Research Paper (postgraduate) from the year 2012 in the subject Business economics - Business Management, Corporate Governance, grade: A, University of California, Berkeley , language: English, abstract: The common goal of any organization is to achieve its objectives which revolve around profit, survival and prosperity. Robert M. Grant (1991:22) identifies two routes to achieve their objective which includes the location of an industry favorable to earn a rate of return above the competitive level and attain a position of advantage over its competitors within the industry, allowing the company to earn return more than the average return of the industry. Duane Ireland et al (2005) mentioned that internal and external analysis is important for the managers in order to develop and the implement the best strategy by evaluating the capabilities and resources of the firms and customer preferences in the market. Glaxo SmithKline (GSK) with a long history dating back to 18th century produce 9 billion Tums tablet, 6 billion Panadol tablets and 600 million tubes every year with more than 200 million customers worldwide and spends more than £300,000 every hour into research and development for innovation in medicine. The company has been able to compete in the industry with strong customer base all over the world, just because of its business strategy which is aimed at increasing growth, reduce risk and improve GSK’s long term financial performance which include growing a diversified global business, deliver more products of value and simplify GSK’s operating model. The present study aims at identifying the key drivers for change, critical success factors, key business strategies over the past five years using Porters generic strategies and resource and capabilities of GlaxoSmithKline over the past ten years so as to analyze the business strategies.

Seminar paper from the year 2008 in the subject Business economics - Business Management, Corporate Governance, grade: 1,3, New College Durham, language: English, abstract: GlaxoSmithKline plc. (GSK) was formed in December 2000 by the merger of “Glaxo Wellcome” and “SmithKline Beecham” and is now one of the world’s leading pharmaceutical and healthcare companies. The organisation is headquartered in London and has further production facilities in 114 countries within Europe as well as in Northern America and Asia. Apart from pharmaceutical products and vaccines, health- and sanitary items are also manufactured and sold in over 140 countries. (Annual Report, 2007, p.4) GSK employs over 103,000 people around the world. In 2007, women “accounted for 24 per cent of senior managers and 37 per cent of all managers” while “minorities made up 19.1 per cent of employees in the UK workforce”. (Corporate Responsibility Report, 2007, p.100) The organisation invests in its own research to develop new drug substances. One in six employees’ works in the area of research and in 2007 GSK spent over 13 million pounds every day for R&D. Research efforts are also directed at diseases, which are mainly widespread in underdeveloped countries.

Considering the recent impact of the capital market on corporate strategy, this text analyzes, through argument and supportive case studies, how pressures from the capital bull market of the 1990s and bear market of the early 2000s, have reshaped management action and calculation in large, publicly quoted US and UK corporations. Beginning with the dissatisfaction with classical strategy and its limited engagement with the processes of financialization, the book moves on to cover three detailed company case studies (General Electric, Ford and GlaxoSmithKline) which use long run financial data and analysis of company and industry narratives to illustrate and explore key themes. The book emphasizes the importance of company and industry narrative, while also analyzing long term financial results, and helps to explain the limits of management action and the burden of expectations placed on corporate governance. Presenting financial and market information on trajectory in an accessible way, this book provides a distinctive, critical social science account of management in large UK and US corporations, and it is a valuable resource for students, scholars and researchers of business, management, political economy and non-mainstream economics. short listed for the 2007 IPEG Book Prize

Marketing in the pharmaceutical and healthcare sector requires a particular set of skills; its intricacies mean planning is an essential prerequisite. The marketing planning system described in this book has been designed to enable marketing and product executives to produce a plan which serves as a dynamic management tool which will help them to get from where they are now to where they want to be next year and thereafter. Now in its second edition, this bestselling book has become the standard text for all product managers, marketing managers and directors working in this demanding industry. John Lidstone and Janice MacLennan have updated the book to embrace best current practice. A new orientation to external analysis and a reworking of the application of SWOT analysis, along with fresh material on sales forecasting and strategy implementation, bring the book up to date with current thinking and industry trends. Marketing Planning for the Pharmaceutical Industry is based on real life experience built up over many years. Each chapter takes the reader through the sequential stages of planning so that by the end they will be able to produce a practical plan ready for implementation. It is the only book of this type which tailors marketing to those working in the sector and as such is a unique, invaluable and indispensable resource.

Data sharing can accelerate new discoveries by avoiding duplicative trials, stimulating new ideas for research, and enabling the maximal scientific knowledge and benefits to be gained from the efforts of clinical trial participants and investigators. At the same time, sharing clinical trial data presents risks, burdens, and challenges. These include the need to protect the privacy and honor the consent of clinical trial participants; safeguard the legitimate economic interests of sponsors; and guard against invalid secondary analyses, which could undermine trust in clinical trials or otherwise harm public health. Sharing Clinical Trial Data presents activities and strategies for the responsible sharing of clinical trial data. With the goal of increasing scientific knowledge to lead to better therapies for patients, this book identifies guiding principles and makes recommendations to maximize the benefits and minimize risks. This report offers guidance on the types of clinical trial data available at different points in the process, the points in the process at which each type of data should be shared, methods for sharing data, what groups should have access to data, and future knowledge and infrastructure needs. Responsible sharing of clinical trial data will allow other investigators to replicate published findings and carry out additional analyses, strengthen the evidence base for regulatory and clinical decisions, and increase the scientific knowledge gained from investments by the funders of clinical trials. The recommendations of Sharing Clinical Trial Data will be useful both now and well into the future as improved sharing of data leads to a stronger evidence base for treatment. This book will be of interest to stakeholders across the spectrum of research-from funders, to researchers, to journals, to physicians, and ultimately, to patients.

Originally published in 2012, revised edition published in 2013, by Fourth Estate, Great Britain; Published in the United States in 2012, revised edition also, by Faber and Faber, Inc.

The pharmaceutical industry is one of today’s most dynamic and complex industries, involving commercialization of cutting-edge scientific research, a huge web of stakeholders (from investors to doctors), multi-stage supply chains, fierce competition in the race to market, and a challenging regulatory environment. The stakes are high, with each new product raising the prospect of spectacular success—or failure. Worldwide revenues are approaching $1 trillion; in the U.S. alone, marketing for pharmaceutical products is, itself, a multi-billion dollar industry. In this volume, the editors showcase contributions from experts around the world to capture the state of the art in research, analysis, and practice, and covering the full spectrum of topics relating to innovation and marketing, including R&D, promotion, pricing, branding, competitive strategy, and portfolio management. Chapters include such features as: · An extensive literature review, including coverage of research from fields other than marketing · an overview of how practitioners have addressed the topic · introduction of relevant analytical tools, such as statistics and ethnographic studies · suggestions for further research by scholars and students The result is a comprehensive, state-of-the-art resource that will be of interest to researchers, policymakers, and practitioners, alike.

This open access book analyses intellectual property codification and innovation governance in the development of six key industries in India and China. These industries are reflective of the innovation and economic development of the two economies, or of vital importance to them: the IT Industry; the film industry; the pharmaceutical industry; plant varieties and food security; the automobile industry; and peer production and the sharing economy. The analysis extends beyond the domain of IP law, and includes economics and policy analysis. The overarching concern that cuts through all chapters is an inquiry into why certain industries have developed in one country and not in the other, including: the role that state innovation policy and/or IP policy played in such development; the nature of the state innovation policy/IP policy; and whether such policy has been causal, facilitating, crippling, co-relational, or simply irrelevant. The book asks what India and China can learn from each other, and whether there is any possibility of synergy. The book provides a real-life understanding of how IP laws interact with innovation and economic development in the six selected economic sectors in China and India. The reader can also draw lessons from the success or failure of these sectors.

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support â€" or distort â€" practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge. The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated. Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee's thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.

Healthcare decision makers in search of reliable information that compares health interventions increasingly turn to systematic reviews for the best summary of the evidence. Systematic reviews identify, select, assess, and synthesize the findings of similar but separate studies, and can help clarify what is known and not known about the potential benefits and harms of drugs, devices, and other healthcare services. Systematic reviews can be helpful for clinicians who want to integrate research findings into their daily practices, for patients to make well-informed choices about their own care, for professional medical societies and other organizations that develop clinical practice guidelines. Too often systematic reviews are of uncertain or poor quality. There are no universally accepted standards for developing systematic reviews leading to variability in how conflicts of interest and biases are handled, how evidence is appraised, and the overall scientific rigor of the process. In Finding What Works in Health Care the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommends 21 standards for developing high-quality systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. The standards address the entire systematic review process from the initial steps of formulating the topic and building the review team to producing a detailed final report that synthesizes what the evidence shows and where knowledge gaps remain. Finding What Works in Health Care also proposes a framework for improving the quality of the science underpinning systematic reviews. This book will serve as a vital resource for both sponsors and producers of systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research.