Search results

The pharmaceutical industry faces multiple risks that adversely affect its performance. Within these risks, some dependencies have been observed, which help in streamlining the mitigation efforts. Therefore, the present work identifies and categorizes various risks/sub-risks in cause–effect groups, considering uncertainty in the decision-making process.

An extensive literature review and experts' opinions were utilized to identify and finalize the risks faced by the pharmaceutical industry. For further analysis, data collection was done using a questionnaire focusing on finalized risks. Based on the data, the causal relation under uncertainty between various risks/sub-risks was identified using a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) technique, i.e. intuitionistic fuzzy DEMATEL, in a pairwise manner.

The results show that the three most prominent risk categories are operational, demand/customer/market and financial. Also, out of the seven main risks, only supplier and operational are categorized within the effect group and the rest, i.e. financial, demand, logistics, political and technology within the cause group. The sub-risks within each category have also been categorized into cause–effect groups. The mitigation of cause group risks will help in economize the financial resources and improve the performance and resilience of the industry.

There is insufficient research on identifying the causality among the pharmaceutical industry risks. Additionally, an extensive discussion on the identified cause–effect groups is also missing in the literature. Therefore, in this work, efforts have been made to determine the prominent risks for the Indian pharmaceutical industry that will be helpful for channelizing the resources to mitigate risks for a resilient industry.

The purpose of the present work is to improve the industry performance by identifying and quantifying the risks faced by the Indian pharmaceutical industry (IPI). The risk values for the prominent risks and overall industry are determined based on the four risk parameters, which would help determine the most contributive risks for mitigation.

An extensive literature survey was done to identify the risks, which were also validated by industry experts. The finalized risks were then evaluated using the fuzzy synthetic evaluation (FSE) method, which is the most suitable approach for the risk assessment with parameters having a set of different risk levels.

The three most contributive sub-risks are counterfeit drugs, demand fluctuations and loss of customers due to partners' poor service performance, while the main risks obtained are demand, financial and logistics. Also, the overall risk value indicates that the industry faces medium to high risk.

The study identifies the critical risks which need to be mitigated for an efficient industry. The industry is most vulnerable to the demand risk category. Therefore, the managers should minimize this risk by mitigating its sub-risks, like demand fluctuations, bullwhip effect, etc. Another critical sub-risk, the counterfeit risk, should be managed by adopting advanced technologies like blockchain, artificial intelligence, etc.

There is insufficient literature focusing on risk quantification. Therefore, this work addresses this gap and obtains the industry's most critical risks. It also discusses suitable mitigation strategies for better industry performance.

Managing risks is becoming a highly focused activity in the health service sector. In particular, due to the complex nature of processes in the pharmaceutical industry, several risks have been associated to its supply chains. The purpose of this paper is to identify and analyze the risks occurring in the supply chains of the pharmaceutical industry and propose a decision model, based on the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method, for evaluating risks in pharmaceutical supply chains (PSCs).

The proposed model was developed based on the Delphi method and AHP techniques. The Delphi method helped to select the relevant risks associated to PSCs. A total of 16 sub risks within four main risks were identified through an extensive review of the literature and by conducting a further investigation with experts from five pharmaceutical companies in Bangladesh. AHP contributed to the analysis of the risks and determination of their priorities.

The results of the study indicated that supply-related risks such as fluctuation in imports arrival, lack of information sharing, key supplier failure and non-availability of materials should be prioritized over operational, financial and demand-related risks.

This work is one of the initial contributions in the literature that focused on identifying and evaluating PSC risks in the context of Bangladesh. This research work can assist practitioners and industrial managers in the pharmaceutical industry in taking proactive action to minimize its supply chain risks. To the end, the authors performed a sensitivity analysis test, which gives an understanding of the stability of ranking of risks.

Once a decision has turned out poorly—such as Merck's decision to launch and support the painkiller Vioxx—it is easy to criticize. However, are these bad outcomes the result of a good decision which turned out unlucky, or are they decisions where the bad outcome could have been predicted? This case follows Merck's pharmaceutical product Vioxx from initial development to launch and subsequent withdrawal, and considers the decisions made at each stage by the Merck executives involved. The case concludes by examining the financial impact of the Vioxx withdrawal on the company and on the Merck stock value.

This case allows the students to examine the various steps of Vioxx's development and launch. By doing so, they can consider whether the decision-making process broke down and why. By connecting the Vioxx launch and withdrawal to changes in Merck's cash flow and stock market value, the students can document the impact of such decisions on the value of the firm.

The purpose of this paper is to identify best practices from high‐technology industries that face many of the same challenges around uncertainty, complexity, and risk that are faced by the pharmaceutical industry.

This research has conducted an extensive review of risk management literature and research conducted in high‐technology industries to collect some of the key best practices for high‐risk research projects.

A literature review of recent risk management publications from three high‐technology industries yielded 13 best practices in project risk management that could potentially be applied to pharmaceutical R&D projects to improve managing risks and uncertainties of managing projects. By reviewing these lessons learned from industries that share many of the challenges of the pharmaceutical R&D projects, it is suggested that the implementation of risk management in the context of drug development projects will require adaptation to the specific needs and challenges of those projects.

Implementing a risk management process is very challenging for pharmaceutical R&D projects, as there are high degrees of complexity, uncertainty, and large amounts of resources at stake. Many of the techniques could be applied to all stages of drug development, but some are clearly most applicable to particular stages. Some will work for small, medium and large pharmaceuticals, though the way they are implemented should be modified to meet the needs and resources of the particular company.

This study will serve as a basis for exploration and discussion that will result in controlled application and experimentation with these approaches, and this in turn could lead to real improvements in the use of risk management in pharmaceutical companies.

An exploration of the methods they have employed to address risk in R&D projects, as well as the outcomes of the application of those methods, should reveal tools, techniques, processes, training, and approaches that can be effectively applied to pharmaceutical development projects, and support the value of spending resources to employ risk management practices.

A key objective of the 5th Annual Pharmaceutical Congress “Marketing ROI for Pharma” conference was to illustrate how in the midst of a very turbulent environment, and with higher demand for pharmaceutical marketers to deliver bigger profits from increasingly smaller promotional budgets, there are a few critical decision areas that, if addressed appropriately, can help to deliver better return on investment (ROI). This commentary paper aims to provide a summary of what was discussed.

Given access to the conference presenters' original materials, the authors condensed the presentations into a summary article with reference to some recent academic work in the area.

The article summarises the presentations of a number of European pharmaceutical industry practitioners, healthcare professionals and government policy personnel in their assessments of the turbulent European pharmaceutical industry environment and the challenges associated with optimising ROI from promotional spending.

The entire paper summarises recent industry practice in Europe regarding how to optimise pharmaceutical ROI with respect to marketing activities and provides actual examples of how to do this.

Primarily targeting pharmaceutical industry practitioners, this paper provides a timely and thorough resource for those industry personnel charged with the mission of maximizing pharmaceutical marketing ROI.

The aim of this paper is to describe an innovative practice that has implication for new product developers within and outside the pharmaceutical industry.

The case describes an approach to managing the risk inherent in marketing drugs. The organization's original name has been retained, although individual managers' names have been changed at its request. Interviews with former company employees and publicly available data were used to write the case study.

The paper provides information and action approaches to new product developers that may reduce the risk of losing products to regulatory action. The subject company devised a risk management response to its product development. Their results offer direct implications for new product development teams in the drug industry. By extension, the implications may aid traditional companies outside of the pharmaceutical industry.

As in all case studies, the specific conditions found in one organization may not be found more generally in others. Readers are cautioned that the conclusions drawn in the case may have limited applicability.

The case depicts an innovative application of the risk minimization to the new product development process. Other organizations may find the technique of value in their own efforts.

The case is the first to describe a successful application of risk management to the product development/product management process. It offers the potential of improving the lifetime of pharmaceutical products in the marketplace, allowing the company a longer time to reap profits.

The aim of this paper is to develop a systematic literature review (SLR) aiming to identify reverse logistics (RL) concepts and practices applied to the end-of-life (EOL) and end-of-use (EOU) of pharmaceuticals and to identify and synthesize, through bibliometric indicators, research opportunities on RL, considering the analysis of publications in the periodical Supply Chain Management: An International Journal (SCMij).

The SLR followed two steps, namely, search for articles on the subject and content analysis of selected material and bibliometric analysis of publications using VOSviewer®.

The SLR allowed the compilation of evidences regarding pharmaceutical RL in the groups: environmental risk, the RL evolution and regulatory and stakeholder’s educational perspective. Despite the timid specific literature on pharmaceutical RL, it was also possible to point out research gaps and opportunities. Pharmaceutical RL seems to be influenced by studies from traditional RL including mathematical modeling, managerial strategies and technologies but prescind of a systemic solution. Besides reducing environmental impact, the motivation to implement pharmaceutical RL resides in its potential for revenue. Considering integrated logistics as a trend and an emerging issue, RL for the pharmaceutical industry needs to be addressed more thorough and broadly.

The limited number of papers returned in this SLR of pharmaceutical RL impaired the bibliometric analysis of them, leading to the inclusion of papers on general RL.

This study provides an overview of the evolution of RL in the pharmaceutical industry, it also clarifies concepts and EOL/EOU practices, particularly directed to the pharmaceutical industry RL.

This paper aims to examine the consistencies and discrepancies in corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting by analyzing the CSR reports of pharmaceutical companies. Despite the major role pharmaceutical companies play in the CSR field, our knowledge of the extent to which their disclosures provide comprehensive, material, credible and accurate information on their actual performances is limited because of a lack of sufficient literature on the CSR reporting practices of pharmaceutical companies.

The authors present a literature review that serves as the basis to develop the two key research questions: Do pharmaceutical companies publish comprehensive CSR reports? Are company reports that cover more material issues more comprehensive? Using the information on material CSR topics provided by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and CSR reporting quality scores by the CSR-Sustainability Monitor®, the authors analyzed the CSR reports of the world’s 15 leading pharmaceutical companies. A total of 11 material topics from SASB were mapped onto the corresponding contextual elements in the CSR-Sustainability Monitor. The Monitor evaluates CSR reports published by the world’s largest companies in terms of the degree of transparency and external verification of reporting.

The analyses revealed that while the pharmaceutical industry outperforms other industries in terms of the overall comprehensiveness of reporting, certain discrepancies exist among these companies in the content of their disclosures. Specifically, pharmaceutical companies beat the averages on multiple key CSR topics. However, while disclosures on mature areas such as environment and labor relations show some level of standardization, those focusing particularly on sensitive areas such as human rights and supply chain are far from being standardized. The authors also find that CSR reports that do not include all of SASB’s material topics are just as comprehensive as those that do. A detailed analysis of US and non-US companies separately further revealed that this result is valid for both groups of companies.

Considering the voluntary nature of CSR reporting, pharmaceutical companies still resort to selective disclosure techniques to highlight their achievements in areas where they feel more confident while leaving out others that can have potential negative consequences on the company. These results underscore the evolving nature of CSR reporting in the pharmaceutical industry and call for more attention and further investigation from managers and researchers alike.

The originality and value of the research show that despite its rapid growth and wide recognition by different segments of society and business as an effective and promising concept, CSR reporting has not yet reached a point where its expected benefits are realized. Focusing on the disclosure side of the story, this paper tries to identify the extent to which the pharmaceutical industry appropriately addresses increasing societal demand for enhanced transparency on its sustainable business policies and practices.

Biotech companies stand as key actors in pharmaceutical innovation. The high risk and long timelines inherent with their R&D investments might hinder their access to funding, potentially stifling innovation. This study aims to explore into the appeal of biotech companies to capital market investors, whose financial backing could bolster the growth of the biotechnology sector.

This paper uses a dataset of 774 US publicly listed biotech firms to investigate their risk and return characteristics by comparing them to pharmaceutical firms and a sample of matched non-biotech R&D-intensive firms over the sample period 1980–2021. Tests show that the conclusions remain consistent across diverse methodological approaches.

The paper shows that biotech companies are riskier than the average firm in the market index but outperform on a risk-adjusted basis both the market and a matched group of R&D-intensive firms. This is particularly true for large capitalization biotech, which is also shown to provide a diversification benefit by reducing the downside risk in past crisis periods.

This paper provides insight relevant to the current debate about the overall performance of the biotech industry in terms of policy changes and their impact on small, early-stage biotech firms. While small and early-stage biotech firms are playing an increasing role in scientific innovation, this study confirms their greater vulnerability to financial risks and the importance of access to capital markets in enabling those companies to survive and evolve into larger biotech.