+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 2019 - The Patient Perspective - Global Edition - The Views of 1,850 Patient Groups

  • ID: 5129265
  • Report
  • April 2020
  • Region: Global
  • 150 Pages
  • PatientView
1 of 4

FEATURED COMPANIES

  • AbbVie
  • Bayer
  • CSL Behring
  • Grünenthal
  • Mundipharma
  • Sandoz
  • MORE
How did the Industry Perform?

Patient-group attitudes towards the pharma industry as a whole were more positive in 2019 than in any of the previous years this survey has been undertaken. Patient groups rated the pharmaceutical industry 1st for corporate reputation out of nine healthcare sectors (a first for the pharma industry).

- 46% of 2019’s respondent patient groups stated that the pharmaceutical industry had an “Excellent” or “Good” corporate reputation, ranking pharma 1st out of nine healthcare sectors for corporate reputation.

However, patient group attitudes do vary worldwide

- The pharma industry’s overall corporate reputation was highest in 2019 among patient groups in Greece, Latin-American countries, Turkey, China, and Poland. By contrast, only 13% of the 2019’s respondent patient groups from Ireland described the industry as having an “Excellent” or “Good” corporate reputation.
- The largest improvements in pharma’s corporate reputation, 2018 to 2019, were seen in Greece, Latin-American countries, Portugal, and Canada. By contrast, respondent patient groups from Ireland reported the industry’s corporate reputation to be falling, 2018 to 2019.

2019’s respondent patient groups also stated that the pharma industry's performance at activities of importance to patients had mostly improved since 2018

2019’s respondent patient groups clearly felt that the pharmaceutical industry, despite having made improvements, still has scope to do better, particularly in the areas of:

- Transparency
- Patient Engagement in R&D
- Fair Pricing Policies

- Less than one-fifth of 2019’s respondent patient groups thought the pharmaceutical industry “Excellent” or “Good” at transparency (whether transparency in its pricing of products, in the sharing of its clinical data, or in its funding of external stakeholders).
- Less than one-fifth of 2019’s respondent patient groups considered the pharmaceutical industry “Excellent” or “Good” at patient engagement in R&D (despite regular calls throughout 2019 by patient organisations and regulators for the further involvement of patients in this core pharma activity).
- Only 10% of 2019’s respondent patient groups believed the pharmaceutical industry to be “Excellent” or “Good” at having fair pricing policies.

ABOUT THE SURVEY AND THE ANALYSES

I. Results of a survey of 1,850 patient groups

- Survey conducted: November 2019 - February 2020.
- Survey conducted in 20 languages: Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Portuguese, Polish, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, Simplified Chinese, Traditional Chinese and Turkish.
- Industry-wide analyses: The pharma industry as a whole assessed at a wide range of activities important to patients and patient groups; its performance at corporate reputation compared with that of other healthcare sectors.
- Company analyses: 48 pharma companies analysed for performance at 12 indicators of corporate reputation by patient groups familiar with the company, and by patient groups that work or partner with the company.

II. Best-practice case studies from eight leading pharma companies

The eight contributing pharmaceutical companies are:

- Boehringer Ingelheim
- Gilead Sciences
- Ipsen
- Lundbeck (US division)
- Merck KGaA/EMD Serono
- Novartis
- Pfizer
- ViiV Healthcare

These eight companies tell their own stories about their patient-centric strategies, and what they were doing in 2019 (and have planned for 2020) to improve their corporate reputation with patients and patient groups.

A note about COVID-19

COVID-19 should have little impact on the results of the 2019 ‘Corporate-Reputation’ study, due to the timing of the survey (November 2019 to February 2020 - largely before the crisis became global). Only the opinions of the 15 respondent China-based patient groups may have been influenced by the epidemic.

However, COVID-19 is already creating greater public awareness of the pharmaceutical industry. On the one hand, the industry’s scientific abilities are being applauded. On the other hand, drug companies have come under pressure to reduce prices during the pandemic. The 2019 ‘Corporate-Reputation’ results can, therefore, serve as a platform to assist pharma in its corporate-reputation strategies, in the context of the COVID-19 crisis and thereafter?at a time when the reputation of the pharmaceutical industry is very much in the public eye.
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
2 of 4

FEATURED COMPANIES

  • AbbVie
  • Bayer
  • CSL Behring
  • Grünenthal
  • Mundipharma
  • Sandoz
  • MORE

1 Executive summary
13 Patient-group relationships with pharma, 2019
16 Industry-wide findings, 2019
21 Rankings of the 48 pharma companies, 2019 (v. 2018)among patient groups familiar with the companies
36 Rankings of the 48 pharma companies, 2019 (v. 2018)among patient groups that work with the companies
51 Profiles of the 48 companies, 2019 (v. 2018)

Appendices
I Profiles of respondent patient groups, 2019
II Methodology
III What 8 pharmaceutical companies say about their patient-oriented activities, 2019/2020

Tables and Charts
2 The key therapy areas of the 2019 respondent patient groups
3 The geographic spread of the 2019 respondent patient groups
3 Corporate reputation of the pharmaceutical industry, 2011-2019 (percentage of respondent patient groups stating “Excellent” or “Good”)
3 Corporate reputation of the pharmaceutical industry, 2019-by country (percentage of respondent patient groups stating “Excellent” or “Good”) [figure in brackets equals number of respondent patient groups]
4 Percentage change in the corporate reputation of the pharmaceutical industry, 2019 v. 2018 - by country(respondent patient groups stating “Excellent” or “Good”) [figure in brackets equals number of respondent patient groups]
5 Percentage of respondent patient groups stating that the pharmaceutical industry was “Excellent” or “Good” at being patient centric, 2019 - by country [figure in brackets equals number of respondent patient groups]
5 Percentage of respondent patient groups stating that the pharmaceutical industry was “Excellent” or “Good” at ensuring access to medicines, 2019 - by country [figure in brackets equals number of respondent patient groups]
6 Percentage of respondent patient groups stating that pharma was “Excellent” or “Good” at having fair pricing policies, 2019
8 Companies’ respective increases in overall rankings in the ‘Corporate-Reputation’ league table, 2019 v. 2018 - according to respondent patient groups that are familiar, and which work, with the company
9 Percentage of respondent patient groups that stated “None” or “They did not know” any company that was “Best” at an activity, 2019
9 Overall rankings of individual pharma companies among patient groups familiar with the company, 2019 v. 2018 - ordered high to low
10 Companies’ NPS scores, 2019 - according to respondent patient groups that work with the company; ordered high to low
12 The rankings of 14 ‘big-pharma’ companies at corporate reputation, 2019 v. 2018 - according to respondent patient groups familiar with the companies
12 The rankings of 14 ‘big-pharma’ companies at corporate reputation, 2019 v. 2018 - according to respondent patient groups that work with the companies
14 Patient groups: familiarity, and partnerships, with pharma companies, 2019 (according to respondent patient groups)
15 The types of working relationships that respondent patient groups have with pharma companies, 2019
17 The corporate reputation of the pharmaceutical industry, 2019 v. 2018 - compared with that of 8 other healthcare sectors - according to respondent patient groups
17 The corporate reputation of the pharmaceutical industry, 2011-2019 - according to respondent patient groups
18 The perceived effectiveness of the pharmaceutical industry at carrying out specific activities, 2010 v. 2019 - according to respondent patient groups
19 Perceptions of the efficacy of the pharmaceutical industry at various activities of importance to patient groups, 2019 v. previous years - according to respondent patient groups
21 Rankings of individual pharma companies, 2019 v. 2018 - according to respondent patient groups familiar with the company
36 Rankings of individual pharma companies, 2019 v. 2018 - according to respondent patient groups that work or partner with the company

Profiles of the 48 companies, 2019

Charts and Tables for Each of the 48 Companies:

  • Number of respondent patient groups claiming familiarity with the company, 2019.
  • Number of respondent patient groups saying that they had a working relationship with the company, 2019.
  • Profile of respondent patient groups familiar with the company, 2019: country headquarters; specialties; geographic remit; and types of relationships.
  • Company scores among respondent patient groups familiar with the company, and which worked with the company, for each of the 12 indicators of corporate reputation, 2019.
  • Percentage of the respondent patient groups that worked with the company, but which also worked with other companies, 2019.
  • Overall rankings for the company according to respondent patient groups familiar with the company, 2019 v. 2018.
  • Overall rankings for the company according to respondent patient groups that work with the company, 2019 v. 2018.
  • Company rankings for each of the 12 indicators according to respondent patient groups familiar, or working, with the company, 2019 v. 2018.
  • Overall rankings among respondent patient groups familiar with the company, 2015-2019.
  • Snapshot view: where the company sits in the corporate tiers for each of the 12 indicators (in the higher, the middle, or the lower tier), as assessed by respondent patient groups familiar with the company, 2019.
  • Snapshot view: where the company sits in the corporate tiers for each of the 12 indicators (in the higher, the middle, or the lower tier), as assessed by respondent patient groups that work with the company, 2019.
  • The company’s Net Promoter Score, 2019.
  • The company’s Net Promoter Score, 2017-2019.
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
3 of 4
AbbVie
Acorda Therapeutics
Allergan
Almirall
Amgen
Astellas Pharma
AstraZeneca
Bayer
Bial
Biogen
Boehringer Ingelheim
Bristol Myers Squibb
Celgene*
Chiesi Farmaceutici
CSL Behring
Daiichi Sankyo
Eisai
Eli Lilly
Ferring
Gedeon Richter
Gilead Sciences (including Kite Pharma)
Grifols
Grünenthal
GSK
Ipsen
Janssen (Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson)
LEO Pharma
Lundbeck
Menarini
Merck KGaA/EMD Serono
Merck & Co (MSD outside Canada and the US)
Mundipharma
Novartis
Novo Nordisk
Octapharma
Otsuka
Pfizer
Pierre Fabre Laboratories
Roche (Chugai in Japan; Genentech in the USA)
Sandoz
Sanofi
Servier
Takeda (including its 2018-2019 acquisition Shire)
Teva
UCB
Vertex
Vifor
ViiV Healthcare
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
4 of 4

Loading
LOADING...

Adroll
adroll