Report published by PatientView, 23rd June 2016
THE CORPORATE REPUTATION OF THE PHARMA INDUSTRY IN 2015: THE PERSPECTIVE OF 67 ITALIAN PATIENT GROUPS (2nd edition)
If you would like more information, or would like to get hold of this report, please use contact details below
Contact: Alex Wyke
Tel: +44-(0)1547-520-965
Email: report@patient-view.com
Website: http://www.patient-view.com
- Publication date:
- Friday, 24th June 2016
About this report
London, Friday, 23rd June 2016. This report is based on the findings of a PatientView November 2015-January 2016 survey exploring the views of 67 Italian patient groups. The report provides feedback (from the perspective of these patient groups) on the corporate reputation of the pharma industry during 2015, as well as on the performance of 15 pharma companies trading in Italy at six key indicators that influence corporate reputation. Results are compared with those of other countries/geographic regions from the 2015 survey.
For the purposes of this report, the phrase ‘corporate reputation’ is defined as the extent to which pharma companies are meeting the expectations of patients and patient groups.
The six indicators of corporate reputation:
- Patient centricity.
- Patient information.
- Patient safety.
- Useful products.
- Transparency. And ...
- Integrity.
The 15 companies analysed:
AbbVie I AstraZeneca I Bayer I Boehringer Ingelheim I GSK I Janssen I Lilly I Menarini I Merck & Co I Novartis I Pfizer I Roche I Sandoz I Sanofi I Teva
“Quanto sta accadendo con la negoziazione Invariata, per la maggior parte delle Case Farmaceutiche, e migliorata di poco con le restanti. Quanto sopra dipende sempre da quanto forte sia la spinta di realizzare un progetto da loro promosso.”
—National Italian patient group specialising in skin conditions
"Le aziende non segnalate, in Italia, erroneamente, non prestano alcuna attenzione e sostegno alle associazioni pazienti.”
—Regional Italian patient group specialising in gastrointestinal conditions
INDUSTRY-WIDE FINDINGS
The 67 Italian patient groups responding to the 2015 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey were more positive about the pharma industry’s corporate reputation than patient groups from other parts of the world in 2015 (with the exception of patient groups from Eastern Europe).
61.9% of the 67 Italian patient groups that responded to the 2015 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey stated that the pharma industry as a whole had an “Excellent” or “Good” corporate reputation that year. The equivalent figure for patient groups from all parts of the world in 2015 was 44.7%. The Italian patient groups ranked the pharma industry 4th out of 8 healthcare-industry sectors for corporate reputation—ahead of medical devices, generics, not-for-profit health insurers, and for-profit health insurers. Pharma ranked 5th in the global results for 2015.
71% of the 67 Italian patient groups responding to the 2015 ‘Corporate Reputation of Pharma’ survey described the industry as a whole as “Excellent” or “Good” at being innovative. 69% of patient groups worldwide stated the same in 2015.
59% of patient groups from Italy reckoned pharma to be “Excellent” or “Good” in 2015 at having a good relationship with the media. The equivalent figure from patient groups worldwide in 2015 was, at 50%, slightly lower.
However, on a number of important issues, Italian patient groups remain critical of pharma, scoring the industry in Italy lower than patient groups across the globe scored pharma worldwide:
Only 22% of patient groups from Italy said that pharma was “Excellent” or “Good” in 2015 at being patient centric; 34% of patient groups worldwide stated the same in 2015.
53% of patient groups from Italy said that pharma was “Excellent” or “Good” in 2015 at ensuring patient safety; 58% of patient groups worldwide stated the same in 2015.
And only 10% of patient groups from Italy said that pharma was “Excellent” or “Good” in 2015 at practising philanthropic activities; 28% of patient groups worldwide stated the same in 2015.
Percentage of patient groups worldwide (by geographic region) stating that pharma is “Excellent” or “Good” at patient centricity
Percentage of patient groups worldwide (by geographic region) stating that pharma is “Excellent” or “Good” at ensuring patient safety
Percentage of patient groups worldwide (by geographic region) stating that pharma is “Excellent” or “Good” at practising philanthropic activities
ITALIAN PATIENT GROUPS BELIEVE THAT THE SINGLE MOST-IMPORTANT POLICY ANY PHARMA COMPANY CAN ADOPT TO IMPROVE ITS CORPORATE REPUTATION IS: INSTITUTE A PATIENT-CENTRED STRATEGY
HOW INDIVIDUAL PHARMA COMPANIES PERFORMED FOR CORPORATE REPUTATION IN ITALY IN 2015
- The table shows the final rankings of the 15 companies, as judged by the 67 Italian patient groups. Roche ranks overall 1st. Roche also ranked 1st at one of the 6 indicators of corporate reputation: patient safety.
POTENTIAL FOR BIAS IN THE RESULTS:
- The percentage of Italian patient groups working with each company varied greatly in 2015. At one end of the scale, 55% of the Italian patient groups which were familiar with AbbVie also worked with the company; the equivalent in the case of Sandoz, by contrast, was 12.5%.
- By far the largest proportion of the respondent patient groups (23.9%) represented the interests of carers, family, or friends. This predominance is no surprise, since such family-oriented patient groups play a leading role in Italy’s patient-advocacy movement. It should be noted that carers can hold a different perspective to patients on many healthcare issues.
- 27 Italian patient groups said that they were familiar with Menarini, but only 4 of the 27 claimed to have worked with the company. The high level of familiarity with Menarini is clearly due to the company’s position as a home-grown, Italy-based entity. In which case, Italian patient groups may be judging Menarini on its local business reputation, rather than just on the 6 indicators used in the corporate-reputation survey.
END OF STATEMENT
PatientView is a UK-based research organisation that consults closely with patient groups, and publicises the work of the patient-advocacy movement.