lifecycle management efforts. Structure and Funding – Learn how pharmaceutical companies are establishing dedicated lifecycle management teams to spearhead efforts. Benchmark functional involvement and funding support. LCM Processes, Challenges and Measurements – Examine top companies’ lifecycle management LCM objectives and goals. Analyze the processes companies take to launch comprehensive LCM strategies as well as many common challenges they must overcome to be successful. Drug Time Periods – Explore the strategies that companies should be considering at three major points in a drug’s lifecycle – pre-launch, peak and mature time periods. Within each time period are LCM tactic profiles that analyze the individual tactics in detail including resources, timeframes and real-world case studies. Individual LCM Brand Profiles – Uncover the resource support that individual brands receive for their lifecycle management efforts annually during pre-launch, peak and mature time periods. Use this study to win additional resource support for your lifecycle management efforts. Examine the brand profiles and case studies to learn from real-world company examples.Companies Included in ReportAstraZenecaBiogen Idec Bristol-Myers SquibbFarma S.A.GenentechGenzymeGrey Healthcare GroupImplicit Bioscience Janssen-CilagPrescription for Strategy LLCNovartisReplidyne, IncSanofi-AventisValeant PharmaceuticalsExpert Patent Lawyer Therapeutic Areas Included in Chapter 5's Profiles AutoimmuneDiabetes Type 2GastroenterologyUrologyWomen’s Health Sample Content(The following is excerpted from “Chapter 1: LCM Structure, Processes and Challenges”) Alter Lifecycle Management Priorities as the Drug Reaches Each Milestone Lifecycle management is relatively new to the pharmaceutical industry’s vocabulary. Two decades ago, lifecycle management was not as prevalent or formal as it is in today’s corporate cultures. Often, lifecycle management processes arose out of necessity. For example, when Company O began from the merger of two companies, the new company had no immediate pipeline priorities. Strategic planners knew that the company had to focus on lifecycle management for the first two to three years. In fact, the company employed a staff of 11 lifecycle management team members, which was quite large at the time. Since that time, lifecycle management has evolved as a function within the pharmaceutical industry. Certainly, companies had been involved in LCM activities for decades, but there had never been any formal resource allocation or pipeline realignment associated with the function. Today, there are far more formal processes in place to ensure that companies focus on lifecycle management from development to patent expiration and beyond. LCM executives must constantly change their priorities as a drug moves through various lifecycle stages. At each milestone, LCM teams must focus on different tactics to pursue. Although a new stage in a product’s life requires LCM teams to execute the task at hand, executives must always remember how each LCM activity fits into the big picture. LCM priorities during early-stage development can change with each development phase. Once the drug launches, each new year means that patent expiration is that much closer and, therefore, brand teams will need to focus on preparing for that milestone. Even after patents expire, companies still have options to maximize their drugs’ value. …. ...To read more, please see Chapter 1 of A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy.(The following is excerpted from “Chapter 1: LCM Structure, Processes and Challenges”) Attaining Sufficient Funding and Resources to Launch LCM Efforts For the most part, funding for LCM activities is tied to individual brands. According to Figure 1.8 [figure appears in full report], 86% of companies tie LCM budgets to individual brands while the remaining 14% comes from other sources. It makes logical sense for LCM activities to be funded via brand budgets because the activities that are performed are intended to have a positive impact on a specific brand. However, not every company derives its LCM funding from brand budgets. The remaining 14% of study participants, who do not tie LCM funds to brand budgets, provide LCM funding through marketing or R&D. One of the two companies in this category funds its LCM activities from both marketing and R&D. As Figure 1.9 [figure appears in full report] illustrates, these two companies do make up the minority, but they do have a system in place that provides funding for LCM-focused activities. No matter where the funding comes from, it can sometimes be a challenge to attain sufficient resources to provide adequate LCM support for a brand. An interviewee gave a prime example of this all-too-common struggle for resources: the LCM team member had to fight to get funding for a $35,000 white paper, which ultimately saved the company upwards of $35 million from a competitor. As the interviewee noted, it would not have mattered if he/she was asking for $2 million to write the white paper – either way it was going to be an uphill battle to secure the necessary funding to go through with the LCM tactic. To overcome the challenge of winning necessary funding for LCM, a Company F executive suggested that LCM team members go to as high as they can within the organization to make sure that upper management not only understands LCM and its benefits, but also try to sell the process of LCM as much as possible. Achieving buy-in from upper management is critical in gaining financial support for LCM as well as cultural support for developing an LCM-conscious organization. Although there are always other market factors at play, companies that take the time to analyze the benefits of investing in specific LCM tactics have a better idea of what type of return the tactics might produce. As LCM teams and functions beginning developing LCM strategy and objectives for a brand, it is typical for them to explore which strategies will have the best payout for a brand. So LCM teams who are able to provide evidence-based research on the resource implications of investing in a specific LCM tactic are in better position to request and receive adequate funding for the LCM initiative. ...To read more, please see Chapter 1 of A Guidebook to Pharma Brand Optimization: Lifecycle Management Strategy.Published 2008268 Pages500+ Metrics185 Charts and Diagrams Single User Licence PDF
Table of Contents
Price: $4,995.00 / €3,338.66
|
|
