Case Report: Glaxosmithkline Reorganizing Drug Discovery (a)

The barrier to enter Biotechnology industry is high. The first barrier is the extensive requirements in funding coming from heavy expenditures in R&D, along with the risk of little to no returns or even heavy losses if the drug fails to reach the market. Regulatory environment partly contributes to the barrier as the new drug approval process can be time-consuming with relatively 89% of failure to pass through. The second barrier is specialization. Companies with knowledge in obscure diseases will enjoy low threat of new entrant for there are few experts in the field.

Yamada reorganization of drug discovery at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) following a merger to combat bureaucracy in decision making, approval, and authorization. This reorganization was necessary for the continued success of the company. Often the process for drug discovery and market is a slow and tedious process which can cost a company a lot in resources and financially. The smaller biotech companies are able to move quicker and push new drugs to market faster. The shift, Yamada thinks,

Improvements in health care and life sciences are an important source of gains in health and longevity globally. The development of innovative pharmaceutical products plays a critical role in ensuring these continued gains. To encourage the continued development of new drugs, economic incentives are essential. These incentives are principally provided through direct and indirect government funding, intellectual property laws, and other policies that favor innovation. Without such incentives, private corporations, which bring to market the vast majority of new drugs, would be less able to assume the risks and costs necessary to continue their research and development (R&D). In the United States, government action has focused on creating the environment that would best encourage further innovation and yield a constant flow of new and innovative medicines to the market. The goal has been to ensure that consumers would benefit both from technological breakthroughs and the competition that further innovation generates. The United States also relies on a strong generic pharmaceutical industry to create added competitive pressure to lower drug prices. Recent action by the Administration and Congress has accelerated the flow of generic medicines to the market for precisely that reason. By contrast, in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

The company is so large that no one drug can lift it from its current sales doldrums. In addition, the company was once highly attractive to investors, but its recent stock price fell to 1997 lows. This may put pressure on the company to attempt acquisitions at a time when the company is ill-equipped to integrate a new company into its organization, and it is engaged in a cost-cutting program at a time when it may need to invest even more in research and development (McTigue Pierce, 2005).

Extremely risky drug discovery and development, lengthening development times which increase development cost, return on investments, and generic competitors.

Founded by two mutual acquaintances and former staff members of California Biotechnology Inc. (CalBio), Lorin Johnson and Randy Hamilton set out to build a company specializing in a specific area of need, such as inflammatory bowel disease. Their search throughout the international landscape was focused on the chemical compounds that would be the foundation for therapeutic drugs that serve as a benefit to the management gastric disorders. As these compounds were discovered by way of research, with the intent to align and contract with already licensed agreements if the price allows for the newly formed company to take part. One such compound that fit the need for the company was found

Develco Pharma is convinced that it can successfully compete in the „Niche-market“in an environment that is characterized by increasing concentration,and which is unattainable to the giants of the pharmaceutical industry. We are convinced that our manageable organization, paired with employees and external development partners, which is characterised by diversity and willingness are ideal conditions to successfully complete projects. In this environment, niche projects have a higher priority than in large organizations. With a high level of tenacity, almost nothing will stand in the way of

In order to decide on the R&D portfolio, an objective quantitative analysis might not be suitable considering the high levels of uncertainities and consequently the risks involved in pharmaceutical research projects. It is important to have a qualitative analysis of the situation as a whole that includes Vertex’s own financial position, strategic implications, a quantitative analysis of its Portfolios with realistic estimations and a risk analysis of the portfolios.

Achieve a median composite eight-year product development cycle by 2010. Deliver two new molecular entity (NME) launches on average per year from 2010. In order to achieve the above objective, ensure that we have 10 or more NMEs in Phase III development by 2010. Development cycle times and quality for small molecules and biologics. Number of NME launches per year. Attrition rates. Number of development projects by phase. Number of in-licensing deals, alliances and acquisitions. R&D investment levels. Improving R&D quality and speed through leading-edge science, effective risk management and decision-making and overall business efficiency. Maximising the value of our biologics business and continuing to build a major presence in this fast-growing sector. Investing in external opportunities to enhance our internal innovation through in-licensing, alliances and acquisitions. 2008 target exceeded for small molecule development cycle times. NME and life-cycle management progressions

Drug portfolio management is one of the most important determinants of long-term prosperity of research-oriented pharmaceutical companies.

GSK is the 2nd largest pharmaceutical firm in the world, and the largest in the UK by sales and profits, it is responsible for 7% of the worlds pharmaceutical market, and has its stocks listed both in UK and US (O 'Rourke, 2002). The origin of the so called blockbuster model, is partly linked with Glaxo (as it was previously known). In the early 80’s, then Glaxo brought to light their first blockbuster drug, Zantac, which was an anti-ulcer drug, which was very similar to the a pre existing drug Tagamet (first ever blockbuster) sold by Smith Kline & French, their completion at the time (MONTALBAN and SAKINÇ, 2011). The introduction of this drug, brought about an increasing sales force in the US, the company soon became dependent on the drug, because it represented a large part of their profit. In 2002, 8 blockbusters of GSK contributed to $14.240 million sales revenue, taking up 53% of its total ethical sales (Froud et al 2006). However, due to the nature of the pharmaceutical industry, the patent began to expire, in other to avoid the patent cliff, Glaxo merged with Wellcome in 1995, which ensured a growing number of sales force, and with Beecham in 2000 (Froud et al., 2006) this merger, boosted the confidence of investors, by growing the business inorganically. For Big Pharma, this block buster model is very profitable, because with the high cost of R&D, the drugs are able to generate ample profit, to cover the sunk costs

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is one of the world’s largest research-based pharmaceutical corporations that discovers, develops, manufactures and markets branded human health products. Headquarters: UK, with additional operational headquarters in the USA Global presence: about 160 countries Primary markets: USA, France, Germany, UK, Italy and Japan Employees: approximately 103,000 GSK key figures for 2003 (in £ million) Sales 21,441 Materials and production costs 4,188 Marketing and administration 7,563 R&D expenditures 2,770 Operating income 6,920 Net profit 4,765 GSK has two main business divisions, pharmaceuticals and consumer

The research and development of the pharmaceutical industry is very important as the industry relies on it to develop new products to maintain and sustain the growth of the industry (ALRC 2014). According to the Australian Government Law Reform Commission, every year, the total spending in research and development in pharmaceutical industry, which includes drug discovery, pre-clinical testing and clinical trials on drugs is around $300 million (ALRC 2014). Mergers and acquisitions are intensifying in the global pharmaceutical industry, especially over the last 10 years. With factors like exorbitant research and development costs, the relatively shorter product life cycles, and the rarity of discovering a new life-changing drug acting as catalysts, leading pharmaceutical companies now have more cause to step out and look for external collaboration. This results in an increasing number of smaller biotechnology companies merging with bigger pharmaceutical companies (The

Although R&D has been retained by the large pharmaceutical firms, there has been a continuous decline in the R&D productivity. Controlling R&D is imperative to the success of a Pharmaceutical firm. However, as the pharmaceutical industry is maturing, there are diminishing returns to the R&D investment. Fewer and fewer blockbuster drugs are being discovered and therefore R&D is not the most value adding component in the value

This is a strategic analysis of GlaxoSmithKline that examines the key factors that influence the company and its activities. The strategic analysis will examine key factors in the company’s internal and external environment and their influence on the company’s strategies. GlaxoSmithKline is a global healthcare company that offers pharmaceutical, vaccines and consumer products. The company is a product of various mergers, the latest occurring in 2001 between GlaxoWellcome and SmithKline Beecham. The company started in London United Kingdom in 1715 as Plough Court pharmacy and has evolved to become one of the leading global healthcare companies. The healthcare company operates in more than 150 countries with 89 manufacturing locations and research centers in the USA, China, UK and Belgium. In 2015, the company’s sales grew to £23.9 billion from £23.0 billion in 2014 (GlaxoSmithKline plc. 2015).