Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
MERCK - OPEN FOR INNOVATION?
Transcript of MERCK - OPEN FOR INNOVATION?
What we will be covering?
History of Merck
Structure of the Pharmaceutical industry (Porters five forces)
Merck’s innovation strategy
Open innovation and value of shareholders
Positive and negative impact of SP for Merck’s transition
Merck’s performance 2013
1. Rivalry amongst existing competition: is high, key players such as Pfizer, Glaxo-Smith-Kline compete strongly and closely in the market
2. Threats of new entrants: is seen as low due to,
High costs related to research and development
Government regulatory barriers
High capital costs, e.g. technology
3. Threat of substitutes: medium, as generic drug companies do not have high costs associated with research and development of new drugs
4. Bargaining power of suppliers: is low as sales for the pharmaceutical industry concentrate on a handful of large players only
5. Bargaining power of buyers: could be rated as medium due to pressure from hospitals, health care organizations to keep prices in check
Merck and Co. History
A global research company that discovers and develops products to improve health.
Became known as the ‘’Harvard of Pharma’’ in 1950’s.
Attracted the most highly respected and talented scientists from around the world
Merck was a internal focused, research driven culture (closed innovation strategy)
One of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world
However due to tough regulatory requirements, competitive market place and a harsh economic climate, The C.E.O of Merck decided that change was necessary.
Investment in R&D
Well established reputation
Good financial background
Highly respected Scientists
Rising drug development costs
Intensive FDA reviews for approvals
Government health programs
Lack of innovation
Mergers / Acquisitions
Shorter patent exclusivity
Decreasing pharmaceutical industry
Contrasting Principles of open and closed innovation?
Can open innovation help Merck to succeed?
Merck and Schering Plough had previously each other’s two biggest rivals; by combining the two companies, not only did they eliminate a lot of competition, but Merck also took a step towards open- innovation.
Merck gain access to a lot of new and groundbreaking scientific intelligence and knowledge by merging with Schering Plough
This new knowledge and information would be invaluable to Merck when formulating and marketing new products
Schering plough (SP) was renowned globally, this global recognition and reputation would be transferred onto Merck
Increased economies of scale
Could potentially sell a billion-dollar drug to its direct competitor
Many scientists feel protective of their intellectual property
Is the strategy cost-effective and brings value for shareholders?
Collaborative effort with (SP) international sales grew from 10.5 billion to 25 billion
Open innovation strategy led to an increase in for the approval of new drugs
Shareholder value increased at its peak in the year of 2009 when merged with (SP)
Helped to facilitate cost containment
Merck’s cultural resistance to change
Difficulty in integrating two large organizations due to differences in corporate culture.
Increased complexity to Merck’s structure, business and geography operations
How to overcome resistance to cultural change?
Connect with the internal environment through informal networking, conferences, and publications with other scientific organizations.
Encourage employees to support and accept the open innovation system
Merck’s profits plunge 50% (July 2013). ‘’ The drug maker Merck’s second-quarter profit fell by half as generic competition hurt revenue from several older medicines this year’’
2013, worldwide sales decrease by 11%
Why is this? Is it because of the expiration of many of Merck’s patents?
Alternatively, is this dip in profits due to the marketing rights that Merck had to relinquish to Johnson and Johnson?
Source: Strategic Management Lecture 5, 28 October 2013