8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

1/35

CORPORATE BRANDING IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL

INDUSTRY - AN INVESTIGATION INTO HOW IMPORTANT IS

CORPORATE BRAND FOR THE GENERAL PRACTITIONERS

By

KALINKA MARKOVA DE MONTILLE

KWAZULU NATAL (SOUTH AFRICA)

NOVEMBER 2005

A research report submitted to Regent Business School,

Durban, South Africa in part fulfilment of the requirements

for the degree Master of Business Administration.

1

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

2/35

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION

For the pharmaceutical industry, brands are the means by which the science is

translated into a commercially viable reality (Robins, 2004:4).

Pharmaceutical companies face a series of significant challenges that are affecting

their ability to maintain growth and sustain earning levels. To operate and succeed in

the complex and highly regulated competitive environment, pharmaceutical

companies know that brands are more than just products and services. They know

that brands are also, what the company does and, more importantly, what the

company is (Davis, 2002:1). What product branding doesnt allow are economies of

scale, endorsements and instant credibility (Davis, 2002:3).

Despite the progress made in understanding and engagement with the dynamics of a

rapidly changing market, companies are missing opportunities to leverage the

corporate brand (Colyer, 2003, deLor, 2004, Doherty, 2004, Druckenmiller, 2002).

Many prescription drugs reside in isolation with little visual corporate brand

endorsement or visual connection to each other (deLor & Bowman, 2003:42).

As pharmaceutical companies communicate through an ever-widening spectrum of

channels to an increasing number of audiences, putting a unified face on those

communications will increase their impact and value. Corporate brand is important forbuilding reputation, credibility, expertise, trust, and differentiation.

The purpose of the literature review is to set the study subject in a broader context

through investigation of the relevant literature. Key theories and arguments in the

literature will be identified.

2

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

3/35

2.2 THE CONCEPT OF A BRAND

Brands and branding, as traditionally understood, were subject to continuous review

and redefining. There are number of definitions of brand. According to AmericanMarketing Association, brand is a name, term, sigh, symbol, or design, or a

combination of them, intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or

group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors (Kotler,

2000:404). A more universally applicable definition describes brand as a cluster of

functional and emotional values which promises stake holders a particular

experience (de Chernatony and Dalllmo, 1999:4). In its simplest form, a brand

represents the promises that the product makes (Blackett, 2004:4).

According to de Chernatony (2001:4), one way to explain the characteristics of the

brand is through the brand triangle, shown on Figure 2.1, which is suitable for brands

in different contexts. Using a laddering technique, the brand triangle shows how

functional values are linked with emotional values, and the promised experience.

Figure: 2.1. The Brand Triangle

Source: Adopted from de Chernatony (2001) Would a brand smell any sweeter by a

corporate name?

3

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

4/35

The concept ofbranding has developed over the years. Within traditional branding

model, the goal was to build the brand and to create brand image, which derived

short-term results (Aaker and Joachimsthaler, 2000). The modern concept of branding

can be applied to anything from product and services to companies and evencountries (Clifton, 2004:1). Kotler (2000:404) regards branding as a major issue of

product strategy.

According to Kapferer (1997:25), the value of the brand comes from its ability to

gain an exclusive, positive and prominent meaning in the minds of a large number of

customers. Combinations of four factors determine the perceived value of the brand

for the consumer: brand awareness, perceived quality, confidence, and image(Kapferer, 1997:37).

Figure: 2.2 Perceived Value

ImageBrand

Awareness

ConfidencePerceived

Quality

Source: Adapted from Kapferer (1997) Strategic Brand Management, London: Kogan

Page.

Brand Equity and Brand Awareness

One method of assessing the success of a brand is through brand equity, which is the

sum of all different values people attach to the brand. Brand equity can include the

monetary value, the intangible value, and the perceived quality attributed to the

product independent of its features. Aaker and Joachimstaler (2000:17) define brand

equity as brand assets and liabilities connected to the brand that add to, or detract

4

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

5/35

from its value to the customer and to the business. Aaker (2004a:2) refer to the

elements of brand equity as: brand awareness, brand reputation, brand differentiation,

brand relevance and brand loyalty.

Figure: 2.3. Brand Equity

Brand Equity

Source: Adopted from Aaker (2004a) Even Brands Need Spring Cleaning, book

excerpt from Brand Portfolio Strategy. Brandweek, March 8, 2004, vol.45. No10

Brand awareness describes how well the brand is known in the market place. Brand

awareness is achieved through market communication to promote the brand identity

(Aaker, 2004a:1). Because people like the familiar it links to other aspects of brand

equity (Aaker and Joachimstaler, 2000:17).

Brand reputation reflects how the brand is regarded in the marketplace and does it

have high perceived quality (Aaker, 2004a:2). Perceived quality influences brand

associations and affect brand profitability (Aaker, 2004b:8).

Brand differentiation refers to any point of differentiation that brand has (Aaker,

2004a:2).

Brand relevance refers to whether the brand is relevant to todays customers and

todays applications (Aaker, 2004a:2).

Brand loyalty refers to the commitment of customer segments to a brand (Aaker,2004a:2). According to Travis (in Nissim, 2005:1), creating customer loyalty is

Perceived

Reputation

Brand

Differentiation

Brand

relevanceBrand

Awareness

Brand

Loyalty

5

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

6/35

neither strategic nor tactic; rather, it is the ultimate objective and meaning of brand

equity. Brand loyalty is brand equity.

Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) model is based on the premise that theower of a brand lies in what customers have learned, felt, seen and heard about the

gnize a brand for what it is and can identify

in different conditions. This does not mean they prefer that brand - brand

the category or a purchase or usage

brand only after hearing or seeing

.

gory and your brand comes first to mind.

flected by the association in their minds

hen they think of the brand. According to Keller (2003:70), brand image is created

p

brand as a result of their experiences over time (Keller, 2003:59). CBBE is derived

from brand awareness and brand image.

Brand awarenessis when customers reco

it

preference, or attach high value to it. According to Keller (2003:67), Brand awarenessconsists of brand recognition and brand recall.

a)Brand recognition is the consumers ability to confirm prior exposure to the brand

when given a brand as a cue (Keller, 2003:67).

b) Brand recall is the consumers ability to retrieve the brand from memory when

given the product category, the needs fulfilled by

situation as cue (Keller, 2003:67).

Aided awareness is when the customer recognizes a

it

Top-of-mindawareness is when a customer is asked to name brands within a

cate

Brand image is consumers perceptions as re

w

by marketing programs that link strong, favorable and unique associations to the

brand in the memory. These associations are created also through direct experience

or with the brands identification with a certain company, person, place or event.

Growth Codes

From an analysis of over 1000 winning brands Buchholz and Wrdemann (2000)

uggest that winning brands achieve outstanding growth in terms of sales and markets

6

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

7/35

The significance of brand equity has been demonstrated by various studies. One of

them is Interbrands annual study on the worlds most valuable brands which receives

ANDING IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY.

substantial coverage in the pages of Business Week. In the latest (2005) studythere is

no pharmaceutical company within the top 20 best global brands. The pharmaceuticalindustrys powerhouse Pfizer, with 11 products, each earning more than $1 billion

in annual sales in 2004, is in 31st position, down from 29th in 2004 (Business

Week,2005:68, 2004:69)

2.3 THE ROLE OF BR

2.3.1 Pharmaceutical Industry Background

The origins of the modern pharmaceutical industry can be traced to the 19 th century.

fizer and Merck in America, Roche, Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz in Europe all started

come firmly established

ithin the pharmaceutical industry. Discovery of penicillin in 1940s was a major

s, the industry expanded, benefiting from new discoveries. The healthcare

pending boomed as economies prospered. There were no strict controls on research

P

out as family chemical companies. Slowly but steadily many companies moved into

synthetic pharmaceuticals and eventually to global players.

During the 1940s and 50s, research and development be

w

sensation throughout the scientific community and Pfizer made medical history when

it became the first company to successfully mass-produce penicillin (Rodengen,

2000:11).

In the 1960

s

and development (R&D), drug approvals and marketing. However, during this time,

the new legislation was passed in the USA that completely transformed the

pharmaceutical industry. By 1978 the average time needed to discover and develop

new drugs to meet the FDAs expanded requirements and then undergo regulatory

review had reached 14years or more (Rodengen, 1999:96). Thus, consuming an

increasing percent of the 17 years - the length of time then covered by patents. As a

consequence, it became much harder for the pharmaceutical companies to recoup their

investment in order to fund future research. By year 2000, the time taken for drugs to

8

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

8/35

share by adhering to specific lows when activating a specific purchase motive in the

customers mind. They are called Growth Codes, which form the basis of a new

approach to brand marketing (Buchholz and Wrdemann, 2000:5). The authors

arranged the Growth Codes behind five portals in the consumers mind: benefitsand promises; norms and values; perceptions and programs; identity and self-

expression; and emotions and love. According to the authors, the success of

migration principle (e.g. to migrate into a different or even unexpected mental

drawer where your brand can better unfold) can be replicated in any market, any

product, service, or institutions.

Emotional Branding

Gob (2001:28) believes that building the right emotion in a brand is the most

portant investment. According to his view, the concept of emotional branding

1 Shift from consumers to people

im

replaces the traditional concept of brand awareness and brings a dimension of

personalized relationship into equation.Shifts from old concept of brand awareness

to this new model are illustrated by the ten commandments of emotional branding:

Table: 2.4. Ten Commandments of Emotional Branding

2 Shift from product toexperience

3 Shift from honesty to trust

4 Shift from quality to preference

5 Shift from notoriety to aspiration

6 Shift from identity to personality

7 Shift from function to feel

8 Shift from communication to dialogue

9 Shift from ubiquity to presence

10 Shift from service to relationship

Source: A Branding: The Ten Commandmentsdopted from Gob, (2001) Emotional

of Emotional Branding, New York, Allworth Press.

7

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

9/35

make from laboratory to market increased by nearly seven years. Most of the increase

occurred in the clinical development phase. The average number of trials and the

number of patients for each new drug application also have increased (IMS, 2004:1).

The pharmaceutical industrys success lay in discovering, developing, and marketinginnovative medicines. The quality of the medicine was the most important

differentiating factor. As there are huge risks involved in discovering, developing, and

bringing a new drug to market, companies are looking for ways to improve

productivity of R&D, widen product portfolios and optimise sales and marketing

costs. It typically costs more than $500 million to bring one new drug to the market

and for every drug successfully brought to the market, there are 5 000-10 000

unsuccessful compounds screened and 250 that undergo preclinical testing (PharmaMarketing News, 2005:8). In response to these challenges, pharmaceutical industry

continues to undergo a period of consolidation and rationalisation. The latest mergers

and acquisitions within the industry testify to the high value placed on innovation, and

the cost of achieving this (Blackett & Robbins, 2001:2).

2.3.2 Pharmaceutical Industry in South Africa

S.As health system is both First World and Third World with less than 17%

aving access to the best walk-in healthcare while the majority remains reliant on a

th Africa were uncontrolled and high. The

ational Drug Policy (NDP) and its amendments have a direct impact on

h

public health system (DoH, 1995:2). In 2002, private sector spending and out-of-

pocket payments accounted for 63% of total health expenditure (Health Systems

Trust, 2002). Since coming to power in 1994, the ANC government has been

determined to redress the many years of health care deficiencies, most notably the

lack of equity in access to essential drugs.

In the past, prices of pharmaceuticals in Sou

N

pharmaceutical industry with special reference to transparent pricing system and

reduction of cost of medicines; compulsory generic substitution at pharmacy level; the

Essential Drug List (EDL) and its selection criteria; compulsory licensing;

international tendering and parallel importation (DoH, 2002). The new changes affect

9

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

10/35

every player in the private sector medicine chain - manufacturers, distributors,

wholesalers, pharmacists, and private hospital groups.

The latest regulations bring SA into line with developed nations such as the UK,

A pharmaceutical market is the largest in Africa and was estimated at US$1.5 billion

France, Canada, and Australia that have introduced similar laws to control healthcare

expenditure and drug selection/availability.

S

at retail prices in 2002 (IMS Health, 2003). The two local corporations, Adcock

Ingram and Aspen represented 23.7% of the market. There are 15 leading

multinational pharmaceutical companies represented in SA, and the leading

prescription product on the market is Pfizers Lipitor (IMS Health, 2003:30-32).

2.3.3 Pharmaceutical Brands

There are three categories of pharmaceutical brands:

Prescription-only medicines,

2. tical generic drugs, which according to IMS Health data

3. edicines purchased without a prescription. They

Each o uires very different marketing and branding strategies.

harmaceutical brands are also primary care products and specialist products.

r structure.

roduct branding for prescription drugs (ethical drugs) has been the most important in

1. Original brands or ethical drugs which are

representedin 2002 38.1% of the market share by value and 15.5% by volume.

(IMS, 2003:32)

Branded and iden

(2003:32-33), accounted for 22.4% of SA private drug market by value and

36% by volume in 2002.

Over-the-counter (OTC) m

are branded or generic.

f the three categories req

PPrimary care products are generally prescribed by GPs, whereas treatment with

specialist products is typically initiated in hospitals. Sales volume, marketing spend

and skills required differ for these two categories.

Many companies have all the categories within thei

P

the industry due to the greater technological differentiation and to the patent system(Colyer, 2003:1). In the pharmaceutical industry, patent protection is a critical asset,

10

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

11/35

as it allows companies to sustain the price premium needed to recover the R&D

investments. Given the high attrition rates of new chemical entities (NCEs) it is no

surprise that block buster or mega brand drugs have had the potential to

determine the fortunes of pharmaceutical companies. However, overdependence on ablockbusters can render a company highly vulnerable to generic competition once

patent expire. Typically, the generic version will erode 70% or more of the branded

drug sales in one year (Cleland et al, 2004:51).

Brands thrive where the relationship between buyer and seller is direct and open,

ccording to Doherty (2004:3), three factors are influencing pharmaceutical brand:

mers;

elf.

Blackett & Robbins (2001) and Cleland

egulatory environment

egulatory bodies, such as managed healthcare as well as the role and impact of

where choice is transparent, and availability unrestricted (Blackett & Robbins,

2001:1). Few of these requirements exist within the prescription pharmaceuticalmarket.

A

The regulatory environment;

The relationship with its custo

How pharmaceutical industry sees its

This view is shared by other authors such as

et al (2004).

R

R

government and its public policy challenges - Act 90 and single exit price (SEP)

currently implemented in South Africa - control and sanction the availability of

medicines, determines what the patient pays, and control the advertising and

promotion of prescription drugs. National Health Act of 2004 (Act 61 of 2003),

provides a framework for national health system in South Africa, comprising public,

private, and non-governmental providers. This will create move towards the creation

of centralised formularies at Primary Care level, offering the GPs clearly defined

prescribing options.

11

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

12/35

Pharmaceutical brands relationship with its customers

arget audiences are no longer limited only to doctors. Currently, there are four

anaged health care organisations and government,

he brand is the focal point for competing for the choice of all these stakeholders and

octors

T

distinctly different customers: doctors,

payers m

pharmacists,

patients

T

depends on how they interact, and the degree of influence they have on one another.(Cleland et al, 2004:51, Colyer, 2003:1, deLor, 2003:3)

D

s prescription drugs in South Africa get no public promotion, doctors are the core

ayers

A

audience for pharmaceutical companies. While no longer the primary influencer of

prescribing, the GP is still the interface with the patient and can make a prescribing

choice between drugs. A doctors choice of medication depends not only on her/his

knowledge of the range of available treatment, but also on prescription guidelines

(Cleland et al, 2004, Thomas, 2005).

P

s GPs influence on a choice of medication has been reduced, pharmaceuticalA

companies are focusing their marketing efforts on the new areas of prescription

influence the payers. These are managed healthcare and government authorities,

which determine the formularies, and key opinion leaders (KOL) (Cleland et al, 2004,

Thomas, 2005).

12

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

13/35

Pharmacists

harmacists can influence the patients choice by making recommendations, making

atients

P

substitutions with the generic drug, or substituting the drug with another from theformulary, called therapeutic substitution (DoH, 2002).

P

nlike most markets where consumers make their own brand choice and purchase

ow the pharmaceutical industry sees itself

n important challenge for the pharmaceutical industry is the way in which they

le

.3.4 Branding of Prescription-only medicines (ethical drugs)

U

decisions, patients - the end-users of medicines, pass their brand choice for

prescription drugs to external parties a GP or specialist who writes the script, andsometimes even to the pharmacist. However, patients are now taking a more active

interest in their health, thus becoming much more involved in the treatment decision

and in the choice of medicine.

H

A

present themselves to the world. The public outcry for greater management

accountability is driving corporate reputation as a critical concern (deLor, 2003:1).

Pharmaceutical companies are building healthcare partnerships with its most valuab

customers doctors. Companies are aiming at presenting themselves as a solution

provider in debate for healthcare quality (Kelly, 2003:1). Pfizers commitment to

innovation and R&D supports its image as a company that makes and sells knowledge

and manufacturing is incidental (Rodengen, 1999:102).

o thrive in today's complex and highly regulated competitive environment,

2

T

pharmaceutical companies must be able to optimise the value of their brands for

ethical drugs.Although companies are spending a lot of time and effort in improving

the performance of sales and marketing, the difference between the best performers in

the industry and the rest is often marginal (Doherty,2004:1).Therefore, building and

13

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

14/35

maintaining distinctive and recognizable brands is very important. Additional sources

of value, such as the equity inherent in the brand itself now supplement the traditional

emphasis on patents. Managing brand equity has become major imperative in

pharmaceutical industry. Brand equity and its set of assets awareness, customerloyalty, reputation and perceived quality, differentiation, and relevance, linked to

brand name - add value to pharmaceutical products, and thus giving customers a

reason to prescribe, buy and use.

According to Robins (2004:2), getting the branding right will never compensate for a

elevance

poor product, but getting the branding wrong can make the difference between good

brand and great brand recognition and loyalty. She suggests that great brands have tomeet key criteria: relevance, credibility, differentiation, and stretch.

R

ing of the behaviour and characteristics of the stakeholder segments, the

redibility

Understand

unmet needs in the market and the existing brand dynamics of the therapeutic area is

crucial to determining the relevance of the window of brand opportunity (Robins,

2004:2).

C

icals brands require careful management to ensure credibility. Brand

ifferentiation

Pharmaceut

identities must be credible across all target audiences. Some brands, such as those for

erectile dysfunction, could become lifestyle-related products without damaging

credibility compare to other drugs, such as those for lowering cholesterol or

controlling hypertension, which demand much more science information.

D

the ability of doctors, buyers, and users to interpret and processBrands enhance

information, gain confidence and provide the rationale in their decisions. Many

pharmaceutical companies have focused on establishing brand recognition. However,

with proliferation of products, many of which are with similar safety and efficacy,

product differentiation is very limited in many therapeutic areas (Cleland et al,

2004:52). Therefore, pharmaceutical companies are trying to add value into their

14

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

15/35

propositions to satisfy stakeholder needs while differentiating their offering (Cleland

et al, 2004:52).

Stretchng to Robins (2004:1), the branding foundations should be sufficiently

epth of brand awareness

Accordi

flexible to accommodate changes in the market and for the post-patent life of the

brand.

D

ess among consumers, and their perception of the brand are

rand loyalty

The depth of brand awaren

very important as well. However, foundations of brand familiarity first need to beestablished.

B

le investment required for the development of new drugs mean that

uct branding for prescription-only

2004:2-4), establishing clear and differentiating brand values

randing of prescription drugs to the GPs

The considerab

pharmaceutical companies must establish brand loyalty throughout a products

lifecycle in order to protect sales at patent expiry.

Because of shrinking periods of exclusivity, prod

medicines is becoming a part of the pre-launch process (Doherty, 2004, Kregor, 2004,

Robins, 2004, Thomas, 2005). Pfizer for example, involves marketing at the drug

discovery stage and claims to make blockbuster drugs rather than discover them

(McKinnell, 2002:1).

According to Kregor (

both functional and emotional - is an important task. He points that different products

will have a different emphasis between the product-based functional values and the

emotional values during different stages of its lifecycle.

B

ecause of the changing environment, traditional way of branding prescription drugsB

to the GPs has changed. For decades, pharmaceutical companies have relied on a

model where sales representatives visit doctors, explaining the benefits of the drug.

This model was successful in raising doctors awareness of the range of available

15

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

16/35

medicines. As the number of sales representatives grows and the face time with

doctors diminishes, creating expertise in a disease category is one way of

differentiating the product messages (deLor & Bowman, 2003:42).

According to Doherty (2004:4), selling a drug based on functional advantage is a

harmaceutical companies are now moving from branding a drug to branding a

ddressing doctors evolving needs include not only providing product information; it

harmaceutical companies also use the Internet to interact with the healthcare

randing of prescription drugs to the patients

short-term goal as product differentiation is very limited in many therapeutic areas.

That is why pharmaceutical companies are trying to recognize and meet the other

needs underlying doctors choice of medicine: treatment needs, role based needs and

personal needs (Doherty, 2004:3).

Pcondition (Robins, 2004:2). Developing propositions around therapeutic categories

does not replace the need for a good product with excellent efficacy and safety, but

adds more value for all stakeholders and helps differentiate the offering (Cleland,

2004:52).

A

also includes providing service that supports the total management of patients

condition (Cleland, 2004:52, Thomas, 2005:17). By helping doctors to increase their

knowledge of various conditions and drug treatments pharmaceutical companies can

help to create an affinity and trust for certain brands and thus promoting brand loyalty.

P

profession. Use of tools such as eDetailing (available in UK and USA) enable

pharmaceutical companies to target GPs with relevant information on new drugs or

products, including clinical trial data, prescribing information and marketing materials

(Thomas, 2005:17).

B

harmaceutical branding for prescription drugs is an important way of creatingP

awareness among the public of the potential benefits of medicines. The shift in patient

power has created a push-pull dynamic, that changed the way in which

16

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

17/35

pharmaceutical brand is brought to the market (Cleland et al, 2004, Colyer, 2003,

Doherty, 2004, Kregor, 2004, Thomas, 2005). The more the patient is involved in

the treatment decision the more brand has role to play. Patient pull can effectively

extend the life of a product beyond its clinical differentiation (Kregor, 2004:3).

According to Cleland et al (2004:55), it is important to address both the

lthough regulations in SA and Europe limit the use of DTC websites, companies can

uilding patient continuum

functional/rational and emotional needs of the customers. Robins (2004:2),

acknowledges the importance of the language surrounding the brand which plays a

critical role in helping to shift mindsets and influence behaviour. Example is the

transition from impotence through erectile dysfunction, to the acronym ED.

A

still raise disease and treatment awareness without directly promoting a drug. Better-

informed patients are more involved in the decision-making process of their

treatment.

B

order to build effective and long-lasting relationships with patients, pharmaceutical

ondition Awareness companies areproviding relevant health information to help

reatment Awarenesscan help promote patient preference for a particular drug.

rescription Request - Studies have shown that 70% of consumers requests for

crease compliance and treatment success rates with educational programs that help

patients understand why a drug should be taken regularly as prescribed.

In

companies are providing them with valuable information during the different stages of

their conditions.

C

patients recognize symptoms. The more aware potential users are about their

condition, the more likely they are to seek treatment.

T

P

specific prescriptions are honored by doctors (Cleland et al, 2004:51).

In

17

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

18/35

Patients word-of-mouth is one way to expand market coverage and generate further

brand equity.

Branding of prescription drugs to the payers

nnot afford to ignore payers and their

eeds in the branding process (Cleland et al, 2004, Colyer, 2003, Thomas, 2005).

understanding and engagement with the dynamics of a

pidly changing market, pharmaceutical companies are missing opportunities to

gs reside in isolation with little visual corporate brand

ndorsement or visual connection to each other (deLor & Bowman, 2003:42). As

Pharmaceutical companies recognize that they ca

n

Thus, companies are taking messages to the market, which are far more sophisticated.

This means the companies have to not only show the drug to be efficacious, but also

what are the added medical benefits for the patients that receive the product. The

interests in health economics - cost effectiveness, include savings from a reduction inhospital admission to a decrease in side effects that could demand additional

medication (Colyer, 2003:2).

Despite the progress made in

ra

leverage the corporate brand (Colyer, 2003, deLor, 2004, Doherty, 2004,

Druckenmiller, 2002).

Many prescription dru

e

pharmaceutical companies communicate through an ever-widening spectrum of

channels to an increasing number of audiences, putting a unified face on those

communications will increase their impact and value.

2.4 CORPORATE BRANDING

2.4.1 Overview

The concept of a corporate brand is the same as the concept of a product brand; it is

e enactment of brands that is different (de Chernatony, 2001:18).In the past decadeth

there was a much greater recognition of the importance and power of the corporate

18

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

19/35

brand by businesses. Business began shifting their focus from product brands to

corporate branding (de Chernatony, 1999:26).

With product branding, the product or service is synonymous with the brand. It

ccording to Aaker (2004b:6), corporate brand represents an organization that stands

he changing role of brands from marketing tool to an organizational principle for

ccording to Aaker and Detert (2004:2), corporate brand represents an organization

strives to build trust in the brand by allowing the consumer to fit product perceptions

and brand image into one (Davis, 2002:3). According to de Chernatony (2001:6), the

enactment of the brand concentrates predominantly on externally focused activities.

Enactment of the corporate brand, on the other hand, follows a different process

which is attentive to the needs of stakeholders rather than just consumers (de

Chernatony, 2001:6).

A

behind its products in spirit and substance. Davis (2002:3) defines corporate

branding as a composite of all the experiences, encounters and perceptions a

customer has with a company. It means that all communications - internal and

external, are aimed at presenting a single, unified message. The underlying motivator,

according to Davis, is to build trust in the company not in a particular product or

service. Sony is an example of ultimate corporate endorser with its name firmly

attached to everything from its DVD to the Play Station (Davis, 2002:3).

T

business is part of a historical trend. Initially, brands differentiated one product from

another. Now, brands define relationships with all their audiences, especially investors

and employees (Interbrand, 2001:3).

A

and reflects its heritage, values, culture, people and strategy, as shown on Figure 2.4.

de Chernatony (2001:11) states that values are at the core of the corporate brand.

According to him, there are four value sources, as shown on Figure 2.3, which are

interlinked and are a critical component for corporate brand success. They must be

built into the product, expressed in behavior, and reflected in communication.

19

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

20/35

Figure: 2.5. Inter-relationship between Value Sources

ource: Adopted from de Chernatony (2001) Would a brand smell any sweeter by a

Organizational Individual

Employees

VISION

Culture

Values

S

corporate name?

According to Aaker (2004b:8) values and priorities are the very essence of a

.4.2 Corporate Branding in the Pharmaceutical Industry

company. Innovation, perceived quality and customer concern are three values and

priorities which are most frequently seen as drivers of corporate brands.

he research conducted in the 2001 BrandPower Study by Corporate Branding

he study was based on survey of senior business executives from top 20% of US

corporations. The respondents represented dual audience- end-consumers of prescription drugs

and had influence over financial investment decisions.)

2

Treveals importance of the companys image within the pharmaceutical industry

(Corporate branding, 2001:1). The study, which rated 34 leading pharmaceutical

companies on their relative strengths across a list of 24 key brand attributes, found

that the majority of these companies have relatively weak corporate brands.

(T

20

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

21/35

The study showed that the strongest brands in the pharmaceutical industry are diversified

consumer products giants such as Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble and 3M and that

they scored well ahead of their purely pharmaceutical-focused peers Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and

In its 2

the mo able corporate brands as: General Electric, Microsoft, Exxon Mobil,

uge how well known and how well thought of a corporate

rand is among senior business decision-makers, a group defined as vice presidents or higher

Pharma

limited

(2004), an overall marketing investment of $450 million to $1 billion is required for

Merk.

002 and 2004 surveys, Corporate Branding ranked the top 10 companies with

st valu

Wal-Mart, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, IBM, Toyota, Procter & Gamble and Coca-

Cola (CoreBrand, 2002, 2004).

For the study, CoreBrand collected Familiarity and Favourability ratings for the largest

publicly traded companies to ga

b

at the top 20% of US corporations based on revenue.

ceutical companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to create brands with

life span (8-10 years), and market them individually. According to IMS

new blockbusters during the first two years of launch. (Much of this spend has to be

directed to convincing new groups of stakeholders of a treatments value andefficacy.) At the same time, their corporate brands are passively and indirectly

managed through the opinions of regulatory bodies and the press.

A number of marketing consultants (Blackett & Robbins (2001); Colyer (2003);

deLor (2004); deLor & Bowman (2003); Doherty (2004); Stibel and Kapoor (2002);

Robins (2004)) believe that pharmaceutical companies have failed to make product

and corporate brand benefit each other. However, even in the case of Pfizer, Stibel

and Kapoor (2002:2) believe that the success in creating a significant corporate brand

is accidental and that the company passively benefit from the Viagra buzz.

According to Aaker and Detert (2004) and a number of other authors (DeLor (2004),

brand has the flexibility to play severalDoherty (2004), Aaker (2004b)), the corporate

roles within the brand portfolio.

21

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

22/35

Advantages of strong corporate brand

Corporate brand as differentiator

The corporate brand defines the firm that will deliver and stand behind specific

roducts or therapies (Aaker, 2004b:1). With proliferation of products, many of whichp

have similar efficacy and safety standards, product differentiation is very limited in

many therapeutic drug classes. At the same time, organizations are very different;

therefore, a corporate brand can potentially find differentiation in the organizational

associations (Aaker, 2004b:10). Thus, a strong corporate brand can have a huge

impact on establishing preference for companys products.

Corporate brand defines company's uniqueness

By developing brand awareness strategies to define a company's uniqueness,

harmaceutical companies can maximize its recognition and set it apart from

and as endorser to

p

competitors.

Corporate br key products

aceutical companies can

nhance their perceived credibility and differentiation (Aaker and Detert, 2004:2).

By using corporate brand to endorse key products, pharm

e

Corporate brand provides credibility

A strong corporate brand provides credibility to key therapeutic areas. Some

ompanies are more strongly associated with a particular therapeutic area than others

tation for innovation

c

are (Aaker and Detert, 2004:2).

Corporate brand provides repu

hus corporate brand offers

redibility through endorsement (Aaker and Detert, 2004:2). Pfizer, for example,

A reputation for innovation enhances credibility, t

c

22

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

23/35

initiates marketing at the drug discovery stage. The company used its corporate logo

on Caduet to support the product brand before launch and to create a relationship

between the company, the therapeutic area, and the product (DeLor, 2004:1).

Corporate brand requires less brand-building resources

The corporate brand requires less brand-building resources, thus reducing the cost of

unching new drugs and increasing the speed of market acceptance (Aaker, 2004b:7).la

Corporate brand can achieve economies of communication

The use of the corporate name helps to communicate to professional audiences the

trength of the companys brand portfolio and thus achieving economies ofs

communication (Ind, 1997:3). As a result, all of a companys products support each

other through a communication endorsement. In his presentation to the AMA,

Druckenmiller (2002:2), points out that Pfizer have broadened and changed its selling

channels, bringing into play a greater diversity of audiences for whom different

attributes of a corporate brand are important.

Long-term benefit after patent expiration

In the long term - after product patent expiration, what remains is the value of the

orporate brand.

can strengthen customer relationship

c

Corporate brand

elationship that is different

om that of the product brand (Aaker, 2004b:11).

The corporate brand provides a message for the customer r

fr

Doctors

Doctors want to be associated with a trusted partner and the corporate brand will

t and that might influence their prescribing decisions (Doherty, 2004:3).

Trust is easier to develop for an organisation than for a product. In addition, doctors

mean trus

23

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

24/35

are more likely to see sales representatives from well-known companies than from

less well-known companies. More doctor details translate directly into higher sales

(Colyer, 2003:3, DeLor, 2004:2).

Patients

A strong corporate brand can be an asset in gaining patients trust and loyalty. Strong

ompany brand means patients know who make their medicine. As patients are

gly interested in learning more about disease states and treatment options

c

increasin

information from well-known and admired company can help educate patients,

motivate them to seek treatment, and make them feel more confident about long-term

use of necessary medication (Colyer, 2003:2, Stibel and Kapoor, 2002:2).

Investors

Investors cannot find Viagra on the NYSE when they invest, they invest in Pfizer

nd not in separate brands, such as Viagra (DeLor, 2004:1).a

Globalisation requires strong corporate brand identity

With globalisation and liberalisation of trade, it is essential to have strong corporateof the company in various

arkets (Colyer, 2003:2).

brand identity. This will help in creating a positive image

m

Corporate brand has significant influence internally

As corporate brand represents the culture, systems, people and strategy, thus has a

004:2). The people of anrganization provide the basis for the corporate brand image. Because people and

significant influence internally (Aaker and Detert, 2o

organizations prefer to do business with those they respect and admire it is important

what kind of people and values are behind this corporate brand (Aaker, 2004b:10).

Ind (1997:83) believes that people are the corporate brand and therefore they should

be the corporate brand communicators. Employees can become loyalists or even

advocates.

24

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

25/35

Risks and challenges

There are risks and challenges of associating pharmaceutical corporate brand with the

roduct brands. Some of them are: clinical drug failure, drug withdrawal, litigations,nd payments due to litigations that could lead to declining sales in unrelated brands.

rate brand translates into the trust in companys ability to deal

ith problems openly and quickly as in the case of Tylenol (Aaker and Detert,

sumers mind. According to Ind (1997:42), when a parent

nd its brand operate under separate names bad news is less likely linked.

pa

However, strong corpo

w

2004:2, deLor, 2004:2).

Davis (2002:3) acknowledges that product branding allows the ability to have a wider

array of products and services that may have no connection to one another under oneumbrella, and less fear of failure. It also allows an organization more opportunity to

control a place in the con

a

However, the pervasiveness of media tends to ensure that the connections are made

Ind, 1997:42).

2.4.3 Corporate Reputation

One of the key findings from Hill and Knowltons Corporate Reputation Watch 2004

Survey is that 93% of senior executives believe that customers consider corporate

putation important or extremely important (Dalton, 2005:7).

Reputation is the sum of values that stakeholders attribute to a company, based on

e reputation, including

entity and image.

re

their perception and interpretation of the image that the company communicates over

time (Dalton, 2005:16).According toDavies (in Dalton, 2005:18),reputation is a

collective term referring to all stakeholders views of corporat

id

It is very important for the pharmaceutical companies to be conscious about the

strength and value of its corporate brand because trust in the minds of consumers, is

closely aligned with corporate reputation and image (Corporate branding, 2004:3).

25

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

26/35

CoreBrand (Corporate branding, 2004:1) defines corporate identity as a companys

look which refers to a companys name, logo, and tagline; and corporate image, as

the publics perception of a company. Corporate branding, by contrast, is a business

process planned, strategically focused, and integrated throughout the organization.

Figure: 26. Corporate Reputation

Source: Adopted fromDalton J. (2004) Reputation Management: A Holistic BusinessTool. www.lspr.com , Read on 13/05/05

The 2004 annual reputation study conducted by Rating Research LLC (RCC) assessed

s Vioxx (rofecoxib) and the concern overther COX-2 inhibitors (anti-inflammatory drugs), pharmaceutical executives and

Eli Lilli was the winner in the overall reputation ranking for 2004. The researchers believe

Brands

Corpor

brand.

19 leading pharmaceutical companies. The study revealed that besides the damaging

ublicity surrounding the recall of Merckpo

industry analysts still view pharmaceutical companies as excellent and are willing

to invest in them (Gasorek, 2005:1).

According to the survey, the four most important drivers for reputation strength were

ethical behaviour, workforce, financial stability, and role and leadership of CEO.

Lillis strong revenue growth from new product sales, as well as companys commitment to

R&D, the quality of its employees, and its financial transparency as key element of reputation

strength.

need better and socially broader measures of success (Clifton, 2004:2).

ate Social Responsibility (CSR) is integral to a companys reputation and

26

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

27/35

2.4.4 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

The landscape in which companies operate has changed rapidly over the past few

ears. As public scrutiny has increased, so as the standards by which brands - bothlonger simply assessed on the basis

f performance, whether financial, functional or emotional, without reference to their

brand and how it is perceived in the marketplace. Thelobalization of American business has contributed significantly to concerns about the

3). Dunfee et al. (1999) discuss the

oncept of a social contract between business and society. According to Clifton

respect and trust (Olins, 2001:2).

yproduct and corporate, are judged. Brands are no

o

wider impact (Bolen, 2004:50).

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a concept which is influencing the

development of brands, especially corporate brands. More then ever companies are

concerned about their corporateg

reputation of companies. Because of the 24-hour news coverage, organisations have

nowhere to hide. Any issue, regardless of how local it may be, can travel the world in

a matter of minutes and negatively impact a corporate reputation and its brand.

According to Olins (2001:2), brands of the future will have to signal something

wholesome about the company behind the brand; the next big thing is social

responsibility. CSR is rapidly becoming a must have feature of the business and

the organizations have recognized how these strategies can add or detract from their

value (Blumenthal and Bergstrom, 2003:332).

Corporate Social Responsibility suggests that an organization should not only

consider their customers and their profitability; it alsorefers to the obligations of the

firms toward society (Ind, 1997, Smith, 200

c

(2004:2), CSR should be about genuinely solving problems and not only reputation

management.

As stakeholder groups are closely interlinked they have enormous potential to

influence each other. Customers and general public are more likely to support

companies they

27

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

28/35

2.4.5 Philanthropic Programs

According to Blumenthal and Bergstrom (2003:337), because corporations already

vest in both branding and philanthropy, there is a rationale for integrating brandingnd CSR under the umbrella of the brand. They suggest, branded CSR can turn

of the promise to an explicit one.

hese programsprove access to quality healthcare for underserved populations and encourage

ina

philanthropy from implicit delivery

Last year, Pfizers CEO Hank McKinnell accepted an Award of Excellence from the

Committee to Encourage Corporate Philanthropy (CECP) (pfizer.com, Press release,

28/2/05). Pfizer has a significant U.S. and International philanthropy effort, including

programs funded directly by Pfizer and by the Pfizer Foundation. Tim

science education in Pfizer's local communities. Many Pfizer country operations also

support philanthropic efforts in their communities (pfizer.com, Philanthropy

Programs, Read on 01/03/05)

The Diflucan Partnership Program is a public/private partnership that donates

Diflucan (fluconazole) for two opportunistic infections associated with HIV/AIDS

in developing countries, and trains healthcare providers. As of January 2005, Pfizer

has donated more than $100 million in medicine and treated more than 110,000

atients (www.pfizer.comp , Read on 01/03/05).

omycin), and trained thousands of

ealthcare professionals. The program is also educating millions of patients and

Developed as a public/private partnership, the International Trachoma Initiative

(ITI) is dedicated to eliminating trachoma, the worlds leading cause of preventable

blindness. The ITI has treated 16 million patients in 11 African and Asian countries

with Pfizers antibiotic, Zithromax (azithr

h

promoting local environmental projects to increase access to clean water and

sanitation (www.pfizer.com, Read on 01/03/05).

The question remains whether the medical fraternity and particularly, the GPs and

public in South Africa are aware about the tremendous good that Pfizer does for the

community.

28

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

29/35

2.5 CONCLUSION

The literature review has been conducted in relation to the topic: a) theory on the topic of

rands, branding and brand awareness; b) information on pharmaceutical industry and

e

sibility and philanthropic programs.Literature review provides basis for

Source: Adopted from Aaker and Detert (2004), The acquired corporate brand,

Pharma Times, December 2004, www.pharmatimes.com

b

pharmaceutical brands; c) the role of branding in pharmaceutical industry; d) theoryon corporate branding and corporate branding in pharmaceutical industry, corporat

social respon

the research design.

Figure: 2.7. The Corporate Bran

HeritageTherapeutic areasPeople

iorities

SystemsProgramsStrategyCitizenship

Values/PrCulture

, Read on 14/3/05

DifferentiationCredibility trust & expertise.Support for internal brand buildingA means to supplement productbrandsMore effective management of thebrand portfolioSupport for Communication

Maintaining relevance to doctors and

Avoiding negative doctor/patientreactions to linkages

Creating value positionsManaging the brand across contexts

Performance

patients

29

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

30/35

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Aaker, D (2004a) Even Brands Need Spring Cleaning, book excerpt from

olio Strategy. Brandweek, March 8the Corporate

Brand Portf , 2004, vol.45. No10B2. Aaker, D (2004b) Leveraging rand, California Management

Review, VOL 46, NO 3 SPRING 2004

2004) The acq3. Aaker, D. and Detert, A.M. ( uired corporate brand, Pharma

Times, December 2004, www.pharmatimes.com, Read on 14/3/05

Brand Leadership4. Aaker, D. and Joachimstaler, E.(2000) New York: Free

Press

5. Adams, G and Schvaneveldt, J. (1991), Understanding Research Methods (2

nd

edition), New York, Longman.

6. Blackett, T. & Robbins, edicine/The role of branding inR., (2001): Brand M

the pharmaceutical industry. Interbrand Healthcare.

7. Blackett, T. (2004), Brands and Branding. Interbrand, New York.

Bless, C and Higson-Smith, C. (1995). Fundamentals of Social Res8. earch : An

African Perspective. Second edition. Cape Town: Juta and Company

Blumenthal, D. and Bergstrom, A. J.9. (2003), Brand Councils That Care:

Towards the Convergence of Branding and Corporate Social Responsibility.

Brand Management, 10 (4/5), 327-341.

10.Bollen, A. (2004), The importance of Brand Reputation, Pharma Times,

February 2004, 50-51

11.Brymer,C. (2004) Brands and Branding What makes Brands Great. Interbrand.

Buchholz, A. and Wrdemann12. , W., (2000) What makes winning brands

different? The hidden method behind the worlds most successful brands. John

Wiley & Sons ltd, England

13.Business Week, (2004) The 100 Best Global Brands , August 2nd, 2004, 68-71

14.Business Week, (2005) The 100 Top Global Brands , August 1st , 2005, 66-70

Chaffey, D. (2002) E-business and E-commerce Management:15. Strategy,

Implementation and Practice.Harlow: FT Prentice Hall

Chandler, J. and Owen, M., (2003), Developing Brands with Qualitative16.

Market Research, SAGE Publications Ltd., London

30

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

31/35

17.Cleland, R., Finskud, L. & Raimondi, V. (2004), Nine prescription for brand

health, Market Leader, Spring 2004, www.warc.com, Read on 13/05/05

Clifton, R (2004) The future of brands18. . Brands and Branding. Interbrand, New

York19.Clifton, R. and Maughan, E. (2000), The future of brands. 25 Visions,

Interbrand, New York.

20.Colyer, E. (2005), Pharma Co-Marketing: Possible Side Effects.

www.brandchannel.com. Read on 11/05/2005

21.Colyer, E. (2003a): Products that Rise Above their Corporate Brands

brandchannel.com. Read on 13/03/05

22.Colyer, E. (2003b): Pushing Pills to Those who Pay the Bills,brandchannel.com. Read on 13/03/05

23.Cooper, D.R. and Emory, C.W. (1995). Business Research Methods. United

States of America: McGraw Hill

24.Corporate branding (2001)Top Pharmaceutical Corporate BrandsRanked in

BrandPowerStudy.www.corebrand.com. Read on 18/03/05

25.Corporate branding (2002) Most Valuable Corporate Brands Announced,

www.corebrand.com, Read on 18/3/05.

26.Corporate branding (2004) Most Valuable Corporate Brands,

www.corebrand.com, Read on 18/3/05.

27.Dalton, J. (2004) Reputation Management: A Holistic Business Tool.

www.lspr.com , Read on 13/05/05

28.Davis, S. (2002), Corporate Branding. Making the brand the strategic driver

for the entire organization. www.prophet.com, Read on 3/6/05

29.de Chernatony, L. (1999) Brand Management Through Narrowing the Gap

Between Brand Identity and Brand Reputation, Journal of Marketing

30. nd smell any sweeter by a corporate

Management, Vol. 15, 157-179

de Chernatony, L. (2001) Would a bra

name? Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 17.

de Chernatony, L. and DallOlmo Ri31. ley, F. (1999) Experts views about

defining services brands and the principles of services branding, Journal of

Business Research, Vol. 46, No2, 182-192.

31

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

32/35

32.deLor, K. (2004) DTC: Whats in a Name? Pharmaceutical Executive, Sep 1,

2004, www.pharmexec.com, Read on 14/03/2005

33.deLor, K. & Bowman, M. (2003) Designing brands for the pharmaceutical

industry. Design Management Journal, Winter 2003, pp39-46.Department of Health (1995) Nati34. onal Drug Policy (NDP)

35.Department of Health (1965) Act No.101 Medicines And Related Substances

Act

Amendments Act 90 of 1997, Act 59 of 2002.

Doherty, G. (2004)Branding36. , www.msi.co.uk Read on 14/03/05

Druckenmiller, B. (2002), presentation37. to the AMA, 07/07/2002,

www.porternovelli.com , Read on 14/03/2005Drugs and Therapeutic Bulletin, Vol 42, No 7, July38. 2004

39.Dunfee, T., Smith, N. and Ross, W. (1999), Social Contracts and Marketing

Ethics, Journal of Marketing, 63(3), 14-32.

40.Frost, R. (2005) Local Success on a Global Scale. www.brandchannel.com

41. R. (2005) Should Global Brands Trash Local Favorites?

Read on 11/05/2005

Frost,

www.brandchannel.com Read on 11/05/2005

42.Feldman, H.A., Goldstein, I., Hatzchristou, D.G., et al. (1994) Impotence and

its Medical and Psychological correlates: results of the Massachusetts male

ageing study. J Urology 1994;151:56-61

43.Forester Research, (2001) Pharmas DTC Reorganization, July 2001

44.Gasorek, D. W. and Resnick, J.T. (2005), The Rise and Fall of Pharma

Reputations, www.pharmexec.com, Read on 17/6/2005

45.Gob, M (2001), Emotional Branding: The Ten Commandments of Emotional

Branding, New York, Allworth Press.

46.Gopal, K. (1998), Please Pass the Viagra, Pharmaceutical Executive, October,

pp 28-30

47.Gregory, J. and Sellers, L.J. (2002). Building corporate brands.

Pharmaceutical Executive, 22(1), p.38

Health Systems Trust (2002, 2003). Sou48. th African Health Review, Durban:

49.IMS Health (2003), Market Prognosis, South Africa

Health Systems Trust

.

32

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

33/35

50.IMS Health (2004), Sustaining Blockbuster Ecosystems

Imms, M. and Ereant, G. (2003), An introduction51. to qualitative market

research, SAGE Publications Ltd., London

Ind, N. (1997), The Corporate Brand52. , Macmillan Business Press Ltd.53.Interbrand,(2001),Bank on the Brand, business paper www.brandchannel.com,

read on 15/03/05

54.Judd, C.M., Smith, E.R. and Kidder, L.H. (1991). Research Methods in Social

Relations. Sixth edition. United States of America: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

55.Kapferer, J-N (1997), Strategic Brand Management, London: Kogan Page.

Keller, K. L. (2003), S56. trategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring and

Managing Brand Equity, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall.utting Physicians57.Kelly, P., (2003) Kelly Says Change Hearts and Minds by P

and Customer First. http:// pfizer.com. Read on 03/09/2004

Kinnear T. C. & Taylor, J. R. (1991) M58. arketing Research: An Applied

Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

59.Kochan, N. (1998) The Worlds greatest brands, Interbrand, UK

Kotler, P. (2000)60. Marketing Management, The Millennium Edition, Upper

61.

Saddle River, Prentice Hall.

Kregor, P. S. (2004)The New Market Building Lifecycle Development in a

World of Blockbusters, www.msi.co.uk. Read on 14/03/05

62.Kumar, R. (1996). Research Methodology: A Step-By-Step Guide For

Beginners. London: Sage.

63.Marsh,J.(2001), Pharmaceutical branding, www.logodesignworks.com, read

on 08/03/05

64.MBA Module Guide (2004) Research Methods, Regent Business School

McCall, R.B. (1994). Fundamental St65. atistics for Behavioural Sciences. Sixth

edition. United States of America: Harcourt Brace.

66.McKinnell, H. (2005), An important message from Hank McKinnell, 5th April,

2005. http:// pfizer.com, Read on 06/04/2006

67.McKinnell, H., (2004) Performance report 2004, 3rd quarter 2004 performance

http://pfizer.com., Read on 10/02/2005

68.Nissim, B. (2005) Brand Loyalty: The psychology of preference.

www.ibranz.com. Read on 18/07/05.

33

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

34/35

69.Olins, W., (2000), How Brands are Taking Over Corporations. In Schultz, M.,

Hatch, M. and Larsen, M. (Eds.), The Expressive Organization, Oxford:,

University Press

70.Padma-Nathan, H., Eardley, L., Kloner, R.A. et al, Four year update on thesafety of Sildenafil citrate (Viagra). Urology, 2002 (Suppl 2B), 67-90

71.Parasuraman, A. (1991). Marketing Research. Second Edition. Massachusetts:

Addison-Wesley

72.Pfizer Access to Medicines International Programs, Spring 2004, Philanthropy

Programs. www.pfizer.com , Article read on 08/03/05

73.Pfizer and New York University School of Medicine Announce The launch of

Online Mens Sexual Health Referral Network. http://www.pfizer.com/news

74.

Read on 08/03/2005.

Pfizer Joins Companies Recognizing First-ever

Corporate Philanthropy Day

28 February 2005, http://pfizer.com Press release. Read on 01/03/05

75. Pfizer, Inc. Viagra Maker, www.scripophily.net, read on 11/05/2005

Pharma Marketi76. ng News (2005), April 2005, Vol. 4, No. 4,

www.pharmamarketingnews.com, read on 11/05/2005

PharmaVOICE (2002) Creating a Pharma Buzz77. , January/February 2002, p60

78.Pharmaceutical Field (2005), Selling a Superbrand, January 2005, pp24-25.

Robins, R. (2004), Building Better Brands: Brand lifecycle management, myth79.

or reality? www.brandchannel.com/papers , read on 25/5/05

80.Robson, C. (1993), Real World Research, Oxford, Blackwell.

Rodengen, J. L., (2000), The legend of Pfizer81. . Write Stuff Syndicate, Inc.

Sekaran, U. (2000). Research Methods for Busi

82. ness : A Skill Building

Approach. Third edition. New York: John Wiley

83.Shedlarz, D., Katen, K., and LaMatina, J. (2005) Pfizer Sees Sustained Long-

Term Growth Driven by Innovative Products, Strong R&D Pipeline and

Operating Efficiencies. 5th April 2005, Press Release.

http://www.pfizer.com/news Article read on 13/04/2005

84.Silver, M. 1992. Business Statistics. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill

85.Simons, J., (2003), King of the Pill, Fortune 500, 14th April.

34

8/3/2019 cbbepfizer

35/35

86.Slavens, R (2004) A Spoonful of branding helps Pfizer. BtoBOnline,

www.netb2b.com. Paper read on 08/03/05.

87.Smith, G. N. (2003) Corporate Social Responsibility: Whether or How?

s forCalifornia Management Review, 45 (4), 52-76.

88.Sounder, M., Lewis P. and Thornhill, A. (2000) Research Method

Business Students. (2nd edition) England, Prentice Hall

89.Steer, W., (1998), Viagra launch speech, 5th May

Stibel, G., Kapoor, G. (2002) Commentary: Brand the Com90. pany,

armexec.com, read onPharmaceutical Executive, May 1, 2002,www.ph

13/6/05

91.Thomas, G. (2005) Whos writing the script? Pharmaceutical Field, April,2005

92.www.eyeforpharma.com, (2004) Successful Product Branding in Pharma

(2004), Article read on 26/04/2005.