+353-1-416-8900REST OF WORLD
+44-20-3973-8888REST OF WORLD
1-917-300-0470EAST COAST U.S
1-800-526-8630U.S. (TOLL FREE)

PRINTER FRIENDLY

The Corporate Reputation of Pharma in 2018 - The Patient Perspective - The Views of 27 Patient Groups with an Interest in Bleeding Disorders

  • ID: 4825644
  • Report
  • June 2019
  • Region: Global
  • PatientView
1 of 3
Patient Groups Specialising in Bleeding Disorders Applaud Pharma's R&D, but Seek More Fruitful Relationships with their Pharma Partners

FEATURED COMPANIES

  • Bayer
  • CSL Behring
  • Grifols
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Octapharma
  • Pfizer
  • MORE
  • The views of 27 patient groups specialising in bleeding disorders (94% in haemophilia).
  • Drawn from a November 2018-February 2019 survey.

Eight companies analysed in this report: Bayer - CSL Behring - Grifols - Novo Nordisk - Octapharma - Pfizer - Roche (Genentech in the US) - Takeda/Shire.

How bleeding-disorders patient groups view the pharmaceutical industry, 2018

Patient groups with an interest in bleeding disorders believe innovation and the development of new treatments to be the most important contributions that pharma can make to improve the well-being of people living with haemophilia (or similar blood disorders). Around 70% of the bleeding-disorders patient groups participating in the 2018 survey regard pharma companies to be "Excellent" or "Good" at these activities (although levels of patient-group endorsement have declined slightly since 2016).

Bleeding-disorders patient groups say that only the biotechnology industry, among other healthcare industries, has a better corporate reputation than the pharma industry (presumably, since biotech is seen by these patient groups as more inventive than pharma).  

So, how did the eight pharma companies perform at corporate reputation in 2018 (in the opinion of patient groups specialising in bleeding disorders)?

Ranking at corporate reputation is measured by patient groups familiar with a company.

Roche (Genentech in the US) was ranked overall 1st out of eight companies for corporate reputation in 2018 by bleeding-disorders patient groups claiming familiarity with it. This performance at corporate reputation represents a significant increase for Roche/Genentech on 2016, when the company was ranked only overall 8th out eight companies by patient groups specialising in bleeding disorders. In 2017, Roche was ranked 2nd.

Takeda (including Shire, acquired by Takeda in 2018-2019) was ranked overall 2nd out of eight companies for corporate reputation in 2018 by bleeding-disorders patient groups claiming familiarity with it. In 2017, Shire was ranked 5th out of nine companies; and, in 2016, 2nd out of eight companies.

Novo Nordisk was ranked overall 3rd out of eight companies for corporate reputation in 2018 by bleeding-disorders patient groups claiming familiarity with it - dropping from its position of 1st in both 2017 and 2016.

High-quality products

Given the importance that bleeding-disorders patient groups place on innovative capabilities, it is perhaps unsurprising that these patient groups judged the overall top-ranking company, Roche, as also best for a key individual indicator of corporate reputation - producing high-quality products (followed, in 2nd place for this indicator, by Takeda/Shire, and then by Novo Nordisk, in 3rd).

The importance of productive pharma/patient-group engagement

However, other factors can influence pharma-company standing among bleeding-disorders patient groups. As the table shows, a high level of outreach to bleeding-disorders patient groups does not automatically guarantee a company a commensurately high corporate reputation among this patient-group community.

In general, when a large percentage of bleeding-disorders patient groups stated that they had purely financial relationships with pharma companies, those companies were NOT seen by the patient groups as performing well at corporate reputation. Such results indicate that bleeding-disorders patient groups prefer their engagement with pharma companies to be active - in the form of assistance in project work, in training, or in other supportive functions (rather than merely being in receipt of financial donations).

Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
2 of 3

FEATURED COMPANIES

  • Bayer
  • CSL Behring
  • Grifols
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Octapharma
  • Pfizer
  • MORE

Page Nos.
1 Executive Summary
5 Relationships That Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups Have With Pharma, 2018
7 The Corporate Reputation Of The Industry As Whole
12 Rankings Of 8 Pharma Companies, 2018 V. 2017 Among Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups Familiar With The Companies
20 Positioning Of 6 Pharma Companies, 2018 V. 2017 Among Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups That Work/Partner With The Companies
28  Profiles Of The 8 Companies, 2018 V. 2017

Appendices
I. What Bleeding-Disordes Patient Groups Say About Pharma(And How The Industry Can Improve)
II. Profiles Of Respondent Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups, 2018

Tables And Charts

  • The Pharma Industry’S Corporate Reputation, 2016-2018(According To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups)
  • Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups: Familiarity, And Partnerships, With Pharma Companies, 2018  
  • The Types Of Relationships That Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups That Work With Pharma Have With The Companies, 2018
  • The Corporate Reputation Of The Pharmaceutical Industry (According To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups), 2018 V. 2017—Compared With That Of Eight Other Healthcare Sectors
  • The Corporate Reputation Of The Pharmaceutical Industry (According To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups), 2016-2018  
  • The Corporate Reputation Of The Biotechnology Industry (According To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups), 2016-2018  
  • Perceptions Of The Efficacy Of The Pharmaceutical Industry At Various Activities Of Importance To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups, 2018 [Chart And Table]  
  • Perceptions Of The Efficacy Of The Pharmaceutical Industry At Various Activities Of Importance To Bleeding-Disorders Patient Groups, 2016-2018
  • Rankings Of Individual Pharma Companies, 2018 V. 2017 (According To Bleeding Disorders Patient Groups Familiar With The Company)
  • Positionings Of Individual Pharma Companies, 2017 V. 2016 (According To Bleeding-Disorder Patient Groups That Work/Partner With The Company)
  • Profiles Of The 8 Companies, 2018
  • Profiles Of The 30 Companies, 2018

Charts And Tables For Each Of The 8 Companies:

  • Profile of respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups familiar, and working, with the company, 2018: country headquarters; geographic remit; and types of relationships.
  • Number of respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups claiming familiarity with the company, 2018.
  • Number of respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups saying that they had a working relationship with the company, 2018.
  • Company scores among respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups familiar with the company, and which worked with the company, for each of the 12 indicators of corporate reputation, 2018.
  • Percentage of the respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups that worked with the company, but which also worked with other companies, 2018.
  • The company’s Patient Corporate Reputation Index (PCRI), 2016-2018.
  • Overall rankings for the company, according to respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups familiar with the company, 2018 v. 2017.
  • Overall positionings for the company, according to respondent bleeding-disorders patient groups that work with the company, 2018 v. 2017.
  • Company rankings for each of the 12 indicators, according to respondent bleedingdisorders patient groups familiar, or working, with the company, 2018 v. 2017.
  • The company’s Net Promoter Score (NPS), 2018.
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
3 of 3

Loading
LOADING...

4 of 3
  • Bayer
  • CSL Behring
  • Grifols
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Octapharma
  • Pfizer
  • Roche (Genentech in the US)
  • Takeda/Shire
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
Adroll
adroll