The case deals with Gilead Sciences, a bio-pharmaceutical company with several FDA approved HIV/AIDS drugs. In 2006, the company launched the Gilead Access Program to enhance access to HIV/AIDS drugs in developing countries. In India, which also happened to be the largest producer of generic drugs, Gilead signed a voluntary licensing agreement for its drug, Viread, with 13 companies. By 2011, Mylan (previously known as Matrix Laboratories), one of the 13 Indian companies, had emerged as the leading supplier for Viread, with two-thirds of the global market. In order to accelerate its market reach, Gilead wanted to expand the scope of the agreement with four major Indian companies, including Mylan. Gregg Alton, Executive Vice President for Corporate and Medical Affairs, had to decide how he would convince his partners to come on board and how to execute the agreement.
The case traces the journey of an Indian pharmaceutical firm, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, which had traditionally focused on generic drugs, into the area of discovery research. After India entered the global product patent system with the signing of the WTO TRIPs agreement in 1994, a number of Indian companies sought to move into discovery research. Glenmark invested heavily in developing its capabilities to undertake high-risk pharmaceutical research, and within three years developed several promising molecules. The company signed out-licensing agreements for the molecules with international companies two agreements with U.S.-based Eli Lilly and Company and one each with U.S.-based Forest Laboratories and Germany-based Merck KGaA. The case takes students back to 2008, one of the most critical periods in the company's evolution. Three of Glenmark's four drug development projects have failed and the fourth is showing signs of failure. The company's stock price has plummeted and the management is under pressure from financial analysts to drop discovery research and focus on what they had always done best generics. The case puts participants in the chair of Glenmark's CEO Glenn Saldanha, who must, amid the building pressure and resource constraints on the company, develop a future plan of action for its R&D. To be or not to be the innovation company? That is the question before Saldanha and the class.
The case traces the journey of an Indian pharmaceutical firm, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, which had traditionally focused on generic drugs, into the area of discovery research. After India entered the global product patent system with the signing of the WTO TRIPs agreement in 1994, a number of Indian companies sought to move into discovery research. Glenmark invested heavily in developing its capabilities to undertake high-risk pharmaceutical research, and within three years, developed several promising molecules. The company signed out-licensing agreements for the molecules with international companies two agreements with U.S.-based Eli Lilly and Company and one each with U.S.-based Forest Laboratories and Germany-based Merck KGaA. The case takes students back to 2008, one of the most critical periods in the company's evolution. Three of Glenmark's four drug development projects have failed and the fourth is showing signs of failure. The company's stock price has plummeted and the management is under pressure from financial analysts to drop discovery research and focus on what they had always done best generics. The case puts participants in the chair of Glenmark's CEO Glenn Saldanha, who must, amid the building pressure and resource constraints on the company, develop a future plan of action for its R&D. To be or not to be the innovation company? That is the question before Saldanha, and the class.
This case deals with the innovation challenges of a medium sized firm (under $1 billion) in an emerging economy (India), particularly the challenges of product development and commercialization. The management has to decide how to proceed with a promising novel formula for oral insulin - a promising therapeutic area both in terms of financial returns as well as social impact. The company had spent several years of R&D in getting the drug through Phase I and Phase II trials, and was entering the most critical stage, Phase III. The case is set in 2009, a period that was punctuated with a lot of economic uncertainty. Students are asked to decide if Biocon should go ahead with Phase III, and if so, whether it should be done locally or globally and with a partner or alone. The case also deals with transitioning research and development strategies in emerging markets, wherein firms that have traditionally focused on 'imitation' (or generic drugs) are moving to high risk drug discovery.
This case deals with the commercialization challenges that a premier research institute in an emerging economy faces despite conducting cutting-edge research. The case is set in 2009 in Hyderabad, India, soon after the appointment of CCMB’s new director, Dr. Mohan Rao. Rao has to decide how to proceed with incentivizing the scientists to find potential applications for their research when most scientists are merely interested in doing basic research and when, at the same time, the government is increasing its emphasis on the use of public science for societal good. The case also deals with the role of commercialization and technology transfer, publishing versus patenting, basic versus translation sciences, and incentives.
This case deals with the innovation challenges of a medium-sized firm (under $1 billion) in an emerging economy (India), particularly the challenges of product development and commercialization. The management has to decide how to proceed with a promising novel formula for oral insulin — promising both in terms of financial returns as well as social impact. The company has spent several years of research and development in getting the drug through Phase I and Phase II trials, and is entering the most critical stage, Phase III. The case is set in 2009, a period that was punctuated with a lot of economic uncertainty. Students are asked to decide if Biocon should go ahead with Phase III and, if so, whether it should be done locally or globally and with a partner or alone. The case also deals with transitioning research and development strategies in emerging markets, wherein firms that have traditionally focused on “imitation” (or generic drugs) are moving to high-risk drug discovery.