Martin S. Kamleiter holds a degree in Medicine, Neuroscience, from Munich University, Germany. Currently, he is European Product Manager and European Product Team Leader with Eisai Europe Ltd., London, and responsible for the European epilepsy franchise. Prior to this, Dr. Kamleiter was Product Manager with the company’s German affiliate, launching Eisai’s first epilepsy product in Germany and Austria, thus paving the way into a new market segment. Before that, he was Medical Marketing Manager for Eisai’s dementia segment. Prior to joining the pharmaceutical industry, he was working for Dept. Psychiatry, Munich University, and media munich, a PR agency in Germany.
1. At the recent 6th Annual Pharma Branding Conference you gave a talk on the connection between corporate and product brand management. How can this connection be characterized?
Corporate brand management and product brand management do neither exist nor operate as distinct processes. I prefer to look at this as a system. If we defined a system as “a set of objects together with relationships between these objects and their attributes connected or related to each other in such a manner as to form an entirety or whole” [1], we find that due to being a system, the components are connected, they are affected by being in a system, the assembly of the components does something, and the assembly is identified as being of special interest.
2. What would be such a system in case of brand management?
A basic system would consist of inputs, processes, outputs and overall controls. In case of brand management, the system is far more complex. The basic components in our case would be the corporate management, the brand management, and the customers. However, the customers are a sub-system on their own, consisting of sales force, prescribers, and patients. Additionally, key opinion leaders and DTC approaches such as disease awareness campaigns contribute to the complexity.
3. What processes are involved in this system?
The key processes involved are the messages relating to the brands. In the pharmaceutical industry, we define product brand management as a task primarily of the marketing function. However, different bits of information on the individual brands are passed down from a corporate level through many stages until the customer is reached. Each stage, be it brand management, sales management or the final detailing to the prescriber, has an impact on the consistency of the messaging if no adequate controls and identification with the core values of both the brands are in place. Additionally, this signal transduction often shows a disconnection between the corporate level, i.e. the corporate identity, and product-focussed brand management. These two factors constitute a risk of dilution or alteration of brand messaging as well as a missed opportunity to reinforce brand power by linking product related messaging to messaging around the corporate identity. In the end, the messaging on corporate and product brands are often disconnected.
4. What would be an example for this disconnection from your point of view?
This disconnection starts early in the messaging process. If we look at mission statements of pharmaceutical companies and try to match them with product strategy, it will be difficult in most cases to find points of contact or real synergies. However, try to juxtaposition definitions of mission statement and strategy. We will find that a mission statement is “a written formal document that attempts to capture an organization's unique and enduring purpose and practices” [2] and strategy can be defined as “a prudent idea or set of ideas for employing the instruments […] in a synchronized and integrated fashion to achieve […] objectives”[3]. I strongly believe that “an organization’s purpose” should be closely linked to its objectives.
5. Why do you think a stronger link between corporate and product brands is desirable and what would be the benefits from this?
When we look at the final interface between a customer and the company, in our industry this will be the detailing of the drug to a prescriber and the subsequent prescription to the patient. The perception of the company by the respective customer occurs through the filter of this respective interface, which can be the product perception or the direct contact to an employee of the company. This interface could be the sales representative or the prescribing physician. Each of these will associate the corporate and products brands. In case of inconsistent communication from the corporate and brand levels this can result in inconsistent product perception and suboptimally controlled perception of a company.
6. How can this customer – company interface be characterized?
This interface still is primarily one of human interaction. In most industries including the pharmaceutical industry, the primary interface is the employee. Behaviour in its widest sense therefore is a central factor influencing this customer - company interface. This is why employee behaviour in terms of representing the brand values is of central importance for a consistent brand perception. However, perception of behaviour on all levels of the company - front and back office - is noticed and processed by stakeholders and subsequently transferred from the individual onto the company.
7. Can you illustrate the potential impact of behaviour on the customer – company relationship?
There are plenty of examples illustrating this impact. You might remember the case of Josef Ackermann, CEO Deutsche Bank, who showed a victory sign during the re-trial over breach of fiduciary duty during the Mannesmann/ Vodafone takeover battle. This very short bit of behaviour was immediately taken up by the press and impacted public opinion. As a matter of fact, it was not only associated with the individual but transferred to the perception of Deutsche Bank as a company. Another very recent example is that several newspapers report Austria fears for its reputation as a country following the discovery of Josef Fritzl’s crimes. In this case the “company” is a whole nation, fearing an impact of one individual’s actions.
8. Can we derive lessons from other industries on how to better manage the impact of behaviour?
Though, e.g., service based industries heavily emphasize the role of behaviour as part of branding, it is not commonly part of considerations by brand management in the pharmaceutical industry apart from sales training. Besides role-model and peer-to-peer influences, brand perception and translation into behaviour can be encouraged by internal marketing [4]. Brand management must not exclusively focus on shaping the brand in the mind of external stakeholders, but also take on responsibility to do this for internal stakeholders. This takes us then directly to true “internal” marketing. Current data suggest that an approach with joint efforts by marketing and HR seems promising to meet this objective
9. What could be tangible outcomes from a closer cooperation between HR and brand management?
This was investigated in a study in the hotel sector [5]. This study found that training programmes and Internal Communication tools were found to be major mechanisms of internal branding. Employees specifically referred to daily briefings, newsletters, notice boards, whereas management also raised recruitment, orientation and reward strategies. The employees’ perspective clearly had a focus on continuously ongoing efforts to raise awareness for the brands values and their transformation into daily practice.
10. How would you summarize your thoughts on this topic?
In summary, corporate and products brands are often disconnected. Efforts to achieve alignment will lead to increased brand power of both. Since any brand comes to life by the way internal stakeholders live it and communicate it to external stakeholders, internal marketing offers the opportunity to exert more control over this interface between the inside and outside world. On this joint quest by HR and marketing, supported by corporate management, it should not be forgotten that bringing a brand to life starts with every single individual.
11. Last but not least, what was your general impression of the recent Jacob Fleming 6th Annual Pharma Branding Conference in Barcelona?
This conference was a lively forum touching upon various aspects of branding in an industry that is facing harsh market conditions, significant influence by third parties such as payers, and increased competitive pressure. I was quite impressed by the agenda and speaker panel that offered a wide variety of aspects: Starting out from thoughts on how to assess and brand innovation, a debate over global versus local approaches to product branding, we also discussed the evolution of a brand over the life cycle of the product. I was very happy and considered it a privilege to be able to contribute to this conference as an advisory board member and speaker can only congratulate Jacob Fleming on this successful event of high value to every marketer in our industry.
References:
1: Spencer Pickett KH: The Essential Handbook of Internal Auditing 2005
2; Bart CK, and Tabone JC. 1998. Health Care Management Review 23: pp. 54-70
3: US DoD, JP 3-0, Joint Operations, Sept 2006, GL-29
4: Tosti K and Stotz D, 2001, Marketing Management, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 28-33
5: Punjaisri K, 2007, Brand Management, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 57-70
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Eisai.
