Double Duty: The Complexity Of Pharmaceutical Branding

The Pharma Market

The Pharmaceutical business has gone through a major transformation in the last 10 years as the push for market share moves slowly away from direct sales and toward consumer marketing.  This marketing trend has proven to be a smart shift, but the branding practices have not consistently kept pace. If you are in the pharmaceutical industry, you will probably be quick to say “not us” as you read, but, unfortunately, you are probably wrong.

The shift toward consumer marketing can easily be seen in industry advertising. The move from text-heavy, mouse type advertisements to broad-based consumer television has been revolutionary. This represents an understanding that the precepts (beliefs) of the patient/customer for ethical drugs have changed.  This advertising is not simply a reflection of the customer's desire to have a more active role in the ethical drug decisions; it represents an understanding that the physician/patient relationship has always been a two-way street.

The prescribing physicians are consumers and are as influenced by broadcast marketing messages as patients. Physicians are not living in an ivory tower insulated from pop culture.  They are just like the rest of us, out of the vacuum and inundated with messaging. Pharmaceutical brands have only begun to scratch the surface of opportunity and have done a great job of developing awareness. VIAGRA is not simply a Jay Leno joke; it is very much in the fiber of our culture. PROPECIA and CRESTOR have become brand names that are recalled, but their brand equity is limited to the efficacy of the drug itself, a mere description of the category in which the brand competes. The end-user is missing.

A Tough Market

The pharmaceutical market is a highly competitive market, and the stakes could not be higher and the risks greater.  What is the brand difference between VIAGRA and CIALIS?  When you survey the market space, men know them both as pharmaceuticals to treat erectile dysfunction.  If the manufacturers are lucky, they might be able to parrot back some of the physical differences like the color of the pill and the period of effectiveness. The differentiation is slim to none. Where does this stagnation leave the pharmaceutical companies?  It leaves them back in R&D constantly scrambling for better efficacy and fewer side effects.  From a brand perspective, this is the tail wagging the dog. 

It is not a complete surprise because these companies have their roots in R&D, and they fully understand the business of their business.  However, they do not understand the business of their brands.  Brand should protect a product from having to be first, best or most effective. The only reason to invest in brand is to allow the brand to have a promise that is greater then the promise of the chemical formula. This promise should offer longevity to brands whose chemical formula loses its patent and becomes the target of generic copies. Currently, the only line of defense is a pretentious and unbelievable (forom the perspective of the end-user) claim of product quality and consistency. It falls on the same deaf ears as governmental claims that Canadian ethical drugs are subject to less rigorous testing then their US counterparts.

Brand's Root

The essence of brand value is found in a relationship between the brand and the user, a personal and valued relationship that helps the user define themselves. Brand answers self-directed questions that are designed to provide each of us with affirmation and identification. Who am I when I use this brand? If you were VOLVO, you would be a person who is smart enough to value safety (and not just a new car). If you were FedEx, you would be a person who desires peace of mind (not just next day delivery). If you are VIAGRA you are a person with a most problematic and flaccid penis. What makes this market even more interesting is the duality of the brand promise, accommodating two markets simultaneously. Both of these brands (physician and end-user) need to work in harmony. While both groups may have different brandfaces, (the self-identification that drives purchase loyalty and trial) they share some important mutual characteristics. Both would like to return the patient to a semblance of wellness, and this means treating more then just the symptoms. It means replacing the idea of illness with one of wellness. It is this wellness that needs to be infused into the brand itself, a promise of a return to something beyond a loss of symptoms.

In a category like erectile dysfunction the players have tried to build a story of prowess and intimacy. However, they all promise the same result and, as a result, the end-user can see no viable difference between brands. In most consumer markets, this brand overlap would be marketing suicide, but in the pharmaceutical industry it is commonplace. The sales do not necessarily die, but the brand certainly does. Conventional wisdom tells us “first in the market” provides ownership, but in the pharmaceutical industry, “first in the market” claims category benefits, not emotional value. From our perspective, this is great news because it means the category is wide open for brands built around the idea of stealing market share.

Comments:


posted by on 12/18/2009 2:27:00 AM

If you would like more information on how Stealing Share can help your brand Click Here

Click Here for Site Map