The Pharma e-50

A study of the 50 largest pharmaceutical

companies and their use of the Internet
to reach their markets

REPORT CREATOR AND EDITOR

Richard Evans

REPORT AUTHOR
Christopher Taylor

A Pharmaceuticals Industry Report published and distributed by

Urch Publishing Ltd
PO Box 27554
London
SE4 2GZ, UK
www.urchpublishing.com
Report Creator and Editor
RICHARD EVANS was educated at The University of San Francisco, the
University of Washington and the Sorbonne. A financial journalist with over 20
years’ experience, he has written for a wide variety of publications including
Barron’s, BusinessWeek, the Economist magazine group, the Financial Times
and Fortune magazine. In 1997, he founded E-Audits, the London-based
international e-business intelligence service specialising in commercial Web
analysis. Partners and clients to date include CSC Europe, Deloitte Consulting,
Informa Group plc, The London School of Economics and California-based
software maker Novell.

Report Author
CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR is a specialist writer on management, and the issues
and concerns which affect business today. With a background in newspaper
and radio journalism, and a Masters degree in Business Administration (MBA)
from Bradford University, he has developed a career down two parallel streams
– international business consultancy, and editing specialist management titles
(Strategic Direction, Managing Service Quality, International Journal of
Business Transformation, Measuring Business Excellence, Benchmarking, etc.)
and writing for similar titles across much of the english-speaking world. He has
also contributed to academic and other course study books.

© 2001 Urch Publishing Ltd

ISBN 1-843-110-083

This work may not be photocopied or otherwise reproduced within the terms of any
business licence granted by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd or the Publishers
Society Ltd.

This Management Report may not be reproduced in any form or for any purpose without
the prior knowledge and consent of the publisher.

The views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the publisher. While
information, advice or comment is believed to be correct at the time of publication, no
responsibility can be accepted by the publisher for its completeness.
Contents
Communicating in a shrinking world 2

Executive summary of findings 3

Ranking the world’s largest Pharma companies on the Web 4

Analysis: The time has come at last 6

Too many portals 32

The truth about CRM 34

E-marketing on proprietary websites and beyond 36

Promoting prescription pharmaceuticals in the European Union 40

The Pharma e-50: Comparison by Dimension 44

Study model and design 46


Richard Evans
As the 21st century dawns, the
world is quickly changing. Plans
to expand both the European
Union and the North American
Free Trade Area will soon lead to
tariff-free zones encompassing
more than a billion people. As
the globalisation of business
continues apace, national and
regional industries are consoli-
dating further. For over two
years now, scarcely a week has
gone by without the announce-
ment of a major merger or
acquisition.
These pressures are deeply felt
in the international pharma-
ceuticals industry, which has
witnessed more large cross-
border mergers than almost any
other. The reasons for these
mergers are already well noted;
the spiraling cost of R&D, greater
international competition and
the drive by health services,
insurers and health management
organisations to cut costs.
Sometimes accused of secrecy
and complacency by the press,
the big pharma makers are also
under pressure to communicate
more effectively with the wider
public – a public increasingly
27
2 The Pharma e-50
Communicating
in a shrinking
world
Pharma e-50 report editor and E-Audits’ principal
consultant Richard Evans outlines the pressures
transforming the global pharmaceuticals industry
aware of its own health problems
and more vocal over a wide range
of ethical and environmental
issues. And they need to cast a
wider net in forming strategic
alliances, inventing new products
and recruiting the best scientific
and managerial talent.
For many reasons, after years
of delay, the industry is now
turning to the Internet and
WorldWide Web. And there’s
growing proof of the Web’s
efficacy as a sales and marketing
tool. Following regulatory changes
in the United States allowing
direct consumer marketing of
prescription medicines, sales
have risen anywhere between
10% and 25%. The attendant
potential cost savings are sub-
stantial indeed. According to
Almasan Ltd, the UK-based
e-pharma experts, the cost of
each prescription generated
online in the US is only $54,
compared to $318 for each
traditional printed scrip. Further,
e-marketing suppliers claim far
superior access to physicians
through online channels.
These events provide both the
background and justification for
COMMUNICATING IN A SHRINKING WORLD
© Urch Publishing
this first Pharma e-50 report, the
most comprehensive survey of
major pharmaceuticals firms’
online activities undertaken so
far. The research was undertaken
by E-Audits, the London-
based e-business intelligence
consultancy. Founded in 1997,
E-Audits marshals considerable
experience, having already
undertaken five previous studies
examining the Internet behaviour
of pharmaceuticals giants, along
with other industries as diverse
as electronics, finance, telecoms,
and travel and transport.
All research was undertaken
by a highly skilled team during
the first and second quarters of
2001. Companies were ranked
according to eight scoring criteria
in a methodology developed
specifically for this report. We
hope you will find the results
enlightening.
Richard Evans is founder and principal
consultant of E-Audits, the London-
based e-business intelligence
consultancy. He can be reached
at eaudits@evansnet.demon.co.uk

Executive summary
of findings
In the 2001 Pharma e-50 report we
examine the online behaviour of the
world's 50 largest pharmaceuticals
companies by revenue. Each was
appraised on the basis of eight
scoring dimensions:
• Web Site Access and Design
• Core Content
• Product/Clinical Information/
R&D
• The Medical Community
• Patients/Users/Carers
• Investors
• Media
• Web Site Proactivity
Overall scores and rankings were
then created by aggregating all eight
dimensional scores for each firm.
A team of experienced researchers
fluent in English, Dutch, French,
German and Japanese languages
conducted all site audits.
Here is a sample of the most
essential findings:
Pharma firms everywhere are
embracing the internet
100% of the pharmaceuticals
companies we examined have
already developed a Web site. The
overwhelming majority of firms
have invested time and money in
producing substantial sites.
Europe now the web leader
over the US and Japan
With Germany’s Merck KGaA the
overall survey winner, and with
three of the top five places, Europe
has emerged as regional winner of
the 2001 Pharma Web 50 survey.
Similarly, among the top ten ranked
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
companies, four are European, three
are American and three are
Japanese.
US weakness in web site
design and interactivity
These findings would appear to
indicate that any previous ‘Internet
gap’ between the US and the rest of
the world has disappeared entirely,
with American firms now fighting
to keep up with online innovation
increasingly coming from Europe
and Japan.
Investors are clear focus
of most companies
A large majority (82%) of companies
specifically acknowledge investors
and direct them to a dedicated area
of their Web site.
Only 42% of firms offer the same
dedicated area to patients and carers,
and fewer still (40%) provide special
online areas to medical professionals.
Media rank second as
a target audience
After investors, most of the firms
surveyed see the press as their most
important target audience to reach
over the Web. Clearly, the most
aware among the global pharma-
ceuticals industry have realised that
the media are greatly influential in
shaping the public’s view of them as
successful businesses.
Doctors and patients needs
not well addressed
Disappointingly, far less online
attention is paid to patients, carers
and members of the medical
© Urch Publishing
profession than to investors and the
media. In fact, of our eight scoring
dimensions, addressing the needs of
medical professionals came in sixth
place, and helping patients and carers
with information finished a distant
seventh.
Most firms now
recruit talent online
It was evident that many companies
are utilising the Internet as a power-
ful recruitment tool to complement
existing human resources strategies.
An impressive 90% offer specific
information for job seekers on their
Web sites, and 72% post live vacancies
and offer advice on how to apply for
these posts.
Ethical and environmental
issues poorly represented
Despite growing public concern over
a host of issues such as environ-
mental issues, animal testing and
the ethics of selling drugs for profit
in the developing world, only the
most aware among our survey have
responded with any serious attempt
to address these issues over the
Internet.
e-commerce barely a factor
There is very little e-commerce
presently undertaken by the world’s
50 largest pharmaceuticals
companies. Just 8% of surveyed
firms offer some products for sale
over the Internet. Many are of
course unable to do so because of
various regulatory restrictions and
regulations.
The Pharma e-50 3
 © Urch Publishing

Ranking the world’s 50 largest

Rank Company US$M(e) US$ Country URL Total
Yr 2000 Rank of HQ Score

1 Merck KGaA 2,581 27 Germany merck.de 73

2 Novo Nordisk 2,482 29 Denmark novonordisk.com 66

3 Bristol-Myers Squibb 14,529 5 USA bms.com 65

4 Bayer AG 5,562 16 Germany bayer.de 64

5 Yamanouchi 3,155 24 Japan yamanouchi.com 62.5

6 Chugai 1,631 36 Japan chugai-pharm.co.jp 62

7 AstraZeneca 15,782 4 UK astrazeneca.com 61

8 Eli Lilly 10,129 12 USA lilly.com 60

9 Tanabe 1,818 34 Japan tanabe.co.jp 59

10 Pharmacia 11,292 8 USA pnu.com 58

11 Takeda 9,109 13 Japan takeda.co.jp 56

12 Novartis 10,428 10 Switzerland novartis.com 55.5

13 Merck & Co 20,460 3 USA merck.com 55

14 Kyowa Hakku 3,187 23 Japan kyowa.co.jp 54.5

15 Amgen 3,686 20 USA amgen.com 54

16 Roche (inc. Genentech) 10,878 9 Switzerland roche.com 53

17 Abbott (inc. Knoll) 8,629 15 USA abbott.com 52

18 Daiichi 2,888 25 Japan daiichi.co.jp 51.5

19 Sankyo 4,041 19 Japan sankyo.co.jp 51

20 Akzo Nobel 2,153 32 Netherlands akzonobel.com 50

21 Taisho 2,221 30 Japan taisho.co.jp 49

22 Johnson & Johnson 14,308 6 USA jnj.com 48

23 Boehringer Ingelheim 4,170 18 Germany boehringer.de 47.5

24 GlaxoSmithKline 26,643 1 UK glaxosmithkline.com 47

25 Schering AG 2,507 28 Germany schering.de 46.5

27
4 The Pharma e-50 PHARMA e-50 RANKINGS
 © Urch Publishing

pharma companies on the Web

Rank Company US$M(e) US$ Country URL Total
Yr 2000 Rank of HQ Score

26 Banyu 1,381 38 Japan banyu.co.jp 46

27 Welfide 1,693 35 Japan welfide.co.jp 45.5

28 Teva 1,560 37 USA tevapharm.com 45

29 American Home Products 10,365 11 USA ahp.com 44

30 Aventis 14,227 7 France aventis.com 41.5

31 Serono 1,159 42 Italy serono.com 41

32 Eisai 1,905 33 Japan eisai.co.jp 40.5

33 Pfizer 24,947 2 USA pfizer.com 40

34 Sanofi-Synthelabo 5,278 17 France sanofi-synthelabo.fr 39

35 Ono 1,071 45 Japan ono.co.jp 38

36 Alza 965 48 USA alza.com 37.5

37 Sumitomo Pharm. 1,370 39 Japan sumitomopharm.com 37

38 Fujisawa 2,847 26 Japan fujisawa.co.jp 35.5

39 Elan 1,012 47 Ireland elan.ie 35

40 Shionogi 3,402 22 Japan shionogi.co.jp 34.5

41 Schering-Plough 9,028 14 USA schering-plough.com 34

42 UCB 958 49 Belgium ucb.be 33.5

43 DuPont 2,174 31 USA dupontpharma.com 33

44 Forest Labs 1,099 44 USA frx.com 31

45 Solvay 1,300 41 Belgium solvaypharmaceuticals.com 30

46 TAP Holdings 3,491 21 USA tap.com 29

47 Nycomed Pharma 1,143 43 Denmark nycomed.com 24

48 Servier 950 50 France servier.fr 23

49 Allergan 1,013 46 USA allergan.com 21.5

50 Dainippon 1,322 40 Japan dainippon-pharm.co.jp 21

PHARMA e-50 RANKINGS The Pharma e-50 5


Chris Taylor
Over the past year more has been
written and claimed about the Internet
than at any time before. Of course,
the news was not always good. But
the collapse of the so-called dot.com
economy and bankruptcy of many
New Economy start-ups have only
heightened the renewal of interest
in Old Economy businesses.
One dramatic illustration of this
reversal of fortune can be drawn
from how different industries have
withstood the financial turmoil
much of the globe has suffered since
March 2000, when the dot.com
bubble burst. The darlings of investors
over recent years, global technology
stocks have fallen in value by an
astounding average of 55% over the
past year. Pharmaceuticals and
healthcare stocks, by contrast, have
actually risen by 12% over the same
period. Investors’ priorities are
clearly changing.
At the same time, Internet use is
increasingly widespread with its
impact now felt globally. In the
United States, half of all Americans
now have ’Net access, as do 35%
of both Western Europeans and
Japanese. A global community of
at least half a billion people now
communicates regularly online.
The new medium of the World-
Wide Web, which makes the Internet
easier to use, is now embraced
widely by medical professionals. In
6 The Pharma e-50
The time has
come at last
After years of conservatism and slow change,
Chris Taylor suggests the global pharmaceuticals
industry is at last embracing the Internet in a
major way
the US, 93% of doctors now log on
daily, according to Harris Interactive
Research. And 42% of all US doctors’
practices have their own Web site.
A whole range of pressures obliges
major pharmaceuticals companies to
use the Internet more substantively.
Patients and carers are increasingly
educated and demanding, looking
for better information about both
illnesses and remedies. Doctors,
researchers and health managers
want to find the most effective cures
at a realistic price. Investors demand
detailed information and frequent
updates. The wider public has come
to expect greater openness on the
part of the pharmaceuticals industry
regarding business practice, ethics
and drugs in development.
Thus the time for this first Web
Pharma e-50 report is ripe. In it we
examine in great detail the online
behaviour of world’s 50 largest
pharmaceuticals companies. We
report on how effectively they
have grasped the use of Internet
technology. We look at how well
they are addressing the needs of
patients, doctors, investors and
the media. We study how well
they market themselves and what
sort of information they provide
to those that log onto their Web
sites.
Employing the E-Audits method-
ology especially adapted for this
© Urch Publishing
study, we examined the web
presence of 50 companies, asking
a total of 108 questions across eight
scoring dimensions, to reach the
overall picture which we present
here. Companies were selected on
the basis of size, determined by year
2000 revenues.
The eight scoring dimensions are:
• Site Access and Design
• Core Content
• Product/Clinical
Information/R&D
• The Medical Community
• Patients/Users/Carers
• Investors
• Media
• Web site Proactivity.
Overall scores and rankings were
then created by aggregating all eight
dimensional scores for each firm.
A standard and systematic tie-break
resolution was adopted. A team of
experienced researchers fluent in
English, Dutch, French, German and
Japanese languages conducted the
site audits. All sites were reviewed in
their own primary language as well
as being examined in English.
Chris Taylor is a management writer
and editor, and a senior member of the
E-Audits team. He can be reached at
ct@clara.net
A N A LY S I S

Key results and survey findings
Distribution of the Pharma e-50 by region
Japan:
16 companies
US: 16 companies
Pharma firms everywhere
are embracing the internet
100% of the pharmaceuticals
companies we examined have
already developed a Web site. The
overwhelming majority of firms have
invested time and money in
producing substantial sites. Most
run fairly smoothly and are at least
adequately designed.
Europe now the web leader
over the US and Japan
With Germany’s Merck KGaA the
overall survey winner, and with
three of the top five places, Europe
has emerged as regional winner of
the 2001 Web Pharma e-50 survey.
Similarly, among the top ten ranked
companies, four are European, three
are American and three are
Japanese.
Europe’s Web leadership extends
deeply into the survey. Among the
top 20 scorers, seven are European,
Overall ranking of scoring dimensions
Dimension
1 Access and design
6 Investors
7 Media
2 Core content
3 Product and clinical/R&D
4 Medical community
5 Patients, users and carers
8 Proactivity
A N A LY S I S
Europe:
18 companies
while seven are Asian and only six
are American. Among the top 30
companies, 11 are European, 10 are
Asian and 9 are American.
The top two European firms –
Merck (ranked 1) and Novo Nordisk
(ranked 2) – have also won between
them the top honours in four of the
survey’s eight overall scoring
categories. Merck leads the way in
overall site design and access, and in
catering to the needs of medical
professionals. Novo Nordisk wins in
providing best site content and in
offering the most interactive services
online. The two European firms are
also consistently high scorers in
virtually every category.
US weakness in web site
design and interactivity
These findings would appear to
indicate that any previous ‘Internet
gap’ between the US and the rest of
the world has disappeared entirely,
No. of Total poss.
questions points
18 18
16 16
11 11
23 25
15 15
9 9
9 9
7 8
© Urch Publishing
with American firms now fighting to
keep up with online innovation
increasingly coming from Europe
and Japan.
Surprisingly, the US companies
surveyed are at their weakest in
terms of basic site design and access,
and in providing core information
content potentially useful to a wide
public. Their strongest showing is
in providing detailed and accurate
product information.
It would be dangerous, however,
to assume that US companies will
remain laggards for long. Internet
entrepreneurship was invented in
the USA and, given
the relatively modest barriers to
improving performance on the Web,
one could well see a reversal of
fortune within the next year or two.
Investors are clear focus
of most companies
A large majority (82%) of companies
specifically acknowledge investors
and direct them to a dedicated area
of their Web site.
Only 42% of firms offer the same
dedicated area to patients and
carers, and fewer still (40%) provide
special online areas to medical
professionals.
Clearly, many pharmaceuticals
companies today consider the Web
a tool to help enhance investor
interest and awareness. 60% of
surveyed firms display a current
share price online and 58% post
financial results on at least a
quarterly basis.
Average Av. as % of
points score possible score
14.52 80.7
6.42 40.1
4.34 39.5
9.48 37.9
5.24 34.9
2.92 32.4
1.62 18.0
0.94 11.8
The Pharma e-50 7

Media rank second
as a target audience
After investors, most of the firms
surveyed see the press as their most
important target audience to reach
over the Web. Clearly, the most
aware among the global pharma-
ceuticals industry have realised that
the media are greatly influential in
shaping the public’s view of them as
successful businesses.
A full two-thirds (66%) of
surveyed firms specifically acknow-
ledge the media and direct them to
a dedicated area of their Web site.
An impressive 88% offer some form
of online news archive cataloguing
press releases and other media
material.
The most Web savvy pharma
companies seem well aware that they
can help shape the press agenda,
with 32% of them offering a search
engine to help journalists sift through
the masses of information residing
on their sites. Just under a quarter
(24%) provide some form of inter-
active service allowing customised
online media queries.
Doctors and patients needs
not well addressed
Disappointingly, far less online
attention is paid to patients, carers
and members of the medical pro-
fession than to investors and the
media. In fact, of our eight scoring
dimensions, addressing the needs of
medical professionals came in sixth
place, and helping patients and
carers with information finished
a distant seventh.
Just 42% of the Web Pharma e-50
sites offer any dedicated area to
patients and carers and only 24%
offer similar facilities to medical
professionals. While it is recognised
that more unobserved communi-
cation may take place over private
networks to which our researchers
did not have access, this still comes
as an unexpected disappointment.
Regarding patients and relatives,
only 16% of the surveyed firms’ sites
offer links to independent patient
groups and other forums. Only a
tiny minority (8%) offer any kind of
online feedback service where
patients can make personalised
27
8 The Pharma e-50
inquiries and receive replies. This
compares to 24% of firms which
offer the same service to journalists
and 24% which offer a customisable
alert service to investors, allowing
them to shape the information they
are sent.
Most firms now
recruit talent online
It was evident that many companies
are utilising the Internet as a power-
ful recruitment tool to complement
existing human resources strategies.
An impressive 90% offer specific
information for job seekers on
their Web sites, and 72% post live
vacancies and offer advice on how
to apply for these posts. This reflects
the already well-publicised current
worldwide shortage of both scientific
and technical talent.
Ethical and environmental
issues poorly represented
Despite growing public concern
over a host of issues such as
environmental concerns, animal
testing and the ethics of selling
drugs for profit in the developing
world, only the most aware among
our survey have responded with any
serious attempt to address these
issues over the Internet.
Only 28% of companies flag up
any form of ethical policy on their
home page or site map, which could
help to guide the public and press.
Just 52% explain their policy in any
way on environmental protection,
genetic modification, or testing on
animals – and only 6% explain all
three. 22% of surveyed firms
describe their policies regarding
disposal of hazardous waste and
dangerous chemicals.
e-commerce barely a factor
There is very little e-commerce
presently undertaken by the world’s
50 largest pharmaceuticals
companies. Just 8% of surveyed
firms offer some products for sale
over the Internet. Many are of
course unable to do so because of
various regulatory restrictions and
regulations. Sales are limited to
over-the-counter products and some
at-cost literature, but few firms even
attempt to do that.
© Urch Publishing
Few take advantage of
web's interactive nature
Despite Internet technology’s ability
to sustain all manner of two-way,
interactive communications, most
firms are still using the Web as little
more than an electronic notice
board.
In order to test the responsive-
ness of the surveyed firms, our
researchers sent messages to all
those companies (64%) featuring
either an email address or an online
Web mail form for enquiries. We
asked a very simple question:
‘Where can I find information on
drugs in development on your site?’
Fully half of all firms contacted
never replied. Of the 32% that did
reply, one in five resulted in simple
‘we’ll contact you later’ notices
which were never followed up on.
Thus, only about one in four actually
responded to a simple query with
meaningful information.
Also significant is that only a
meagre 10% of companies actually
offer any kind of ‘help’ button, or
similar device, with which to receive
information or guidance about their
Web sites.
Timeliness of information
could be better
One great advantage of communi-
cating via the Internet is that it is
cheap and easy to update and
publish new material, given that files
can be altered and deleted at very
little cost compared to traditional
printed media.Yet few companies
are doing as well at updating their
Web sites as they should. The
tendency often is to treat the
corporate Web site like a printed
brochure that is altered only
occasionally.
74% of surveyed firms show
evidence that their Web sites have
been updated within the past 30
days. But that seems awfully slow
for the Web. And we only found
58% of companies with financial
reports referring to periods ending
less than six months ago.
A N A LY S I S

The regional winners
Merck KGaA – European Winner
and Overall Winner
As the top scoring company in our
survey, Germany’s Merck offers a
comprehensive and highly useful
Web site that is easy to use and
provides a wealth of information.
Merck was also the top scoring
company regarding overall site
access and design, and in catering to
the needs of medical professionals.
Its online presence is home to an
unusual breadth of information
including a dedicated area for
suppliers. There is a wealth of
material regarding ethical and
environmental issues, and even a
dedicated telephone number
provided in the case of accidents
involving hazardous materials.
A N A LY S I S
Bristol-Myers Squibb – US Winner,
Ranked 3rd Overall
As the top scoring American firm,
Bristol-Myers Squibb excels at
providing useful information to
patients and carers online, one of
the few in our survey to do so. The
company’s Web site demonstrates
real thought regarding how material
should be presented to specific
audiences, to the degree of even
offering a larger typeface to diabetes
patients who may also have eye
problems. There are excellent links
to a variety of product areas, with
good search facilities and incisive
product descriptions. Unusually,
potential side effects are also clearly
outlined.
© Urch Publishing
Yamanouchi – Japanese Winner,
Ranked 5th Overall
Yamanouchi’s Web site is
comprehensive by Japanese
standards, and also easily navigable.
It offers a great variety of links to a
number of external bodies including
the Japanese Health Ministry, as
well as personal contacts in many
areas including recruitment. It is
one of the few Japanese sites which
appears to model itself on the US
style, even to the degree of adopting
the ‘.com’ suffix instead of the
normal national identifier, ‘.jp’.
The company shows remarkable
willingness to enter into social
debate with a significant section
devoted to its ethical policies.
There is an admirable focus on user
groups, with a dedicated phone line
provided for patient enquiries.
The Pharma e-50 9

DIMENSION 1: SITE ACCESS AND DESIGN
Online access excels, but
design problems remain
It’s an acknowledged fact that an
attractive window display will draw
shoppers in, and the same certainly
applies to online users of the
WorldWide Web. While the parallel
between a retail store and the Web
presence of the world’s leading
pharmaceutical companies is not
exact – there certainly is evidence
that the companies surveyed consider
accessibility to their sites the top
priority.
Access and Design was the highest
scoring of our eight analytical
dimensions, with the average
company score an impressive 81%.
In measuring the quality of online
access and site design we looked for
a visible and attractive Web-based
shop window, and a welcoming and
clearly signposted interior.
Most important was to determine
how easy it was to find these
companies on the Web. In most cases
this was simplicity itself; a majority of
sites were found by simply keying in
‘www.company name.com’. Others
were traced rapidly using a multiple
search engine (such as www.meta-
crawler. com) which scans individual
engines including Lycos, Excite,
Yahoo, AltaVista, Google, DirectHit.
In most cases, we were offered a
27
10 The Pharma e-50
variety of sites from which the home
page of the company under investi-
gation could be found.
Among 50 firms surveyed only
one, Dainippon (ranked 50th overall),
could not be located immediately
and this clearly differentiated its Web
presence. The same applies to loading
the surveyed sites: 92% of home pages
were clear and loaded reasonably
promptly without obvious errors.
However, only 86% of sites
immediately confirm the user has
located the right company, without
having to go to a deeper level than
the home page.
Once in the site, only two firms
failed to provide adequate signposts
to make for easy navigation of general
and unrestricted areas. We expected
more than a basic linear search and
discover format, and in general we
found it. Almost three-quarters
(74%) of companies achieved this
through a constant navigation bar on
screen, and a full 76% provide a site
map accessible from the home page.
Novo Nordisk (ranked 2) sets the
standard with a comprehensive, well-
structured map which is very easy to
follow. Eli Lilly (ranked 8), by
contrast, is one of several companies
whose site map wasn’t easy to find –
© Urch Publishing
as if the designers felt this vital
function was unimportant.
Despite this apparent willingness
to help visitors navigate their sites,
only 54% of companies possess a
fully functional and intuitive search
facility operating on the home page.
Some companies including Aventis
(ranked 30) have basic search
facilities which appear in some
sections but not in others, and fail to
work reliably. Others, like Alza
(ranked 36), have clearly spent a
great deal of time polishing this
function with good result.
Nearly all (92%) place few, if any,
restrictions on where you can visit
within their sites. The other 8%
position themselves as providing a
service for healthcare professionals,
only requiring visitors to register
before browsing the site any more
deeply than the home page.
Regarding the basic operation
of the site, 50% offer at least one
additional language choice other
than English, and some offer several
languages. While noting the offer,
we reviewed each site, wherever
possible, in its native language,
using other options simply as a
means to check the degree that site
A N A LY S I S

Dimension 1: Access and design
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
offerings were comparable. This was
demonstrably the right tactic, as
second language alternatives were
often – but not always – much
less detailed than the original.
Translation inaccuracies also
diminished confidence in the
integrity of translated information.
Understandably, many companies
offer only their ‘home’ language and
English – though some offer further
alternatives. Merck KGaA (ranked 1)
provides an excellent site written in
German, English, Spanish and French.
Japanese companies often do not
translate everything when offering
language choices – even into their
own language! Shionogi (ranked 40)
offers an English language-only site,
with just investor information given
in Japanese. Banyu (ranked 26),
among others, only offers limited
areas written in English.
Access: The top ten
Company
Merck KGaA
Bayer
Chugai
AstraZeneca
Johnson & Johnson
Boehringer Ingelheim
Shering AG
Serono
Sanofi-Synthelabo
Alza
A N A LY S I S
18
18 16
14.52 (80.7%)
Most companies have mastered
Web technology to an adequate
degree, though Allergan (ranked 49)
was a notable exception. We
attempted to access the Allergan site
on many occasions, with different
computers and at different times of
day, only to find that it consistently
froze or crashed computers to the
degree that a full appraisal was
impossible. Nevertheless, 88% of
companies maintain sites which are
functionally effective, in that they
have managed to avoid access
problems created by over-design,
needless graphic overlays, decorative
typescripts, and unsuitable back-
grounds which can make sites
difficult to read and slow to load.
Many Japanese companies are
handicapped by character conversion
software which necessarily slows
access to their sites. Typical of this is
Overall
ranking
1 18
4 18
6 17
7 17
22
23
25
31
34
36
© Urch Publishing
Takeda (ranked 11), whose character
conversion problems are needlessly
exacerbated by slow-loading complex
backgrounds which cause further,
unnecessary delay. Japanese firms
seem to suffer more than most, with
Daiichi (ranked 18) and Taisho
(ranked 21) also suffering from over-
burdened backgrounds which slow
site performance. However, Aventis
has also overcrowded its individual
pages making the loading of
continuation areas slow, and Merck
& Co (ranked 13) includes submenus
which occasionally conceal the text
they are meant to complement.
Fewer companies (72%) were
reviewed without discovering at least
one missing or non-functioning link
within the company area of the site –
we did not penalise for failing to
keep abreast of any external links it
offered. Some of these errors arose in
areas under construction, but others
were clearly the result of the site not
being fully maintained. Examples
include Pfizer (ranked 33) which had
failed to update consistently all of its
Dimension 1
score
17
17
17
17
17
17
The Pharma e-50 11

cross references, and Chugai
(ranked 6) which while very easy
to navigate, suffered from areas
which remain incomplete.
Roche (ranked 16) was the only
Web site where moving through
simple use of the ‘back’ and ‘forward’
commands proved to be difficult and
did not work consistently. Bayer
(ranked 4) was one of several sites
where sub-windows open without
being requested and then need to
be closed manually.
Somewhat irritating was the
tendency shown by 24% of surveyed
firms to offer information, and when it
was requested, to start immediately a
download process without consulting
the user. This is the rough equivalent
of a shop assistant spending a few
minutes taking details of what you
want, before telling you that you’ll
have to order it. It is extremely simple
to indicate whether the information
on a site is held in a PDF file (or
other download format), and users
may well want to reject it if it is only
held in PDF format – or else come
back later when they have more
27
12 The Pharma e-50
time. Several companies, including
Schering AG (ranked 25), offer an
email address for those who prefer to
receive hard copy versions of reports.
Site design, in our view, is critical
to a company’s ability to present a
coherent image and attractive brand.
It is, of course, understandable that a
corporate R&D department may have
created its Web pages at a different
time, and using different resources,
than the marketing department
which built the basic corporate site.
But is that really a good enough
excuse to make your company look
inadequate in front of millions of
people? The integrity of both style
and design are essential, and their
absence can give the impression that
no-one is in overall charge of the site.
Inconsistent design was found on
34% of surveyed sites, including a
number of Japanese ones such as
Takeda, Kyowa Hakku (ranked 14),
Sankyo (ranked 19) and Yamanouchi
(ranked 5). At the other end of the
scale, Amgen (ranked 15) stands
apart for the skill and integrity of its
design, which overcomes the
© Urch Publishing
constraints of the format and
transcends the ‘square box’ look of
most sites through a highly
imaginative use of graphics – without
the often concomitant loading delay.
Timeliness of information is
another area of concern. Surprisingly,
26% of all sites fail to provide clear
evidence that at least some
information has been updated within
the past 30 days. One site, UCB
(ranked 42) appears at first to be
more than a year out of date, though
other material eventually suggested
that it is actually fairly current.
GlaxoSmithKline (ranked 24) claims
to be updated, but nevertheless
posted a notice on the home page
promoting a conference that had
concluded more than a week earlier.
Maintaining a site and removing
outdated material is not that difficult;
much of it can be done automatically
with the right software. As with
inconsistent design, outdated
material leaves an impression of a
company that is not perched on the
leading edge of its industry.
A N A LY S I S

DIMENSION 2: CORE CONTENT
Lack of detail mars site content
In today’s world, we demand
immediate satisfaction in both
business and pleasure. It’s not good
enough any more for companies to
provide quality goods or services as
advertised, they have to be able to
provide them now. It’s the same with
the Internet and the Web: for a
company to win the attention of
browsers in an increasingly
competitive environment, it must
demonstrate – in seconds – that it
can perform the task or provide the
service specified by the user. This
means that a wide spectrum of basic
information must be highly visible –
or the Web user will move on, with a
poor impression of your site and,
perhaps, your company.
The 50 pharmaceuticals companies
surveyed, by and large, perform
adequately in this regard, but with
substantial room for improvement.
Only 22% of firms scored more than
half the possible points regarding
core Web site content. Even the top
scoring company, Novo Nordisk,
(ranked 2nd overall) only achieved
72%, and only a further two
companies topped the 60% mark.
The average score across all 50
companies was 37.9%, pushing this
dimension into fourth place out of
all eight dimensions reviewed.
A N A LY S I S
There are some achievements,
however, and most companies have
clear priorities regarding the core
content on their sites. For example,
96% include a clear overview of the
company and what it does, while
88% provide in some form a physical
list of their products and services.
More disappointing is that only 36%
offer easy and clear contact details
encompassing mail and email
addresses and phone and fax
numbers. Merck KGaA (overall
survey winner, ranked 1st) is among
a very few which provide all this
information on their home page.
Obviously, far more firms provide at
least some contact information.
Most companies provide some
information about their geographical
operating areas. Indeed, 64% provide
some form of map showing their
locations worldwide or regionally,
and 68% have developed and
maintain effective direct links
between sites, often between
different national operating units.
Another priority area for many
companies concerns information for
job seekers. A full 90% of surveyed
firms provide specific information for
this audience, while 72% publish
actual vacancies. Some companies
encourage online applications;
others, including Aventis (ranked 30)
© Urch Publishing
claim this facility will be available
shortly. Pfizer (ranked 33) is so keen
to help it even features a helpful
section on how to create a resumé or
CV. Johnson & Johnson (ranked 22)
on the other hand, was one of several
which, probably inadvertently, makes
recruitment information harder to
find than it should be.
Another widely addressed area,
and one of growing public concern,
concerns ethics and the environment.
Just over half (52%) of companies do
explain their company policies on
environmental protection, genetic
modification, or testing on animals.
However, three companies – Merck
KGaA, Novo Nordisk, and Novartis –
provide real examples of leadership
in this sensitive domain, posting clear
policies on all three. Merck KGaA
even goes to the lengths of explaining
why testing on animals is necessary.
Two further firms state where they
stand on two out of these three
issues. One of these is AstraZeneca
(ranked 7), which proves itself to be
up to be abreast the news by
explaining that while it does animal
testing, it will not work with the
controversial Huntingdon Life
Sciences, a British firm recently
beleaguered by animal rights
demonstrations and protests.
The Pharma e-50 13
 © Urch Publishing

Curiously, one of the most basic

Dimension 2: Core content
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
While 58% of companies
demonstrate on their site that they
are aware of ethical constraints and
act accordingly, only 28% have a
visible ethical policy signposted on
the home page or site map. Even
fewer – just 22% – describe their
policies and/or processes for disposal
of hazardous waste and dangerous
chemicals and materials.Yamanouchi
(ranked 5) deserves credit for posting
this information, but it inadvertently
suffers by tucking it away in reports
which require downloading. The
same applied to Johnson & Johnson,
where a keyword search disappoint-
ingly only offers a section from a
1998 report. Others, including
Schering AG (ranked 25), also
have the material but make it
unnecessarily hard to find.
Other companies, however, are
quite impressive in their coverage of
23
25
9.48 ( 37.9%)
environmental matters. Merck KGaA,
demonstrating again its lead in the
field, provides a dedicated phone
number for people with concerns
over hazardous material accidents.
Tanabe (ranked 9) offers email and
phone links to its environmental
department. Takeda (ranked 11)
names and provides an email address
for the head of its environmental
department. Amgen (ranked 15) is
notable for its coverage of recycling
issues. Welfide (ranked 27) provides
the benchmark with a page carrying
detailed information on its ethical
policies, including an acronym of
its company name (claiming it
represents ‘Wellness, Welfare,
Fidelity, and Confidence’), as well
as offering a second memorable
mnemonic MOTTO, for Morality,
Openness, Transparency, Trust, and
Ownership.
ethical considerations – the individual’s
right to privacy – is only explicitly
addressed by the 10% of surveyed
firms which make obvious assurance
that no information provided by
users (including their contact details)
will be passed on to any other
organisation. GlaxoSmith Kline
(ranked 24) is particularly clear on
this point.
Only one company – Azko Nobel
(ranked 20) makes it clear which
regulatory and overseeing bodies to
which it belongs, and one other, Teva
(ranked 28), provides full contact
details for such bodies. Only 12% of
company sites include links to some
of these organisations. Somewhat
more encouraging, 22% do include
links to external professional or
commercial bodies, and Eisai
(ranked 32) even includes other
competing pharmaceutical
companies in its long list of links.
Particularly disappointing is that
only 12% of surveyed firms possess a
corporate frequently asked questions,

Core content: The top ten

Company Overall Dimension 2
ranking score
Novo Nordisk 2 18
Merck KGaA 1 16
Bayer 4 15
Yamanouchi 5 14
Bristol-Myers Squibb 3 14
Aventis 30 14
Akzo Nobel 20 14
Chugai 6 13
AstraZeneca 7 13
Kyowa Hakku 14 13

27
14 The Pharma e-50 A N A LY S I S

or FAQ, page – a device that deserves
widespread acceptance as an effective
means of disseminating commonly
demanded information. Rather more,
22%, do offer a dedicated FAQ page
for their products and services.
Chugai (ranked 6) is in the process
of building such a page.
Other efforts to convey basic
company information include
Pharmacia (ranked 10) which has
placed product logos and brands on
its site’s home page. Bayer (ranked 4)
offers a technological solution for
those wanting more detailed
information – company videos
available to download.
There is not enough information
available for Web users wanting to
understand a company’s corporate
structure or its management. Just
16% include a corporate structure
diagram, and just 38% identify any
contacts by name as well as by job
title/position. Aventis is unusual in
offering a wide range of well-defined
email addresses. Some 14% of firms
provide details of directors’ external
activities, with Glaxo standing out
through the provision of
A N A LY S I S
comprehensive directors’ CVs.
More encouraging is the fact that
over half (56%) of firms clearly
indicate ownership of the group and
whether it owns, or is owned by,
another organisation. Sankyo
(ranked 19) makes its equity owner-
ship clear, even explaining its share
support programme – a strategy
designed to maximise shareholder
value through buying back its own
stock or that of partner companies.
Examining evidence of community
involvement by pharmaceuticals
makers on the Web, we found this to
be the case in 52% of cases. Merck
KGaA, for example, supports an
orchestra, while Shionogi (ranked 40)
sponsors a well known Japanese
television show. Many other
companies claim local initiatives with
schools or colleges. Posting these
activities on the Web can help
enhance a firm’s public image.
All in all, the demonstration of a
wide variety of core Web site content
proved to be a mild disappointment.
An Internet user should be able to
find most, if not all, of the important
background information about a
© Urch Publishing
company here on its site. In a
substantial majority of cases,
however, we could not even find an
address to write to them. It is
disappointing, too, to find so many
cases of spelling and grammatical
errors – and not just in companies
working outside their own language.
A few firms do show real
innovation regarding site content.
Pfizer, which did not fare that well
overall, does nevertheless offer two
novel and useful features. Its
‘prodhelp.com’ linked site adds real
value in explaining its products and
its ‘send a card to a doctor’ facility
suggests a more caring and humane
approach than seen on the majority
of sites.
The failure of many companies to
adopt widely the FAQ format appears
ill-informed. In some cases where a
FAQ facility does exist, the questions
addressed are utterly baffling. For
instance, Johnson & Johnson’s FAQ
inquires: ‘how do I get my child
featured in your commercial
advertising?’
The Pharma e-50 15

DIMENSION 3: PRODUCT AND CLINICAL INFORMATION/R&D
Development strong
but product info lags
It is a challenge for businesses to
provide enough information to satisfy
the interested and curious without
revealing competitively sensitive
material. This dilemma affects the
pharmaceuticals industry perhaps
more than most. Aside from the
normal competitive issues, much of
what drugs makers do is subject to
restrictions and can also be subject to
scrutiny by a number of watchdog
and other special interest groups.
Thus, the emergence of the
Internet as a business medium has
doubtless caused the pharma
companies some headaches. The
normal function of a Web site, as an
online shop window, is often
inappropriate as e-commerce is
difficult or impossible. Further,
products registered for commercial
use in one country may not be so
registered in another, and some can
be dispensed over the counter in one
country, but not another.
Thus it is not surprising that this
scoring dimension, focusing on how
firms make available information
about their products, and about their
use and value for the treatment of
Dimension 3: Product and clinical information/R&D
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
27
16 The Pharma e-50
specific illnesses, only scored fifth
highest among the eight dimensions.
In this dimension we also assessed
the quality of information on the
R&D base, including pipeline
products and research collaborations,
and looked specifically for objective
endorsement through third-party
tests, and through links to articles in
the trade and professional press. The
average score across companies
reviewed was just 34.9%.
Even understanding the
background, it is disappointing that
only 4% of surveyed companies have
posted external endorsements by
third parties on their Web sites. Just
8% offer site links to product
comparisons, and 18% provide links
to scholarly or medical journal
articles about their products. This is
simply not the openness one would
hope for regarding potentially critical
health issues.
In some other respects, however, a
majority of companies do show a
willingness to share important
information – or at least acknowledge
the value of doing so. Only (6%)
failed to make any score in this
15
15
5.24 ( 34.9%)
© Urch Publishing
dimension. We also found that 68%
of companies make the effort to write
about their products in non-technical
terms, along with easily understood
descriptions of what the products are
for and how they work. Some
attempts at openness, however, are
thwarted by technical malfunctions.
For instance, Bristol-Myers Squibb
(ranked 3) offers admirable non-
technical product descriptions, but on
several occasions these were
distorted by corrupted or overlaid
text files making comprehension
difficult. Unfortunately, this sort of
disruption is all too common to
pharma industry Web sites, where a
clearer and simpler design should be
able to pre-empt most such
problems.
Clearly concerned about litigation
by patients and consumers, only 36%
of firms, extend this openness about
product information to include
possible side effects resulting from
product use, and some of those that
do so fail to make this information
easy to find. There are some notable
exceptions, however. Banyu
(ranked 26) stands out as a company
with clear and easily accessible
information about the possible
effects of its drugs on users, while
others including Merck & Co
A N A LY S I S
 © Urch Publishing

Product and clinical information/R&D: The top ten

Company Overall Dimension 3
ranking score
AstraZeneca 7 11
Novo Nordisk 2 10
Bristol-Myers Squibb 3 10
Pharmacia 10 9
Eli Lilly 8 9
Merck & Co 13 9
GlaxoSmithKline 24 9
Pfizer 33 9
Merck KGaA 1 8
Bayer 4 8

(ranked 13) identify the product area,
including potential side effects, as a
new area of its site which is still
under development.
A solid majority of companies
(64%) list and summarise current
and past research, while almost as
many (60%) identify and describe,
albeit to differing levels of detail,
their drugs in development. Again,
some companies seem to tuck their
development pipeline information
away, to where only the most
dedicated researcher can find it.
Examples of this include Chugai
(ranked 6) and Novo Nordisk
(ranked 2). Sanofi-Synthelabo
(ranked 34) on the other hand, offers
excellent and clear information which
is easy to find, while Sankyo
(ranked 19) provides a dedicated
email contact for development
information. Noticeably fewer, just
38%, explain the development status
of those drugs, regarding where they
are in the pipeline and if they are yet
in clinical trials. Even among the
firms that do, the information
provided can be far from clear.
Pharmacia (ranked 10), for example,
describes drug development as
‘long term’ and ‘medium term’ only,
dispensing altogether with the more
understandable Phase 1, Phase 2
and Phase 3 terminology.
Still fewer sites (10%) make clear
the opportunities for individuals to
participate, or put themselves
forward for participation, in drug
trials. But of those which do,
Japanese companies lead the way.
Takeda (ranked 11) invites interested
parties to make contact about its
work on Alzheimers’ disease; Daiichi
(ranked 18) does the same on
hepatitis, and Fujisawa (ranked 38)
for rheumatism. GlaxoSmithKline
has a closed Clinical Pharmaceutical
Unit for registered users only,
which (it appears from the outside)
offers opportunities for drug trial
participation to its members.
Perhaps surprisingly, many
companies consider research and
development a higher priority for
publication than a detailed and
discrete Web site dedicated to their
key products. Indeed, some firms
barely mention existing products;
Welfide (ranked 27) is typical in this
group. A small majority of 52% of
firms maintain specific product sites,
but clear and functional links
between their corporate and the
product sites are not always found.
A good idea – overlooked by all but
a few – would be to place details of
key products and brands on the
home page. This is indeed the tactic
adopted by Pharmacia, where a
simple click on the logo or brand
name provides a quick and easy link
to comprehensive details. Tanabe
(ranked 9) offers an email link
dedicated to those with questions
about products.
It seems to us that the ability
to search a company’s site for a
particular drug by name (to find its
application) or by the name of an
illness (to find a suitable treatment)

A N A LY S I S The Pharma e-50 17


is a desirable attribute, bearing in
mind the wide use of the Internet for
research. However, a minority of
companies appear to share that view;
only 34% provide an easily accessible
facility to search by product name
and just 24% enable an effective
search by product attribute, illness or
symptom. Elan’s (ranked 39) Online
Learning Centre deserves a mention
for carrying much useful information,
as well as a comprehensive and well-
functioning search feature.
Rather more, 40% of the companies,
identify on their sites details of
research links with schools,
universities, and other organisations
– and many of these go into some
detail about research collaborations
with potentially competing companies.
Of the companies which list their
links with academic institutions,
half go further in offering contact
opportunities for prospective research
projects where partner organisations,
or individuals, are sought. Boehringer
Ingelheim (ranked 23), offers details
of internships and an email contact
27
18 The Pharma e-50
for further details. Pfizer (ranked 33),
clearly links its academic work with
community involvement and a
desire to address the issues of
early education – its site features
a pharmaceutical science ‘fun-zone’
where youngsters can learn about
important issues in a playful
environment.
Also worthy of mention is Merck
& Co’s (ranked 13) summary of
articles from relevant professional
journals on its site. Category winner
AstraZeneca’s (ranked 7 overall)
provides comprehensive links to
professional and other medical
clinical and patient support sites.
Forest Labs (ranked 44) offers a
user-friendly – but quite openly
marketing-oriented – ‘desktop
prescription reminder tool’. Merck
KGaA (overall survey winner,
ranked 1) is to be applauded for its
candid dialogue on sensitive topics
like company sales policy in the third
world and the rationale for relocating
production to low-cost regions. These
provide a breath of fresh air in a
© Urch Publishing
world which can appear to favour
closed doors.
Two factors appear to mitigate
against success. First, the research
was seeking product information
from companies, of whom many are
clearly focused on the perceived
needs of investors (to be examined in
more detail later). This helps explain
why some companies place details
of their development pipeline
exclusively under the Investor
section of their Web site.
A second mitigating factor is the
application of the technology itself.
The impressions gathered by our
researchers are sometimes of
companies not entirely at ease with
the idea of posting so much sensitive
information using a medium as
public and open as the Internet.
Clearly, companies are struggling to
master a technology of open
information, perhaps sometimes
against their own instincts.
A N A LY S I S

DIMENSION 4: MEDICAL COMMUNITY
Medical professionals’ needs
not well addressed
The community of medical
professionals acts variously as
censor, gatekeeper, or advocate for
the pharmaceuticals industry, in that
doctors, pharmacists and hospital
management boards must make daily
choices about which drugs to buy
and use. Those choices can be driven
by cost, but equally by other criteria
such as buyers’ awareness of what is
available, perceived needs and the
relative strengths and drawbacks of
given products. By its approval or
censure, the medical audience has
the ability to make or break a drug.
It can accelerate or delay uptake, and
ultimately determine whether a new
remedy becomes a commercial
success or failure.
Certainly there are other channels
to market for some products. Most
pharmaceutical companies offer a
range of over-the-counter drugs
which do not require medical
endorsement – but even here,
medical professionals often exert an
advisory influence. The doctors, or
pharmacy staff, often make an
informed recommendation to a
Dimension 4: Medical community
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
A N A LY S I S
purchaser, and this again may be
driven by cost, or by the adviser’s
knowledge and familiarity with the
product.
One would therefore see the
medical community as a vital and
important audience for pharma-
ceutical companies, and a key target
for any channel of communication –
including the Web. The truth,
however, is far removed from that.
Provision of information to
medical professionals only ranks
sixth out of our eight scoring
dimensions. Indeed, the average
score across all 50 surveyed firms is a
meagre 32.4%.Yet even this poor
showing may appear artificially high
because we scored firms generously
where we were unable to gain full
access to areas of sites requiring pre-
registration and subsequent
password entry. As researchers rather
than certified medical professionals,
we had no access beyond this point,
and so allowed a maximum score on
evidence of a closed area dedicated
to medical professionals, assuming
that all the material we were
9 dedicated Web area to the medical
9 community. They are not from any
2.92 ( 32.4%)
© Urch Publishing
checking for would be offered after
registration.
Just 24% of companies offer some
sort of restricted, value-added area
pertaining to the medical community.
Among all firms, no fewer than 60%
fail to acknowledge this critical
audience at all, and they offer no
dedicated area of their site to them.
Some, admittedly, include a fair
amount of the material we were
looking for under general or product
areas of the site or its associated
links, but clear and specific
acknowledgement of the information
needs of medical professionals was
surprisingly rare.
Pfizer (ranked 33) and DuPont
(ranked 43) were among the group
who failed to explicitly acknowledge
the medical community as an
audience with a dedicated Web area,
but yet nevertheless do include much
of the information required
elsewhere on their sites. Others,
including Bristol-Myers Squibb
(ranked 3) cover the relevant material
partly within specific audience areas
and partly within product areas.
There is no apparent connection
among the companies that offer no
one region of the world, nor from
The Pharma e-50 19

Medical community: The top ten
Company
Merck KGaA
Takeda
Taisho
Roche
Banyu
Yamanouchi
Sankyo
Tanabe
Chugai
Kyowa Hakku
any one language group. Nor, when
their overall rankings are compared,
do they tend to cluster together in
other scoring dimensions. While top-
scoring companies figure among
their number, including Novo
Nordisk (ranked 2) and Bayer
(ranked 4), 66% only make it into
the lower half of the rankings.
An exception – and a disappoint-
ment – is Allergan (ranked 49).
Many indications suggest that this
company should have ranked higher,
but its overall performance was badly
marred by continual problems which
consistently caused computers to
freeze and its site to crash. The
disappointment is that Allergan's
attractive home page features a link
to its ‘Professional Pathway’ – a
dedicated area for the medical
community. Ironically, access was
denied not by the need to register
but by the poor site design causing
accessing computers to crash
repeatedly.
Bearing in mind then that only
40% of companies clearly address the
27
20 The Pharma e-50
Overall
ranking
1 9
11
21
16
26
24
19
9 9
6 9
14
medical community, and 24% require
registration before entering this area at
all, a further 10% offer deeper levels
of information available to those who
pre-qualify through some form of
professional registration. Merck
KGaA (ranked 1), for example, scored
maximum points in this category
without requiring pre-registration,
yet offered more information
specifically targeted at chemists if
they chose to register.
A total of 30%, including those
requiring registration, offer the
facility for users to customise the
Web site or tailor it more specifically
to their requirements, through an
express log-in or similar mechanism.
A total of 32% of companies
surveyed offer a dedicated FAQ
(frequently asked questions) page
targeting the medical audience, and
26% offer a dedicated email help
line, or query line. Kyowa Hakku
(ranked 14) was one of the few
Japanese companies that provide this
service.
© Urch Publishing
Dimension 4
score
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
We looked for companies’ active
attempts to help the medical
community through the
dissemination of information, both
proprietary and third party, in three
different ways. First, we searched
for evidence of contact details for
members of this audience indicating
their interests, problems and concerns,
and found this present with 30% of
companies. Second, we sought to
establish whether leaflets, research
notes or other literature designed for
medical professionals were available,
and found this in 28% of cases. Third,
we looked for links to professional
forums or other interactive bodies
where doctors, researchers and
health managers could share
experiences and learn from each
others’ examples, and found this in
32% of cases.
A few companies deserve special
acclaim. Merck & Co (ranked 13) was
one of the relatively few companies
whose medical community area is
both explicit and open to the public
without registration. Understanding
A N A LY S I S

its audience better than some, Merck
makes clear the differences between
the US and other parts of the world
regarding drug approval, use, and
sale. This was the only clear
explanation we found of this
throughout the entire exercise.
Merck KGaA (ranked 1), on the
other hand, is the only company to
achieve full marks in this dimension
by actual scoring, rather than by
default through the requirement to
register. Of course, Merck KGaA is
mentioned elsewhere and frequently
in this report as being exceptionally
A N A LY S I S
Web wise. In our view the German
firm well deserves its position as
overall winner.
All in all, the results of our analysis
of how well, or poorly, pharma
companies cater to the needs of
medical professionals surprised
us. The form and structure of this
scoring dimension were developed
on the assumption that this audience
would be proven to be important to
the pharmaceuticals companies’
overall Web strategy, but this was not
found to be so. That a minority, just
40%, of firms clearly and explicitly
© Urch Publishing
direct medical professionals to a
special area of their site, and that just
over half of those (24%) determined
that this area should be closed to the
casual browser or non-professional
was perhaps to be expected. But
that 60% should either ignore this
important audience altogether, or at
least not provide information in any
systematic or organised way, was
very surprising to us. One would
expect a better lobbying effort by the
big pharma firms, if only out of
enlightened self-interest.
The Pharma e-50 21

DIMENSION 5: PATIENTS, USERS AND CARERS
Information for patients
disappoints badly
Concern for two main themes figured
in the creation and application of this
scoring dimension, which deals
specifically with how well pharma-
ceuticals companies cater to the
needs of patients, users and their
carers.
First, for the past 15 years or so,
various management doctrines have
focused on the need to satisfy the
customer or user with information
and service. Thus, Customer
Sovereignty has given way to
Customer Care, whose main tenets
then became absorbed into the
Quality movement and then into
Customer Relationship Management,
or CRM. Whatever the name or
term, the underlying principle has
remained essentially the same: that
companies are run in order to meet
customer needs profitably.
Second, the Internet is becoming
the reference tool of choice for a very
broad public, from young students to
big business. The recurring refrain
‘I’ll look it up on the Internet’ is
increasingly thought to be the
answer to just about every question
around.
Dimension 5: Patients, users and carers
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
27
22 The Pharma e-50
There are audiences for whom the
’Net and Web hold even greater
relative value than for the general
public. For the housebound, the Web
offers a world of information not
otherwise available. Those who
through illness, disability or old age
cannot get about as much as others
often find the Internet a lifeline,
a point of contact and a valuable
working tool. Their carers, too, rely
on the Internet to fulfil needs as
diverse as health information,
shopping and access to support
groups.
Disappointingly, few of the firms
surveyed appear to see helping these
groups as a very high priority, at least
in terms of their Web strategies.
Addressing the needs of patients,
users and their carers ranked a lowly
seventh place out of our eight
dimensions, with an average score
across all firms of just 18%. In fact,
patients ranked as the lowest scoring
audience score of all. Investors and
the Media, on the other hand, each
achieved comfortably more than
twice that figure, and the Medical
Community was just short of double.
9 are Pfizer (ranked 33), DuPont
9 (ranked 43), and Daiichi (ranked 18),
1.62 ( 18%)
© Urch Publishing
We asked for this audience to
be specifically acknowledged, and
expected them to be directed to a
special part of the company site.Yet
58% of surveyed firms failed that
most basic of tests. Only 10% of
companies scored more than half
the possible points.
Just 20% of companies offered a
dedicated FAQ (frequently asked
questions) page for this audience,
though this was not always easy to
find. Some companies, including
Pharmacia (ranked 10) relegated
'people' issues including the
patient/user FAQ, to a subset of its
product pages. Banyu (ranked 26),
however, provides a better example
of patient care, with several FAQ
pages categorised under different
diseases and conditions, including
hepatitis, diabetes, osteoporosis and
high blood pressure. At the time of
this writing, Chugai (ranked 6) is
building a patient FAQ page which
should be completed soon.
The Pharmacia tactic of providing
a good amount of relevant inform-
ation under product rather than
patient areas has also been adopted
by other firms. More disappointing
who really provide little more than a
A N A LY S I S
 © Urch Publishing

Patients, users and relatives: The top ten

Company Overall Dimension 5
ranking score
Bristol-Myers Squibb 3 7
Yamanouchi 5 6
Novartis 12 6
Pharmacia 10 6
Bayer 4 6
Merck KGaA 1 4
Takeda 11 4
Sankyo 19 4
Tanabe 9 4
Eli Lilly 8 4

product list with some general
information, presented more as
product promotion rather than
patient assistance. We also tested for
evidence that patients or concerned
carers could get answers regarding
illnesses without necessarily being
able to name a specific drug. But
this service proved to be rare.
Takeda (ranked 11), however, has
made the effort to render its question
and answer area entertaining as well
as informative and eye-catching. Its
cartoon-style information for the
company’s over-the-counter products
is easy to run as well as quite helpful.
There is even a downloadable cartoon
addressing general health concerns.
Johnson & Johnson (ranked 22)
also stood out in the clarity and
direction of its information for this
audience, with specific headings
including ‘Women’s Heath’,‘Child
Care’, etc.
Those looking for information such
as leaflets describing illnesses and
their treatments, were served by just
12% of companies. Bristol-Myers
Squibb (ranked 3), Bayer (ranked 4),
Tanabe (ranked 9), and Novartis
(ranked 12) are among those who do.
Boehringer Ingelheim (ranked 23)
has no specific patient site but does
offer downloadable literature on
various aspects of healthcare.
AstraZeneca (ranked 7), on the
other hand, offers no downloaded
supporting literature, but outperforms
many of those who do by providing
comprehensive online material,
clearly signposted from the site’s
home page.
For patients and users wanting
to register for more personalised
service, 10% of firms offer the facility
to tailor a site for their needs through
an express log-in or similar tool, with
most of those (8%) seeking pre-
registration. Pharmacia (ranked 10)
requires registration for US users
only, while others such as Amgen
(ranked 15) offer a fairly basic Web
site but with comprehensive links
to product and other information.
Contact with other affected people
is an important factor for patients
and carers. The ability to share and
discuss the progress of condition
with others may play a crucial part
in emotional acceptance of disease,
and also perhaps provide useful
information. We looked for active
links from patient sites to user
groups, forums, and found these
in just 16% of companies.
The quality of such links varies
widely. AstraZeneca (ranked 7) offers
a large number of good third party
links, while Takeda (ranked 11) has
effective links for those suffering
from Alzheimer’s Disease and those
with certain gynaecological concerns.
Eisai (ranked 32) has a new area,
launched in conjunction with Pfizer
(ranked 33) in March 2001 which
also addresses Alzheimer’s.
Other companies offer links
providing informative material, but
not all were easy to find. The marked
tendency to provide information as a
subset of product areas assumes
more knowledge than some users
may have at the outset of a Web
search. Bayer (ranked 4) provides a

A N A LY S I S The Pharma e-50 23


large number of links, but they are
not easy to locate. Roche (ranked 16)
offers much patient information under
a separate healthcare site, and Serono
(ranked 31) also offers a dedicated site
for this audience. Tanabe (ranked 9)
is one of few companies that clearly
focuses attention on patients, while
both Sankyo (ranked 19) and Chugai
(ranked 6) provide a great deal of
information, including relevant
academic articles.
One way in which we assessed
sites was to search for some way
patients or others in this audience
can receive feedback regarding their
concerns directly from the company
itself. Only 8% of surveyed firms
provide contact names and numbers,
however, and the same percentage
provide a dedicated email help line.
Yamanouchi (ranked 5) and Chugai
27
24 The Pharma e-50
(ranked 6) stand out as providing
clearly visible contact telephone
numbers for patients. Bayer
(ranked 4), on the other hand, is
typical of most who offer this facility,
in that they provide an email link
but no name to accompany it.
Memorable features include
contributions from Bristol-Myers
Squibb (ranked 3 overall and the
winner in providing information to
patients, users and their relatives)
which offers clear signs of thoughtful
human intervention on its site. In the
area on diabetes, acknowledging that
this condition can affect eyesight, the
company provides a click box to
increase the font size of written text
on the screen. Aventis (ranked 30)
also deserves mention for its frank
approach to medical problems, viz:
‘One in three Americans will have
© Urch Publishing
cancer…’, but loses through
difficulties with the site which mean
that it frequently freezes. Allergan
(ranked 49), also promises more than
the site seems able to deliver, due to
technical design or delivery problems.
Overall, it seems that many
companies demonstrate that they
do not fully understand a vital part
of doing business today - the
importance of the customer interface.
As individuals acquire more and
more knowledge, as well as greater
influence over key purchasing
decisions, most companies are
directing their attention towards their
end-users in an attempt to create and
build loyalty. Many pharmaceuticals
firms, based on these research
findings, have a long way to go.
A N A LY S I S

DIMENSION 6: INVESTORS
Most firms excel at pleasing investors
Ten to 15 years ago investors loved
the pharmaceutical sector. New
scientific techniques like
combinatorial chemistry and high-
throughput screening promised to
accelerate the pace of commercial
‘blockbuster’ drugs with sales over
$500 million a year. It was not
unusual for a winning pharma maker
to post earnings increases of 20% or
more per year. They were the darlings
of the stock market.
Towards the mid-1990s, however,
information technology and Internet
stocks overtook pharmaceuticals as
the greatest bonanza investments.
The drugs industry itself entered a
period of turmoil where the cost of
drugs development soared,
prompting a long, and ongoing,
chain of mergers and takeovers.
Profits flagged and investors looked
elsewhere. Today, pharmaceuticals
firms are trying hard again to inform
both institutional and private investors
about the very real growth prospects
of their industry.
In that context, it is hardly surprising
that the 50 surveyed firms scored
highly on the provision of inform-
ation to investors, with this dimension
ranking second out of all eight
included in our study. The average
company score was 40.1%, with only
A N A LY S I S
Access and Design (dimension 1)
covering basic site design, scoring
higher.
In scoring this dimension, we
set out to establish the degree to
which the companies reviewed
acknowledge the needs and wishes
of private and institutional investors,
and how far they go towards meeting
those needs and wishes. Particular
attention was paid to how quickly
and simply one can determine a
current share price in relevant
markets, and to determine stock
movements, equity holdings –
both of the company itself and,
significantly, of its directors. Also
deemed important was the ready
availability of and access to financial
material including regular reports
and trend information.
Underlining the importance of this
audience to companies, there were
many sites where the only route into
product, R&D, clinical, even media
focused material was under the
Investor heading. Some provide a
very good service – the highest
scorers listed in the table clearly
Dimension 6: Investors
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
© Urch Publishing
provide most of the information
required.
The overall goal of the research
was not to scour every available
avenue in search of elusive
information, but rather to investigate
its ready availability; signposting,
directions, and easy access, were as
important as the data itself. With that
in mind, the scores described here
were not obtained by downloading
the latest annual report – available in
80% of cases, the balance tending to
be private companies or wholly
owned subsidiaries. Rather we
wanted to see evidence that they had
considered what information should
be available instantly without time-
consuming downloads, and it is on
this basis that the below scores were
assessed.
A large majority (82%) of the
companies reviewed specifically
acknowledge this investor audience,
and the same number direct them to
a dedicated area on their Web sites.
A full 60% provide the company
share price at the end of the previous
trading day, although many are far
16
16
6.42 ( 40.1%)
The Pharma e-50 25
 © Urch Publishing

Investors: The top ten

Company Overall Dimension 6
ranking score
Chugai 6 12
AstraZeneca 7 12
Pharmacia 10 11
Bristol-Myers Squibb 3 10
Bayer 4 10
Tanabe 9 9
Kyowa Hakku 14 9
Amgen 15 9
Daiichi 18 9
Johnson & Johnson 22 9

more up-to-date than that providing
15 or 20 minute updates published
on the home page. Examples include
Roche (ranked 16) which links to the
Reuters trading platform, and
Yamanouchi (ranked 5), Kyowa Hakku
(ranked 14), Daiichi (ranked 18), and
Taisho (ranked 21) which link with
Yahoo Finance – the world’s most
widely used financial portal.
While four-fifths of all companies
make their annual reports available
as downloads, 46% include
comprehensive summaries on their
Web pages for those who do not
need or wish to see the full
document. The quality of these
summaries is sometimes excellent –
Pfizer (ranked 33) includes a full
reformatted report, available from a
contents menu, section by section.
AstraZeneca (ranked 7) does
similarly, while Aventis (ranked 30)
provides detailed press releases
designed for experienced financial
journalists as well as for investors.
Schering AG (ranked 25) is one of
several which accepts an emailed
request for reports and other docu-
ments to be mailed out free of charge.
We only found 58% of companies
with financial reports immediately
available referring to periods ending
less than six months ago. This was
mildly disappointing as we expected
to see more quarterly results and
other interim figures posted, with
the ability to compare with previous
periods. A full 76% of those
surveyed, however, provide some
form of historic information, mostly
in the form of previous yearly figures.
But this information is not always
easy to find: Alza (ranked 36) places
much useful financial data under the
heading ‘Advanced Fundamentals’.
And if Servier (ranked 48) has
financial data more recent than
1998/99, it eluded us completely.
When it comes to analysing
numbers, 42% of companies provide
functions allowing researchers to
chart and graph data of their own
choosing in – broadly speaking – the
manner they choose. Merck & Co
(ranked 13) is the class benchmark in
this regard, offering sophisticated
features that have been well thought
out.
To make it easier and faster to
access information, 20% of firms
provide an investors’ FAQ facility that
is different from the main corporate
FAQ, or which links direct to a
specific section of the larger item.
Some of those who do not answer
questions make easy connections to
the Search facility. Bayer (ranked 4)
is one such, and this company also
provides a comprehensive list of
company contacts for investors, so
they can place queries directly.
In 24% of companies, investors can
sign up by email to receive details of
(for example) further stock and bond
issues, and to receive copies of
specified reports. We looked across
all companies to find direct links to
independent investment reports, to
comment by banks and brokers, and
to articles or comment in the
financial press, but found none. The
closest we came was with Merck
KGaA (ranked 1) which lists its own

27
26 The Pharma e-50 A N A LY S I S

issuing banks and brokers with
contact details for individuals within
each organisation.
We looked for explicit information
about company ownership and found
that 30% offer some material on their
major stakeholders, while 26%
provide details of other firms in
which the company in question
holds stakes in.
We gained much information, but
insufficient in most cases to state
categorically the precise relationships
that exist in this tight-knit industry.
Of course, publicly listed
companies are often obliged by law
to list any investor holding more than
5% of the firm. Eisai (ranked 32) goes
so far as to identify its top ten
shareholders by stock volume.
Investors are clearly the focus of
the Web presence for an overwhelm-
ing majority of companies. Schering
AG (ranked 25) is especially noted
for the depth of information under
A N A LY S I S
the Investors heading, compared with
that apparently available elsewhere.
One exception is material surrounding
details of directors’ share options.
Only 6% of firms, including Bayer
(ranked 4), AstraZeneca (ranked 7),
and Merck & Co (ranked 13) provide
such information.
Another growing area of interest
for investors surrounds the ethical
and environmental policies by which
pharmaceuticals firms operate. Today,
these are a mainstream concern of
both press and public. Ill-regarded
ethical approaches to selling drugs to
the developing world or to testing on
animals can have catastrophic effects
on a company’s share price.
Take the UK-based product
development and safety testing
company Huntingdon Life Sciences,
which works closely with the
pharmaceuticals industry, amongst
others. Informed opinion, by and
large, does not oppose all tests using
© Urch Publishing
animals as it is widely accepted there
is little viable alternative. Some firms,
notably Merck KGaA (ranked 1) and
AstraZeneca (ranked 7) make the
case for so doing. But AstraZeneca
specifies explicitly that it does not
work with Huntingdon, as the
execution of tests there may be
deemed to be cruel.
Ethical concerns pose a
considerable problem for many
companies’ efforts to provide a
Web space that is open, honest and
informative. The 50 large pharma-
ceuticals makers we surveyed are
split almost evenly over the issue,
with 52% offering some explanation
of their policies regarding the environ-
ment, genetic modification, animal
testing and other ethical issues.
Some must feel they will only be
criticised for describing what they do
regarding ethics and the environ-
ment, while they will be accused of
secrecy if they remain silent.
The Pharma e-50 27

DIMENSION 7: MEDIA
Most sites are media friendly
Publicity is the lifeblood of any
organisation. The right or wrong kind
of press coverage increasingly drives
the corporate brand and determines
the company’s overall reputation.
Unfortunately, the media has its own
agenda, one which may at times
clash with the drive by corporate
marketing departments to enhance
the corporate image. At the same
time, the media is the marketplace
for information, read, heard, or
viewed by investors, customers,
partners and the public at large.
Despite the risks, there is little option
but to try to lead the media agenda –
these days in large part through an
organisation’s Web presence. If not,
then the agenda will be set for you
by others.
The challenge is to maximise
‘good’ publicity and minimise the
‘bad’, while acknowledging that ‘bad’
for you may well be ‘good’ for the
media, and what is ‘good’ for you, just
may not interest them at all. How do
you win this ongoing battle? The
answer is usually openness, for two
reasons. First, if your company has a
good story to tell, it usually won’t be
heard unless you make it available.
Second, if you post and maintain
information and reliable contact
details on your Web site, you may
well benefit from publicity through
Dimension 7: Media
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
27
28 The Pharma e-50
stories generated by the media, on
which you may be invited to comment.
The relationship with the press is
critical – and our survey findings bear
this out. Provision of information to
the media ranks third among our
eight scoring dimensions rankings,
with an average score of 39.5%, just
behind the second-place Investors
(dimension 6) at 40.1%.
That these two audiences should
be so close is no coincidence. Given
the power and pervasiveness of the
financial press in this age of
shareholding democracy, there is
often an overlap between the
interests of investors and the media.
Indeed, we found companies – Pfizer
(ranked 33) was one – where press
materials appear under the Investors’
heading. The same applies to both
Takeda (ranked 11), which has no
other media facility at all, and Daiichi
(ranked 18).
We found that 66% of companies
specifically acknowledge the media
audience and direct them to a
dedicated area of their Web site.
Others, as indicated above, make
no such direction, but offer media
information under an Investor
heading.
Some companies try much harder
than others, and some succeed.
Merck & Co (ranked 13) clearly
11
11
4.34 ( 39.5%)
© Urch Publishing
recognises the media as an important
audience, and invites browsers to
‘Visit the Merck Newsroom’ on the
company home page. Bayer
(ranked 4) offers a ‘Bay News’ section,
although it is not immediately
obvious that this is the media centre.
Once located, however, it is an
excellent service, one among just
14% of sites reviewed permitting
journalists to register for electronic
delivery of press releases. Others
offering this facility include UCB
(ranked 42), Amgen (ranked 15),
and Novo Nordisk (ranked 2). 28%
of all surveyed firms supply a
comprehensive and functional
contact base for journalists to seek
further information and obtain
quotes for their stories.
Eli Lilly (ranked 8 overall and top
scorer in the Media dimension)
provides the only site we found
which allows journalists to register
their interests and obtain password
clearance for a restricted area. This
approach can help create a relation-
ship between company and media,
which may engender greater under-
standing and sympathy among
journalists.
Press releases are an obvious and
frequent point of contact between
company and media. So we looked
not only for the ability to receive
releases electronically, but also for
previously issued releases to be
archived and available, and for
consistent dating of historic material.
An impressive 88% of companies
A N A LY S I S

Media: The top ten
Company
Eli Lilly
Boehringer Ingelheim
Novo Nordisk
Bayer
Abbott
Merck & Co
Merck KGaA
Akzo Nobel
Novartis
Pharmacia
offer such an archive, and all of these
properly date their material. Some
archives, however, are better than
others. Shionogi (ranked 40) provides
a handful of releases while other
firms offer hundreds of them going
back more than two years. Kyowa
Hakku (ranked 14) has no press
releases archived on its Japanese
language site, but offers a selection in
its English language area.
In virtually all cases, releases are
immediately viewable, with only one
company, Banyu (ranked 26) storing
them as files for downloading only.
This is a significant weakness in our
view, as the whole idea behind
offering releases is to encourage
quick and painless browsing.
A relatively small number of
companies (32%) have an adequately
performing search engine operating
throughout this archive. More typical
is GlaxoSmithKline (ranked 24) in
that its archive relies on the site’s
general search mechanism, which
takes you to the item that includes
the word you want, but not to the
word itself. This means that searches
– especially where there are dozens,
or even hundreds, of archived
releases – can be too time consum-
ing. Pharmacia (ranked 10), on the
A N A LY S I S
Overall
ranking
8 10
23
2 9
4 7
17
13
1 7
20
12
10
other hand, has a useful search
mechanism that works well.
Two companies deserve special
mention. Merck & Co (ranked 13)
divides its press release archive into
corporate and financial sections – a
valuable help that can speed searches
by journalists. Roche (ranked 16)
posts key elements of its photo
library on its site, in a closed area for
which registration is quite reasonably
required. This registration can
perform the useful function in
identifying interested journalists.
28% of companies provide a clear
and accessible contact for quotes and
further information – as mentioned
above – and the same number offer
a dedicated phone line for media
inquiries. Companies providing this
basic but important to media service
include Novartis (ranked 12), Abbott
(ranked 17), and Teva (ranked 28).
The quality of press contact
information varies widely. GlaxoSmith-
Kline (ranked 24) offers a single
phone number, apparently for world-
wide, English language use. DuPont
(ranked 43) provides direct email
links under a number of headings
including the media, but no names or
numbers are provided. Just 24% of
companies offer journalists the
© Urch Publishing
Dimension 7
score
10
7
7
7
7
6
facility of emailing their press queries
– but not always to a named
individual. This may discourage
usage, as the perception among
journalists is frequently that
questions sent to unnamed parties
will not be answered in a timely
manner. Nevertheless, companies
that provide the service include Akzo
Nobel (ranked 20), Boehringer
Ingelheim (ranked 23 overall and 2 in
the Media dimension), and Merck
KGaA (ranked 1 overall and 7 in the
Media dimension).
Disappointingly, we looked for an
FAQ (frequently asked questions)
facility designed specifically around
the needs of the media, and only
found one – Boehringer Ingelheim
(ranked 23) – and for evidence of
direct links to public relations
agencies. This was only evident in
only two cases: Eli Lilly (ranked 8
overall and 1 in the Media dimension),
and Daiichi (ranked 18). In the latter
case, however, it appears that this is
intended for financial PR only, as it
appears under the Investor heading.
The Pharma e-50 29

DIMENSION 8: PROACTIVITY
Proactivity remains a
distant dream for most
Despite all of the complex issues
surrounding the Internet and its use
for competitive advantage, there are
really only two options regarding
how a company Web site should
function. Either it acts essentially as
an electronic notice board or it can be
interactive, providing genuine two-way
communication between a company
and its various stakeholders – some
in the public arena, some closed to all
but pre-registered and qualified use.
Consider the advantages of
opening up your Web site. It allows
companies access to information
from people who contact them –
subject to applicable data protection
laws – and can provide a valuable
database, with lists of interested
individuals and organisations from
among the investor community, the
medical profession and its ancillaries,
the media, and other audiences.
If you know who is visiting your
Web site, and you have the ability to
'talk' to them by email, you can find
out what they want and tailor your
site accordingly. This is a critical part
of doing business today, in that it
helps to build loyalty among all
audiences. Interactivity also can be
used as a means of gathering and
disseminating information. With a
contact database, individuals can be
Dimension 8: Proactivity
Number of questions
Max. possible score
Average score across all companies
27
30 The Pharma e-50
invited to share their experiences –
and even occasional or one-time
visitors to the site can be encouraged
to input material. Information
gathered in this manner could
provide, for example, insight into
national/regional attitudes among
medical professionals and the extent
and character of educational needs.
Proactivity carries some
disadvantages, too – but these are
principally questions of time and
cost. Channel integration should
actually improve business
performance once it is set up and
running. By its very nature, the Web
lends itself to the effective integration
of communications channels. A
university student looking for a job,
for instance, should be able to find as
much information on a Web site as he
or she would gain from a job fair. Nor
should it be necessary for a journalist
or an investor to write or phone to
establish where a company stands on
the question of testing on animals.
Ultimately, a well-designed and
comprehensive Web presence can
help enhance a company’s image.
Users will draw their own con-
clusions about what sort of company
it is, and what it would be like to work
with, work for or invest in, from what
they see and experience.
7 In order to test the responsiveness
8 of the surveyed firms, our researchers
0.94 ( 11.8%)
© Urch Publishing
Our eighth and final scoring
dimension, Proactivity, was intended
to explore the degree to which pharma-
ceutical companies exploit the
technology’s extraordinary potential
for interactivity, to a degree unimagin-
able even ten years ago. The results
are far from encouraging. Based on a
ranking of average scores across all
companies reviewed, Proactivity came
a distant last with a score of just 11.8%.
A meagre 8% of companies
volunteer a clear listing of email
addresses for named individuals or
departments. Some offer an immediate
online Web mail facility, but that is
not very helpful if you want to note
an address and make contact later.
Some, including Schering-Plough
(ranked 41), give the appearance of
not wanting to be contacted. Others,
where we could not find a suitable
email address for queries, include
GlaxoSmithKline (ranked 24), Eli
Lilly (ranked 8), Abbott (ranked 17),
Tap (ranked 46), and Takeda
(ranked 11). It is possible, however,
that such facilities may exist within
closed areas of these Web sites.
Some 12% of firms post contact
telephone numbers for some areas of
their business on their sites. Schering
AG (ranked 25) is typical of these,
with numbers for appropriate people
appearing in the Investor area, as
well as for company spokesmen
addressing environmental issues.
sent messages to all those companies
A N A LY S I S

featuring either an email address or
an online Web mail form for general
or media inquiries. Our question was
not complex – we asked: ‘where can I
find information on drugs in
development, on your site?’
This message was sent to 64% of
companies (all those possible), and
exactly half, 32%, responded, with two-
thirds of these answering within one
working day and the remainder within
two working days. Among those who
did reply within the one working day
were Novo Nordisk (ranked 2),
Novartis (ranked 12), Johnson &
Johnson (ranked 22), Serono
(ranked 31), and Alza (ranked 36).
The best response came from
Forest Labs (ranked 44), when a
named individual replied, suggesting
a time and day when she could be
reached on a certain phone number,
by which time she would establish all
details that might be helpful. At the
other end of the scale is Boehringer
Ingelheim (ranked 23), which offers
specific named contacts for media
and recruitment areas only, and
includes an online email request
form. A reply came back extremely
rapidly, stating that the email could
not be delivered as the person to
Proactivity: The top ten
Company
Novo Nordisk
Merck KGaA
Akzo Nobel
Teva
Merck & Co
Novartis
Amgen
Roche
Serono
Schering AG
A N A LY S I S
whom it was addressed was not
listed. Schering AG (ranked 25)
replied, redirecting the query to the
postal address of an agency in the
UK. Sanofi-Synthelabo (ranked 34)
was just one of several where we
could not send an email, but in this
was not due to any lack of contact
address or link. Rather it was because
system problems caused the computer
to freeze every time Outlook Express
was opened.
Automated systems of the type
which reply virtually immediately
proved rare, available at only 8% of
companies, including Akzo Nobel
(ranked 20), Allergan (ranked 49) and
Amgen (ranked 15).Yet none of these
companies actually followed up later
with any further contact.
DuPont (ranked 43) provides an
example of those which offer direct
email links under a variety of
headings such as disease areas,
products and careers while others,
including Servier (ranked 48), only
offer contacts under the Career and
Investment areas.
Only 10% of companies have an
effective ‘help’ button, or similar
device, to contact the company for
information or guidance. These
Overall
ranking
2 4
1 4
20
28
13
12
15
16
31
25
© Urch Publishing
include Chugai (ranked 6), which
provides an easily completed form
which can be emailed to the
appropriate area, and Amgen
(ranked 15), which is the only firm
that appears to actively seek input.
On almost every page, Amgen asks
for feedback on all aspects of its
performance. Allergan (ranked 49)
suffers the problem of ‘freezing’
noted elsewhere.
Just 8% of surveyed firms offer
some products for sale over the
Internet. Many are unable to do so
because of various trading restrictions
and regulations. Sales are limited to
over-the-counter products and some
at-cost literature.
All in all, the results indicate that
most firms have a long way to go
before they can make effective use of
the Web's highly proactive nature.
Simple failings that can be easily
overcome include the listing of
contact details for individuals or
departments, the provision of
assistance for those who need help,
promptly replying to queries, and the
introduction of a basic e-commerce
service which can help cover some
Web costs.
Dimension 8
score
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
The Pharma e-50 31

Simon Seljeflot
There are at least 100,000 health-
related sites on the Internet. There
are 17,000 health-related portals. The
market is over saturated and, one by
one, these sites are collapsing or
buying one another out. At the same
time, the pharmaceutical industry
stands on the periphery of this
frenetic activity, a stable industry
reluctant to enter the unpredictable
flux. Is there a way for the two to
come together to mutual benefit?
The pharmaceutical/healthcare
portal developed hand in hand with
the rise of the informed consumer.
The Internet has provided an easy
route to a wealth of knowledge, and
with a little knowledge comes the
desire for more. The Internet is now a
major force in health information
provision: a survey by Cyber Dialogue
last year found that 40.9 million – 54%
of the online population of America
– use the Internet for healthcare.
In response health sites
proliferated and portals emerged. The
trouble is there were too many of
them and their business models just
did not work. So today, portals are
swallowing one another up and
entering into contra-deals to further
extend the range of functions that
they offer and stave off the collapse
that has affected so many sites. In
April last year www.CVS.com and
www.WebMD.com entered into a
partnership where CVS became
WebMD’s sole medication provider in
return for WebMD becoming CVS’s
27
32 The Pharma e-50
Too many
portals
Simon Seljeflot believes big pharma companies
can turn the current shakeout among Web
portals to their advantage
sole information provider. www.
HealthZone.com bought www. Health-
Shop.com. www.drKoop.com acquired
www.drDrew.com. www. MotherNature
.com liquidated. And these are just a
handful of the industry’s biggest
names, representing only the tip of
the iceberg.
One of the major problems
consumer-facing pharmaceutical
and healthcare portals must address
is that of trust. Of the 100,000 or
more medical or health sites on the
Internet, it is estimated that only
about half of these are reviewed
by doctors. The Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) is waging an
ongoing war against sites making
bogus claims and selling fake
treatments, identifying at least 400
health sites making dubious claims
in 1999. According to the FTC, 67%
of online health information seekers
found it difficult trying to decide
what online information they could
consider trustworthy.
Big pharma companies are in a
perfect position to capitalise on this
sense of circumspection surrounding
online health information. The
opportunity is there to enter the
market and create consumer portals
of their own or add their stamp of
approval to established sites. Pharma
companies have widely recognised
and respected brand names that are
regarded with more confidence than
the Internet sites and portals that
seem to have appeared overnight.
© Urch Publishing
This regard might be warranted;
while web sites have only voluntary
codes of conduct, pharma companies
are at least subject to stringent
regulation about the claims that they
can make for their products.
The current situation should give
big pharma just the opportunity it
needs to finally make a committed
move into developing an online
presence. Portals are vulnerable to
takeover and crying out for sponsor-
ship, and have problems of trust with
the consumer. Big pharma has the
money to invest, and can offer trusted,
reliable brand names. For big pharma,
the opportunities that portals offer are
direct consumer contact, the ability to
establish relationships with the
consumer, and a wealth and density
of market information that is only
available online.
Pharma companies can refocus
their marketing to primary care
physicians by offering free fast
Internet connection and IT tuition,
and by offering online conferences
and symposia. Using the Internet
offers a way to give doctors access to
the information they want without
making them feel that it is being
forced upon them, as they often do
with rep visits.
Online marketing via health
portals can also enable pharma
companies to penetrate the doctor-
patient relationship. If patients can
store their records on www.thedaily
apple.com, then this site will most
TO O M A N Y P O R TA L S
 © Urch Publishing

Sales of the leading US prescription-only medicines in 1999

Drug Indication Company 1999 sales % change
($bn) (1998–1999)
1 Prilosec heartburn, ulcer AstraZeneca $4.62 10
2 Lipitor cholesterol Pfizer $4.15 38
3 Prevacid heartburn, ulcer TAP Pharma $3.15 33
4 Zocor cholesterol Merck $2.79 22
5 Prozac depression Eli Lilly $2.67 4
6 Celebrex arthritis Pharmacia/Pfizer $2.15 52
7 Epogen anaemia Amgen $2.06 12
8 Zoloft depression Pfizer $1.98 14
9 Zyprexa schizophrenia Eli Lilly $1.91 28
10 Procrit anaemia J&J $1.86 48
11 Paxil depression GlaxoSmithKline $1.84 22
12 Glucophage diabetes Bristol-Myers $1.80 37
13 Norvasc hypertension Pfizer $1.71 16
14 Claritin allergy Schering-Plough $1.69 10
15 Vioxx arthritis Merck $1.52 308

likely be accessed by both the patient
and the doctor. The site simply needs
to be set up so that different
advertisements or promotions or
medical information is displayed
depending on the user logged on for
a particular session. Even more
significantly, the portal becomes a
common point of reference for the
doctor and for the patient – the
portal becomes an integral part of
the doctor-patient relationship.
This level of intervention will
become more complex, as in the
announcement of a collaboration
between Infinet and Swedish pharma
company Ferring to help monitor
bedwetting patients. Patients using
DDAVP could register with the site
and use an online calendar to record
taking their medication and their
bedwetting. Ultimately this kind of
scheme would improve compliance,
provide valuable electronic feedback,
and build a long-term relationship
between the pharmaceutical
company and the patient.
By targeting the patient and
promoting the idea of the informed
consumer, pharma companies
sponsoring or advertising on portals
can have a dramatic effect on drug
choice and compliance. A survey by
Cyber Dialogue found that online
direct to consumer marketing out-
performed all other DTC (Direct
To Consumer) advertising media.
Measuring patient requests for drug
information from their doctor, the
survey found that the cost per
request was $14 for online drug
advertisements, as against $197 for
print and $220 for television. Else-
where, a survey has found that 80%
of doctors would prescribe the drug
the patient requested. If the Internet
can make marketing cheaper and
more effective, then in turn pharma
companies will be able to continue to
develop drugs that would tradition-
ally have been dropped in the
development process.
If pharma companies can target
their advertising and sponsorship
accurately enough, then this
promotional material will be seen by
individuals who are directly interested
in what they are seeing, and
motivated enough to pursue it (or
at least to click through to more
information from the pharma
company). And by monitoring click-
throughs and traffic, pharmaceutical
companies gain instant feedback on
how promotions are performing, and
even on how specific (though
possibly anonymous) individuals
travel through their and other sites.
The online opportunities for big
pharma are clear. Portals are crying
out for funding and consumers are
desperate for information they can
really believe in. Big pharma can
supply both. In doing so they can
further extend their marque, establish
direct relationships with their
consumers, and access the kind of
detailed marketing research that
wasn’t even dreamt of just a few
years ago.
Author’s note: Simon Seljeflot is assistant
editor at Pharmaceutical Business News,
published by Informa Global Pharma-
ceuticals and Healthcare. He can be
reached at simon.seljeflot@informa.com

TO O M A N Y P O R TA L S The Pharma e-50 33


Richard Backhouse
If you’re about to embrace customer
relationship management, take a
few minutes to consider why you’re
ready to commit funds, energy and
reputations to what will be a major
project. The adage ‘if it ain’t broke,
don’t fix it’ may hold true in many
cases, but if your competitors are
‘doing’ CRM, why aren’t you?
Your organisation’s products and
services may be so good you don’t
need to worry – but who dare claim
that? Perhaps now’s just the time to
enhance what you do, rather than
react to a crisis when it’s too late.
But be warned – CRM is part of
company culture and can’t really
exist departmentally. It’s potentially
time consuming and costly, and
many people will become involved.
Complex markets and
relationships
Until recently, relationships with
customers and publics were
essentially linear and the
organisation would take the lead.
27
34 The Pharma e-50
The truth
about CRM
A cautionary tale by Richard Backhouse, senior
consultant at New Information Paradigms
That’s all changing – and quickly.
With the widespread use of email
and the growth in consumer
knowledge and awareness,
organisations are being forced
to review their position in the
knowledge arena. What were once
linear relationships have now
formed a web and you are deluded
if you think you might prevent any
of the parties communicating with
one another and forming opinions.
Many expert patients are more
knowledgeable than their GPs
about their condition and GPs are
embracing the changes. They’re
learning to work with informed
patients for the general good rather
than imposing a hollow superiority.
The markets themselves are
becoming more complex. With
increasingly more EU and national
government legislation to comply
with, pricing and licensing issues
may be taken out of your immediate
control. Good communications with
regulatory bodies are vital. And
© Urch Publishing
whilst niche areas support targeted
marketing and provide rich pickings,
the costs are subsequently higher.
More channels, more segments
and more products proliferate
opportunities but mean that you
cannot treat all customers the same.
Then we have rival company sales
forces working together and the
ultimate consummation – the
merger. Few industries have
undergone such a consolidation in
such a short period of time. The
physical effort required to rationalise
the back-end systems for invoicing,
stock control etc. must be carefully
managed and not deflect resources
from the on-going customer
relationship. In many cases, the new
organisation will be a new entity –
maybe a new name – and will be
struggling to make an impact in the
first few weeks of inception. With
only one chance to make a first
impression, it’s imperative you get
it right first time.
THE TRUTH ABOUT CRM
 © Urch Publishing

Self service solutions
Since information itself has no mass,
no time and no place, the delivery
paradigm is unlike that of physical
items like a parcel. It’s critical that
information be stored centrally just
once, but then made available
instantly on the device of choice,
independent of time or place. PCs,
laptops, personal digital assistants
(PDAs) and WAP phones can all
receive web pages and email, so that
should be borne in mind when you
consider the infrastructure
requirements. Supply of quality
information can go a long way to
defining the (virtual) relationships
you have with your customers.
The Internet makes it possible to
provide a ‘self-service’ solution
through a web-enabled front-office
system. Furthermore, the level of
service provided – including content
and timeliness – can be determined
by your users’ changing needs. What
does this mean in practice? As
organisations have so many diverse
‘customers’ with differing require-
ments and interests, it makes sense
to provide them with what they
want at any given time. Initially,
access will be provided based on
membership of a group, but of
course groups comprise many
individuals and that is where you
should focus. Offering a personal-
ised, secure access based upon trust
have a different take on it. Marketing
can create targeted messages; sales
people can plan calls; call centres
staff can be aware of caller history.
Impediments to success
CRM sounds such a great idea –
shouldn’t everyone be doing it?
What can possibly go wrong? Like
so many things, it’s easy to do
badly. Even if done well, a CRM
implementation will require you to
resolve a number of potential
conflicts, like – how much will this
cost? CEOs want a low cost delivery;
shareholders want to maximise
returns, whilst customers want a
personalised and responsive service.
The question of sourcing
immediately arises – is it better to
use organisation know-how and
build in-house or should we get the
so-called experts in?
Whichever way these decisions
go, operational conflicts may soon
emerge. Is it better to start right
away and learn from experience or
should we customise the system
before it goes live? The enthusiasm
to make the system as good as
possible must be tempered with the
need to avoid scope-creep and get
the project finished within time and
budget.
A CRM system can be sparsely
populated when launched, but it
clearly makes more sense to have
some historical content, which itself
willing to ‘give up’ what they may
perceive as their own personal
knowledge can be challenging.
Building trust essential
Building customer trust is so
important and you need to provide
an openness for users that is secure
for the organisation. People will
expect to see a feedback form and if
they send you comments, they can
reasonably expect an acknowledge-
ment and even some action. Ignore
unsolicited feedback at your peril.
Personally, I think all websites
should have a manned telephone
hotline and make the number very
obvious. Never lose sight of the fact
that you’re ultimately dealing with
people and not machines.
Furthermore, if your CRM system
has a public access area you will be
forming relationships with people
you may know nothing about – yet.
Some of these people could go on to
become customers or even future
employees. It makes sense to
present your organisation favourably
and to provide a positive long-
lasting image of it.
Author’s note: Richard Backhouse is head
of marketing to the pharmaceuticals
industry for New Information Paradigms
Ltd, the software development house.
He specialises in the human/computer

and previous usage can create a rich
environment for individuals that is
driven by organic demand.
A CRM system need not be
limited to external customers and
partners. Many of your own staff will
be able to share information, but
interface and can be reached at
poses a few problems. There will be
richardb@nipltd.com
many potential sources of inform-
ation – much of which will not have
an owner and which may exist in a
proprietary computer system or on
paper. Evaluating content and
identifying process owners who are

THE TRUTH ABOUT CRM The Pharma e-50 35

 © Urch Publishing

E-Marketing on proprietary
websites and beyond
Aleksandar Ruzicic
Despite much recent investment in
e-health, the big pharma producers
haven’t yet fully embraced the Internet
for sales and marketing, write Aleksandar
Ruzicic and John Haughey of Almasan Ltd,
the dedicated e-marketing consultancy.
Here’s how they can.
John Haughey

Recent market research from Jupiter
Communication found that in the US,
69% of pharmaceutical marketing
executives spend 3% or less of their
DTP (Direct To Profession) marketing
budgets online. More surprising is
that 56% of respondents plan to
increase their online DTP budgets by
25% or less, while 58% will increase
their meager online DTC (Direct To
Consumer) spending by 25% or less.
However, pharmaceutical companies
adopting Jupiter’s advice and
experimenting with new marketing
approaches achieve promising
results. According to Cyber Dialogue,
the Internet generates prescriptions
through DTC at a fraction of the cost
of more traditional channels such as
print and television. The cost of one
prescription generated online in the
US is only $54, compared to $152 by
television, and $318 by print. Further-
more, e-marketing suppliers claim far
superior access to physicians through
the online channel.
Iphysiciannet, a company
providing broadband video detailing,
claims a fourfold increase in the
duration of physician details to more
than 8 minutes. Physician Interactive
(www.physinter active.com) reports
that 70% of participating physicians
choose to be e-detailed outside
traditional office hours. A recent
study on a Physician Interactive
programme for a top pharmaceutical
company, conducted by HyGro
Group, documented increases in ROI
of 480% and brand share growth
from 3% to over 9% among partici-
pating physicians. It is important
to note that this programme was
completed for a large, mature brand
that had been on the market for six
years and was nearing the end of its
patent life.
Marketers looking to identify
winning e-marketing initiatives
should consider carefully increasing
evidence that both physicians and
consumers prefer unbiased,
independent information online. A
recent research by the Boston
Consulting Group shows that
European consumers prefer groups of
university clinics, medical
associations, and university clinics
over pharmaceutical companies and
commercial providers; only 25% trust
and use information provided by the
latter compared to 70-80% for the
former.
When undertaking any e-marketing
initiative, marketers have to make
difficult choices across three specific
axes, choices we will explore further
in this article. For optimal effect,
however, they also have to combine
the individual initiatives into an
overall online marketing programme.
The three choices relate to the
objectives, the approach, and the
external support for the e-marketing
initiatives.
1. What is the objective of the
interaction, and which target
audience should be addressed?
We suggest the traditional
patient/physician flow analysis to
answer this question (see figure).
However, due to the new interactive
opportunities of the Internet, the
appropriate actions might differ from
the offline marketing and sales
approach.

27
36 The Pharma e-50 E - M A R K E T I N G O N P R O P R I E TA R Y W E B S I T E S
 © Urch Publishing

Figure: Proposed decision-making appr0ach segment the potential partners into asthma, diabetes, and
Three difficult choices by e-marketing initiative
different categories, and discuss their cardiovascular
ability to help in implementing • Active communities for
Per initiative
Interaction
objective
Ownership
and branding
Relevant
suppliers
successful e-marketing initiatives. peer support
approach

Pharmaceutical companies are

What is the objective and which
Combination of initiatives into online marketing program
using patient and relative
audience is targeted?
communities to help each other
2. How should the target A typical patient/physician flow
with compliance (www.habitrol
audience be addressed? analysis is used to identify the best
.com) or the difficulties of care
We propose a decision-making marketing approach for the (offline)
giving (www.mswatch.com)
framework to decide on the marketing mix. We suggest using
ownership and branding for the the same approach for e-marketing • Physician to physician interactions
initiative. Companies will have to initiatives, while leveraging the Marketers have started to
identify the best approach to reach additional opportunities presented by leverage opinion leaders online
their target audience and achieve the interactive nature of the Internet. to influence large groups of
their objectives as identified above, See the table for some Internet- interested specialists and GPs
and resist the temptation to control based examples by patient/physician similar to symposia and
all aspects directly. flow. congresses. They are using
The Internet offers fundamentally among others MedPanel’s
3. Who can help to make new, interactive approaches that Medcast services (www.Med
the initiative a success? are not available through other Panel.com), and Conceptis’
Many companies have been formed channels. Examples include Cybersessions on its cardiology
to help marketers in their patient/physician interactions, active Web site www.theheart.org.
undertakings. In addition to their communities, and physician-
services, they already offer scarce How should the target
physician interactions, such as:
implementation know-how. We will audience be addressed?
• Patient/physician interactions The two main questions to be
Figure: Patient/physician flow analysis for compliance and disease answered are the ownership and
Target
management branding for the initiative. Marketers
Symptom/risk/disease awareness of patients Patient

Medical consultation by patients Patient Leading disease management have to trade off between
Disease diagnosis Physician
companies, such as www.life independence and company control.
Treatment selection Physician
chart.com, exploit mobile They also have to choose between a
Prescription filled Patient

Patient compliance Patient input/output devices for product and a disease branded site.
fundamentally new approaches Regarding ownership, pharma-
How can the major leakage be addressed?
to chronic conditions, such as ceutical companies have to resist the

Flow Product/disease Sponsor/supplier

Symptom, risk, and STI-571 (orphan drug for Independent patient groups
disease awareness leukemia by Novartis) through viral marketing
Patient consultation Claritin (using asthma Schering-Plough
Web site)
Disease diagnosis Prozac (using the Zung Eli Lilly
tool for depression)
Treatment selection e-detailing and online Phase Various, marketers use
IV trials for physicians many e-marketing suppliers
Prescription filled e-prescriptions through Various, e.g., Merck Medco/
wireless devices Express Scripts/Advance PCS
Patient compliance Meridia (‘Point of Change’ Knoll /BASF Pharma
Weight Management Program)

E - M A R K E T I N G O N P R O P R I E TA R Y W E B S I T E S The Pharma e-50 37


temptation to control initiatives that
might jeopardise their targeted
objectives. If they want superior
access to the targeted audience,
they need to co-operate with
independent associations or
commercial portals. These
organisations and companies have
Figure: Branding and infrastructure ownership
• Consumer communities for
Disease
severe conditions, e.g.,
www.mswatch.com
branded • Pharmacoeconomic and
experience trials, e.g.,
www.glaukom.de
• Consumer sites for lifestyle • Online market research
Product diseases, e.g., Viagra
branded • Patient compliance, e.g.,
www.Habitrol.com
Company site
established relationships with the
audience, and give access on a
sponsorship, unrestricted grant, or
fee-for-service basis.
Depending on regulations and
objectives, marketers will have to
decide about branding initiatives
with a disease (soft branding), or a
product (hard branding). While
product branding offers the best
opportunity for competitive
marketing initiatives, disease
branding is usually required to
leverage independent and unbiased
associations/portals. Many companies
are undertaking initiatives to promote
a set of products in the same thera-
peutic area, or targeting a specific
physician segment on behalf of the
overall company. These initiatives
in general neglect the patient and
physician requirement for indepen-
dent and unbiased information, as
evidenced by the research. It will be
difficult for pharmaceutical
companies to compete with
associations, portals, and hospitals
for a holistic relationship, and still
remain focused on selling proprietary
products.
The attempt of pharmaceutical
marketers to capture consumer/
patient and/or physician relationships
exclusively, can best be compared
27
38 The Pharma e-50
with the impact the Internet had in
another industry – financial services.
Internet discount brokers have forced
banks to make third party mutual
funds available to their clients,
giving-up the proprietary product
portfolio in favour of capturing the
customer relationship.
However, pharmaceutical
companies do have a highly valuable
• Support of patient/
physician associations asset, ongoing access to physicians
• Unrestricted educational
grants for physician CME
• Content sponsorships for through their large sales forces.
consumer/physician sites
Pfizer has decided to use its 8,000
• e-Detailing to physician
• Online experience trials
US sales representatives to promote
Independent site a Web-based practice management
service. The company has announced
a partnership with IBM and Microsoft
to set-up a separate venture that
will challenge already established
companies such as WebMD. The
new entity will be independent,
and will not be used to promote
Pfizer’s products or advertise to
physicians.
Who can help to make the
initiatives a success?
We have segmented the supplier
market into six segments, given
their distinct value proposition to
pharmaceutical marketers. Key for a
successful relationship is defining a
clear marketing strategy before
contacting vendors, since they all
Figure: e-Launch Internet marketing program
Pre-launch conditioning Opinion
Leaders
International marketing Specialists
GPs
Local marketing
Patient initiatives Patients
offer solutions to reach very specific
objectives. Without a clear strategy,
marketers risk their implementations
being driven by the technology
solutions of their vendors, rather
than the strategic needs of their
products. The six segments are
described below:
E - M A R K E T I N G O N P R O P R I E TA R Y W E B S I T E S
© Urch Publishing
1. Online authorisation services
of medical professionals
These companies provide outsourced
verification services to medical
professionals. Especially in Europe,
companies have to adopt these
services due to stringent regulations
for DTC. Most companies provide
only country-specific, or language-
specific solutions, such as www.
medipass.fr for French sites, or www.
doccheck.com for German sites. There
are currently very few truly global
solutions, such as Physician
Verification Services (www.verifies
.com).
2. Online market research
solutions companies
These companies provide full
solutions, and are usually offered by
general market research experts,
covering quantitative research with
both physicians and consumers/
patients. Global services are offered
for example by www.pslgroup.com.
www.medpanel.com offers a unique
qualitative research with academic
physicians and opinion leaders on a
global basis, enabling clients to save
significant time and cost while
obtaining high-quality research
results.
3. Reach/traffic providers
Traditionally, portals provide the bulk
of the reach and traffic. They can be
segmented by target audience (GPs,
Facilitated
influence specialists, consumers/patients),
Facilitated viral geographic reach, and covered topics
marketing
(general, specific diseases). In the
US, the offer is large and highly
fragmented. Marketers also need to
consider the financial stability of
their potential partners when closing
a deal. Europe has mostly general
portals for physicians and consumers,
with several successful national sites,
such as www.doctors.net.uk.
Additionally there are a very few
pan-European players such as

www.planetmedica.com and www.
netdoktor.com. Europe currently lacks
specific deep and narrow portals,
those that do exist being provided by
associations and healthcare providers
on a non-profit basis.
4. Content providers
Most portals, publishers, and e-care
companies provide all the necessary
content for Internet initiatives.
Marketers need to carefully select the
content they require since content
deals can become costly, while not
offering substantial differentiation to
sites competing for the attention of
the target audience. Since content is
also generally available, marketers
should be taking notice of who else
the information is being syndicated
to, and explore exclusivity clauses if
they wish to capture a strategic
advantage.
5. E-care companies
Most prominent are disease manage-
ment companies, offering their
services online and, more recently,
through wireless devices such as the
globally operating www.lifechart.com.
Companies not requiring a one-stop
shop, and looking for a technology
platform should explore companies
such as www.softwatch.com, who
provide eHealthcare Relationship
Management solutions on a global
basis.
6. E-Marketing/sales solutions
The market offer can be segmented
into technology platforms and one-
stop-shop e-marketing services to
physicians. While most vendors have
very specific approaches, they tend to
offer their services only in the US.
Exceptions include www.siebel.com,
E - M A R K E T I N G O N P R O P R I E TA R Y W E B S I T E S
the leader in multi-channel CRM
solutions, and its partner
www.synavant.com. www.iphysician
net.com provides a unique broadband
physician video facility in the US,
which many of the leading
pharmaceutical companies have
adopted. Suppliers such as www.my
drugrep.com, www.medsite.com,
www.physinteractive.com, and
more traditional Contract Sales
Organisations, such as Innovex and
Ventiv Health, provide one-stop-
shop services.
Combining initiatives into an
Internet marketing programme
To be more than a reaction to the
Internet, individual company
initiatives to influence the
patient/physician flow need to be
combined into an overall Internet
marketing programme. These
programmes will depend on the life
cycle stage of the product, and differ
for pre-launch, launch, Rx-to-OTC,
and patent expiry. Even as they
change over time, all programmes
need a strategic consistency that
unites content, presentation and
interaction in a compelling fashion to
achieve marketing objectives.
Let’s focus on the most important
step, the launch of a pharmaceutical
product. Similar to offline launch
programmes, where companies have
adopted sophisticated approaches to
target physicians and patients, they
will have to adopt an orchestrated
and carefully timed e-launch
programme. It might start with pre-
launch activities targeted at opinion
leaders, and conditioning them to
the new product. These opinion
leaders are subsequently used to
influence the relevant early adopters,
© Urch Publishing
who are interested to follow opinion
leader discussions. The majority of
prescribing physicians, specialists
and/or general practitioners, are
targeted through suppliers of e-
marketing and sales services, such as
e-detailing, and online Phase IV
trials. Marketers can also exploit the
Internet to facilitate viral marketing
among those physicians. Depending
on the product and local regulation,
marketers will target patients with
general awareness programmes,
product branding initiatives, and
compliance/disease management
initiatives.
Over time, pharmaceutical
companies will have to complement
existing marketing processes to
include Internet activities. The global
and local product teams responsible
will be tasked to use the appropriate
planning processes, which will be
developed through experience with
initial pilot approaches. Advanced
pharmaceutical companies will
not use the Internet solely as a
marketing channel, but will also
adopt online workflow and
collaboration tools. They will capture
the institutional learning across
individual products more effectively,
and avoid loss of critical know-how
due to loss of key personnel.
Authors’ note: Aleksandar Ruzicic and John
Haughey are managing director and
operations director, respectively, with
Almasan, the dedicated e-marketing
consultancy. Previously employed as
consultants with McKinsey and PA
Consulting, they combine many years of
healthcare sector experience and can be
reached at aleksandar.ruzicic@almasan.com
and john.haughey@almasan.com.
The Pharma e-50 39
 © Urch Publishing

Promoting prescription
pharmaceuticals in the
European Union
Recent regulatory and legal changes in the
United States mean that direct advertising
and marketing of prescription drugs has led
to as much as a 25% increase in sales.
Mark Lubbock and Richard Cumbley,
pharmaceutical and e-commerce specialists
at lawyers Ashurst Morris Crisp, explain.
Mark Lubbock Richard Cumbley

Direct to consumer advertising, or
DTC, has been a controversial topic
in the pharmaceutical industry for
more than 20 years. Although the
experiences of the countries that
permit such advertising for
DTC tv advertising in August 1997.
In 1999, the most recent year for
which figures are available, pharma-
ceutical companies spent $1.8 billion
on DTC advertising in the US, up
38.5% on 1998. 1998’s figures were
Notwithstanding that commercial
success, regulators remain con-
cerned at the public health
implications of DTC advertising.
The contents of DTC advertising are
heavily regulated in the US. In

prescription only medicines (POMs) themselves 50% higher than 1997. summary, the four key elements the

has been mixed, there are signs that The pharmaceutical industry spent FDA controls are the requirements

the prohibition on DTC advertising 33 times as much on DTC of honesty, balance, disclosure (of a

on POMs in the EU, and particularly advertising in 1999 as it did in 1991. summary of the product’s package

the UK, is softening. Thus far, Clearly, from these figures, the insert), and limitation of claims (to

however, only two countries in the industry considers DTC advertising those for which the product is

world permit DTC advertising in its worthwhile, and prescription figures authorised by the FDA). Those four

broadest form – the US and New seem to bear this out. In 1999, elements give the FDA a very wide

Zealand. The US case obviously has
far greater potential impact on UK
and European trade, and only this is
examined here.
The US Situation
DTC advertising of POMs was
largely prohibited in the US until
September 1985, and did not
become a significant success until
changes in FDA guidelines enabled
Doctors wrote 34.2% more pre-
scriptions than in 1998 for the 25
heaviest DTC promoted products.
They wrote 5.1% more for all other
prescription products than 1998. The
US National Institute for Health
Care Management considers that
consumer advertising could be
responsible for 10–25% of the recent
increase in prescription drug
spending.
subjective discretion to regulate the
content of DTC advertising – and
both the FDA and the drugs
companies have complained recently
about the results. The FDA has
stated that more than 50% of
adverts it sees require corrective
measures; while drugs companies
have complained that they are
subject to a regime that is all but
impossible to comply with.

27
40 The Pharma e-50 P R O M OT I N G P R E S C R I P T I O N P H A R M A C E U T I C A L S I N T H E E U

Perhaps the most high profile
casualty has been Pharmacia’s arthritis
treatment, Celebrex. Deemed the
most successful drug launch ever by
Med Ad News in 1999, with sales of
US$1.47bn in its first year, Pharmacia
spent over $80m marketing the
product in 2000. Its television
adverts, which pictured arthritis
patients engaged in various activities
including rowing and riding, were
pulled after the FDA found that they
suggested that Celebrex is more
effective (in treating arthritis) than
had been demonstrated by
substantial evidence.
There is no doubt that the DTC
environment in the US remains
volatile in trying to balance
commercial success with possible
health concerns. The FDA has
further committed to review its
guidelines once again in two years
time, in the light of further
experience.
The regulatory environment
within the EU
In contrast to New Zealand and the
USA, the regulatory environment in
Europe is easily summarised. Direct
to consumer advertising of POMs is
prohibited, by virtue of a European
Union directive implemented in
each member state. Having said
that, there is no comprehensive
definition of what constitutes
direct to consumer advertising. In
particular, there is no comprehensive
discussion of how advertising is
distinct from the provision of health
information.
P R O M OT I N G P R E S C R I P T I O N P H A R M A C E U T I C A L S I N T H E E U
That lack of distinction is
exacerbated because the directive
referred to above is then implement-
ed in EU member states by local
legislation, and enforced by local
bodies. In assessing therefore what
constitutes direct to consumer
advertising, interpretations may vary
from member state to state. In the
UK, the Prescription Medicines
Code Of Practice Authority (PMCPA)
monitors the advertising, marketing
and sale of prescription medicines.
In Germany, advertising and
marketing of medicinal products is
controlled by the health authority of
each federal state. Member states
also have varying laws on methods
of advertising; for instance in
Belgium and France a licence is
required for television or radio
advertising of medicinal products.
Because of these disparities in
implementation and enforcement, it
is possible for different practices to
emerge in different member states.
It is principally as a result of this
that recent developments described
below have been able to develop.
Pushing back the boundaries
While there is still no immediate
prospect of a removal of the DTC
advertising ban imposed by the EU,
it is clear that the boundaries of
what constitutes DTC advertising
are being pushed back. In doing so,
it appears that an area of permitted
DTC marketing is emerging –
notwithstanding the EU directive.
There are five significant areas in
which this growth can be seen; all of
© Urch Publishing
which share a common theme – the
ease of information flow provided by
the Internet.
Leakage across the Atlantic
One of the most striking examples
of this new DTC advertising is the
leakage of material across the
Atlantic from the USA. The
Internet is no respecter of national
boundaries, and therefore citizens of
EU countries find it easy to access
patient information and advertising
web sites aimed at US patients.
That is not to say that US sites
are beyond the reach of EU based
regulators where they clearly
contravene the EU’s DTC advertising
ban. The UK’s MCA has indicated
that sites based outside the UK will
be subject to UK regulations where
they are targeted at UK residents.
Certainly, delivery of information or
products to UK addresses would
constitute such targeting, but some
US sites have gone further to protect
themselves. Some e-pharmacies in
the United States remind their
visitors by way of an opening page,
that only residents of certain
countries may access the web site.
Use of disclaimers and clear terms
and conditions may also assist in
limiting legal liability for such
leakage.
Leakage from the professionals
The EU’s DTC advertising ban does
not, of course, extend to advertising
to healthcare professionals.
Advertising in professional journals
is commonplace; until recently the
The Pharma e-50 41

general public has been largely
prevented from seeing this
advertising by virtue of close control
of subscription lists – notwithstanding
the access to such journals afforded
by public libraries.
The launch of on-line editions of
these journals has made them far
easier to access for the general public.
The advertising in journals such as
the eBMJ and the Lancet Interactive
remains, however, targeted at the
healthcare profession.
Initial concern at such advertising
was highlighted in the PMCPA’s
review of banner advertising on the
eBMJ site for Janssen Cilag’s
Risperdal product. As a result of that
case, a PMCPA Appeal Board
working party was established. That
recommended that:
• full advertisements in electronic
journals must include prescribing
information
• abbreviated advertisements on
healthcare web sites are
forbidden
• any banner advertising must
provide a clear, direct link to
prescribing information
• non-proprietary names and active
ingredients must accompany
banner product references
• if the banner is over 10 per cent
of the screen size it may have three
links, two if under 10 per cent
• there is no need to state specifically
on a site intended for healthcare
professionals that the advertise-
ment is intended for healthcare
professionals.
27
42 The Pharma e-50
Furthermore, it is clear from
another recent case, involving a
product web site targeted only at
professionals, that healthcare
companies need to take specific
steps in order to ensure that non
professionals do not have access to
the web site at all. Bristol-Myers
Squibb had set up a product site for
one of its products, Zerit, an anti-
HIV therapy, and had attempted to
restrict access to the site to health-
care professionals by requiring
people who accessed the site to
declare whether they were consumers
or healthcare professionals. If the
enquirer claimed to be a healthcare
professional, they were then
presented with a self declaration
form, which, if left blank on
submission, still allowed access to
detailed technical information and
advertising for Zerit. The PMCPA
ruled that, as a password was not
required, the site was an open access
site and therefore breached the
prohibition on advertising POMs
to the public. The fact that Bristol-
Myers Squibb had only advertised
the site to healthcare professionals
was not an adequate restriction.
The online shop window
Although online sales of POMs
remain difficult, it is now taking
place in Europe, notably Holland
and the UK, but in order to enable
such sales a web site typically needs
to place some kind of statement on
its site indicating that the POM is
available.
P R O M OT I N G P R E S C R I P T I O N P H A R M A C E U T I C A L S I N T H E E U
© Urch Publishing
In order to circumvent concerns
that such statements might be
advertising, the Pharmaceutical
Committee of the EU has produced
some draft guidance on advertising
of medicinal products over the
Internet which states that the
Summary of Product Characteristics,
the package leaflet and public
assessment reports of a medical
product would not be considered as
advertising provided there was no
hidden inducement to promote the
prescription, supply, sale or
consumption of the product.
As a result it appears that such
information can be placed on a web
site without constituting advertising.
Public health campaigns
The previous three categories may
be characterised as inadvertent DTC
advertising. While they have done
much to change perceptions about
DTC advertising, it is a series of high
profile industry sponsored public
health campaigns that has done
most to push back the boundaries.
These information campaigns have
tended to cover disease or symptom
areas frequently considered
embarrassing – such as male
infertility (Pfizer), prostate problems
(Yamanouchi) or female incontin-
ence (Pharmacia & Upjohn). They
have used leaflets in local
newspapers, posters in toilets,
newspaper adverts and even
television and radio advertising.
Perhaps the most striking example
of such problem health campaigns
however has been one to use the

Internet to promote exchange of
information between disease
sufferers. The web site for MS
sufferers, MS-Gateway.com,
sponsored by Schering, provides
extensive information about MS for
sufferers and their families, inform-
ation about support groups and an
opportunity to exchange information
with other sufferers. Schering has a
major product in this field – Betaferon.
The site therefore provides limited
information regarding Betaferon,
along the lines to some extent of
that described above regarding
online shop windows. The large
number of information portals in
the infertility field (see www.repromed
.net for example), run by hospitals
offering infertility treatment clearly
serve a similar purpose.
Clearly such promotion treads a
fine line with pure advertising. The
recent report in March of this year
of the Pharmaceutical Industry Com-
petitiveness Task Force (PICTF),
recognising that, has set out a pro-
gramme to establish clear guidelines
for the industry in carrying out such
campaigns – particularly where there
is only one treatment available in
such a disease area. The key planks
of that review are:
• The MCA to agree guidelines with
the ABPI on disease awareness
programmes by 30 June 2001
• The industry will provide to the
MCA a working definition of the
difference between advertising
P R O M OT I N G P R E S C R I P T I O N P H A R M A C E U T I C A L S I N T H E E U
and information provision by
June 30, 2001 with a view to the
MCA finalising such distinctions
by June 2002
• The ABPI will provide examples
of company generated inform-
ation it would like to placed on
company web sites by 30 June
2001, and a model for company
web sites by 31 September 2001
• The MCA will then seek
clarification from Europe of
what such sites may contain
by June 2002.
The future environment
The current European experience is
increasingly similar to that of the US
prior to the lifting of the DTC
advertising prohibition. The US
‘help’ advertising of the 1970s, which
did almost everything but mention
the name of the product, resulted in
patients asking doctors for products
whose name they did not know; the
FDA ultimately took the view that
adding the product name to those
adverts would do more good than
harm to public health.
It is clear from the PICTF report
that, at least in the UK, sponsored
patient information provision is to
be encouraged by means of clear
guidance from the MCA. This
together with the web site guide-
lines to be agreed between the
MCA and ABPI offer a significant
opportunity for the healthcare sector
to raise awareness of disease areas
© Urch Publishing
and encourage direct patient
relationships. When taken with
the guidelines issued by the EU
Pharmaceutical Committee, it is
clear that there is a large amount of
information that can now be given
to patients about POMs on the
Internet.
That full DTC advertising will
follow in Europe, notwithstanding
the leakage phenomena outlined
above, is neither imminent or even
inevitable – particularly given
the reviews planned of current
regulation in both the US and New
Zealand. Large portions of the
professional health care community
remain vigorously opposed to DTC
advertising in all its forms. As
recently as December 2000, the
Standing Committee of European
Doctors and the Pharmaceutical
Group of the European Union
issued a strongly worded statement
opposing DTC advertising as
detrimental to efforts to safeguard
public health.
Nevertheless, the Enterprise DG
in Brussels has commenced a public
consultation process with a view to
reporting on the current climate in
the EU. A new European regulatory
environment is slowly taking shape.
Authors’ note: Mark Lubbock and
Richard Cumbley are pharmaceutical
and e-commerce specialists at the
international law firm of Ashurst Morris
Crisp. They can be reached at
mark.lubbock@ ashursts.com
The Pharma e-50 43
 © Urch Publishing

The Pharma e-50:

Company US$ Dl D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 Tie Total
rank

1 Merck KGaA 27 18 16 8 9 4 7 7 4 0 73.0

2 Novo Nordisk 29 16 18 10 0 0 9 9 4 0 66.0

3 Bristol-Myers Squibb 5 15 14 10 5 7 10 3 1 0 65.0

4 Bayer AG 16 18 15 8 0 6 10 7 0 0 64.0

5 Yamanouchi 24 16 14 5 9 6 8 4 0 0.5 62.5

6 Chugai 36 17 13 3 9 3 12 4 1 0 62.0

7 AstraZeneca 4 17 13 11 0 3 12 3 2 0 61.0

8 Eli Lilly 12 15 10 9 4 4 8 10 0 0 60.0

9 Tanabe 34 16 12 4 9 4 9 5 0 0 59.0

10 Pharmacia 8 14 11 9 0 6 11 6 1 0 58.0

11 Takeda 13 14 11 8 9 4 8 2 0 0 56.0

12 Novartis 10 13 12 2 7 6 6 7 2 0.5 55.5

13 Merck & Co 3 15 10 9 4 0 8 7 2 0 55.0

14 Kyowa Hakku 23 15 13 3 9 3 9 0 2 0.5 54.5

15 Amgen 20 14 13 7 0 3 9 6 2 0 54.0

16 Roche (inc Genentech) 9 14 7 7 9 3 5 6 2 0 53.0

17 Abbott (inc. Knoll) 15 16 8 7 4 0 9 7 1 0 52.0

18 Daiichi 25 14 11 2 9 2 9 4 0 0.5 51.5

19 Sankyo 19 15 8 5 9 4 6 4 0 0 51.0

20 Akzo Nobel 32 13 14 6 0 0 7 7 3 0 50.0

21 Taisho 30 11 10 7 9 0 9 3 0 0 49.0

22 Johnson & Johnson 6 17 11 7 0 2 9 0 2 0 48.0

23 Boehringer Ingelheim 18 17 12 5 0 0 3 10 0 0.5 47.5

24 GlaxoSmithKline 1 16 9 9 0 0 6 6 1 0 47.0

25 Schering AG 28 17 12 4 0 0 7 4 2 0.5 46.5

26 Banyu 38 10 7 7 9 3 6 4 0 0 46.0

27
44 The Pharma e-50 T H E P H A R M A E - 5 0 : C O M PA R I S O N BY D I M E N S I O N
 © Urch Publishing

Comparison by Dimension
Company US$ Dl D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 Tie Total
rank

27 Welfide 35 11 12 0 9 0 8 5 0 0.5 45.5

28 Teva 37 13 8 8 0 0 7 6 3 0 45.0

29 American Home Prods 11 15 8 6 0 0 9 5 1 0 44.0

30 Aventis 7 14 14 0 3 3 5 2 0 0.5 41.5

31 Serono 42 17 5 4 0 3 4 6 2 0 41.0

32 Eisai 33 14 10 3 0 0 7 5 1 0.5 40.5

33 Pfizer 2 13 8 9 0 0 7 2 1 0 40.0

34 Sanofi-Synthelabo 17 17 6 3 0 0 7 6 0 0 39.0

35 Ono 45 12 3 3 9 0 7 4 0 0 38.0

36 Alza 48 17 8 2 0 0 6 4 0 0.5 37.5

37 Sumitomo Pharm. 39 16 7 5 0 0 5 4 0 0 37.0

38 Fujisawa 26 14 11 3 0 0 3 4 0 0.5 35.5

39 Elan 47 16 8 4 0 0 5 2 0 0 35.0

40 Shionogi 22 13 11 2 0 0 6 2 0 0.5 34.5

41 Schering-Plough 14 14 5 6 0 0 5 4 0 0 34.0

42 UCB 49 16 8 1 0 0 3 5 0 0.5 33.5

43 DuPont 31 14 8 5 0 0 1 4 1 0 33.0

44 Forest Labs 44 12 6 6 0 0 3 2 2 0 31.0

45 Solvay 41 16 3 7 0 0 1 3 0 0 30.0

46 TAP Holdings 21 11 4 7 0 0 1 5 1 0 29.0

47 Nycomed Pharma 43 14 5 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 24.0

48 Servier 50 13 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 23.0

49 Allergan 46 9 5 2 2 2 0 0 1 0.5 21.5

50 Dainippon 40 12 0 1 0 0 6 2 0 0 21.0

726 474 262 146 81 321 217 47

T H E P H A R M A E - 5 0 : C O M PA R I S O N BY D I M E N S I O N The Pharma e-50 45


Study model and design
The 2001 Pharma e-50 report was conducted on the basis of the E-Audits
methodology, specially adapted for an examination of the international
pharmaceuticals industry
The overall goal was to examine and
measure the online performance and
behaviour of the world’s leading
pharmaceutical companies – and
then rank them in terms of overall
excellence. The methodology itself is
comprised of eight different scoring
dimensions:
Web site access & design
A functional Web site should be easy
to find, accessible, and appropriately
navigable. This section examined
each company’s Web presence
testing whether the site places
unnecessary barriers in the way of
those with the need or the desire to
enter, so that they may do so with a
minimum of bother. Once inside
the site, we looked for appropriate
signposting, consistency of design,
timeliness, and a general feeling of
user-friendly construction.
Core content
Certain elements were considered to
be critical ingredients of a successful
site. We looked for the presence –
and quality – of basic company
information including full contact
27
46 The Pharma e-50
details, a comprehensive listing of
products and services, references to
corporate ownership, and links to
various regulatory bodies. Given
current consumer concerns, we also
looked for explicit material outlining
each company’s ethical and
environmental operating policies
and practice.
Product and clinical
information/R&D
Here we looked primarily for com-
prehensive, plain-language
descriptions of products and treat-
ments, along with an explanation
of side effects and any form of
comparative data relating to older
or competing drugs. as well as the
presence of any independent
endorsements. We also looked for
information on companies’ research
pipelines and for links to universities
or other research organisations.
The medical community
In this dimension we investigated
the degree to which companies are
using their Web sites to educate,
inform or otherwise communicate
© Urch Publishing
with the medical community. Here
we looked for dedicated contacts,
downloadable targeted information,
‘user group’ access, and other
elements that would make the site
not only a source of information
but also a useful working tool for
practicing doctors and other medical
professionals. We accepted – even
welcomed – a closed area, password
protected, for access by accredited
professionals only.
Patients, users and carers
Similarly, we investigated the degree
to which companies are using their
site to educate, inform or communi-
cate with those who might be
termed their end users. Recognising
this audience’s growing knowledge
and assertiveness, we looked for
much of the same information
we sought under the previous
dimension, but added to that
dedicated help-lines, condition-
specific patient forums (which could
be password protected), and other
mechanisms accepting – and
adapted to - the particular needs
of patients.
ST U DY M O D E L A N D D E S I G N
 © Urch Publishing

Investors
Here we asked how surveyed firms
are using the Web to benefit
investors, whether individual or
institutional. We did not think it
enough merely to offer an annual
report download, but were instead
expecting specific information to be
available immediately. This included
the current share price, recent
headline financials and trend data,
independent comment or links,
details on equity ownership, and
evidence that stakeholders could
interact with the company; for
example, to receive reports or share
offers by email.
The media
This audience section considered
how well companies are using their
sites to communicate with the
media – requiring more than a basic
press release archive. We examined
the ability to register for email
delivery of press material, the
availability of dedicated 24-hour
media phone lines and email
addresses with real names as
contacts, and the existence of a clear
FAQ (frequently asked questions)
page providing background
information.
Proactivity
This final dimension examined the
possibility of site visitors establishing
direct, two-way contact with the
company via its Web site, along with
the quality – and speed – of any
response to emailed queries. We
looked for the presence of means to
aid contact, from names and contact
details of appropriate individuals,
to ‘contact me’ buttons for those
experiencing difficulty for in navigating
the site. We also checked for any
evidence of e-commerce.
The companies participating
in the Pharma e-50 survey were
chosen from investment bank global
rankings of the top 50 pharma-
ceutical companies as measured by
annual revenues. Figures were based
on estimated sales for calendar year
2000 and fiscal year 2000–2001.
The ongoing spate of mergers and
acquisitions posed some specific
difficulties, given the integration
of both companies and Web sites.
Wherever possible, we based
findings on the online behaviour
of the merged entity.
Nearly all companies are multi-
nationals, many with Web sites in
more than one language. We
assessed the site, as far as possible,
in the language of its main national
market. Specially trained
researchers, native or fluent in
English, Dutch, French, German,
and Japanese, undertook the
research. All Web site audits were
checked by at least one other
researcher in an attempt to reveal
any consistent bias. All research was
undertaken between January and
May 2001.

The spirit of the exercise

The overall goal of the research was not to scour every available avenue in search of elusive
information, but rather to investigate its ready availability. Signposting, directions, and easy
access, were as important as the data itself. Our researchers were advised to review each site
from the perspective of a bona-fide seeker of information, with multiple avenues to explore
– and that if data could not be traced within a reasonable timescale, it should be treated as
being absent.

ST U DY M O D E L A N D D E S I G N The Pharma e-50 47

About Urch Publishing

Urch Publishing is a UK-based business information provider dedicated to providing

pharmaceutical industry executives the information they need in their jobs. All
publications and information products are carefully researched by experts and written in
a clear and succinct style.

Busy executives can rely on Urch Publishing to make their life easier as Urch has
committed itself to three simple principles:

1 Quality – Urch prides itself on always offering quality products, directly relevant to
your business. All publications are based on expert analysis, informed opinion and
both primary and secondary research.
2 Understanding – Urch realises that all executives are time-poor and under
considerable pressure. All publications are all designed to save time by identifying
the information you need in your job.
3 Customer Service – Although most Urch customers are from large organisations,
we realise that it is individuals who make up these companies and choose to buy
our products. We strive to offer our customers the best possible service by ensuring
that our customer service staff fulfil your order as quickly as possible and can
answer any questions you may have.

See the website www.urchpublishing.com for more details about the company and its
publications.