DOES BRANDING
WORK IN
PHARMACEUTICAL
MARKETING?
EXECUTIVE
Whether it’s Rx, OTC, or Rx destined for OTC makes a difference, according to this
roundup of advice from eight leading pharmaceutical marketers.
Julie A. Laitin is president of
Julie A. Laitin Enterprises,
Inc. She can be reached at
360 Lexington Avenue, New
York, NY 10017. Tel. 212 286-
2424; fax: 212 286-2345.
S U M M A R Y:
by Julie Laitin
B
randing. It’s the buzzword of advertising.
The be-all and end-all of consumer mar-
keting. The force that drives the sales
that keeps Coke, Nike, and BMW at the
top of their markets.
But what is branding? Does it work? More to
the point, can it work in the complex and close-
ly regulated world of medical marketing?
As a member of the Program Committee for
the Healthcare Marketing & Communications
(HMC) Council, and chairman of a program
on branding, I set out to learn the answers to
those questions. I approached eight leading
healthcare marketers and asked them for their
views, looking for a broad perspective on what
branding is about, whether it makes sense in
pharmaceutical marketing, and, if so, how to
do it most effectively.
Of particular interest was exploring some of the
limitations that are implicit in medical marketing
— limitations imposed by patent expiration, FDA
guidelines and the duality of the doctor-patient
audience — and asked the participants whether
the benefits of branding can justify the cost and
increase the return on investment.
There was broad agreement on what consti-
tutes successful branding in the healthcare arena.
Tylenol and Claritin were cited over and over as
the most effective brands, in OTC and ethical
products, respectively. But there was a wide diver-
gence of opinion on other issues. Here are some of
the most interesting comments that were given.
 Matt Giegerich, President
of The Quantum Group,
defines branding as the com-
bination of thoughts and
feelings evoked in the con-
sumer when confronted by a
product name or imagery.
“Many marketers overlook the emotion-
al component in healthcare branding,” he
says. “That’s ironic, because healthcare is a
very emotional issue. The key element is
insight. Unless you understand how the
patient feels about a category, and then
show how your product can respond to
that feeling, the execution is jargon.”
Insight, he adds, is based on research,
not unsupported hunches. “Most adver-
tising agencies work backward. They pre-
sent a range of concepts to consumers and
ask for feedback. Consumers rate the con-
cepts and choose one. Then the agency
refines it into a final campaign. I call this
deductive methodology.
“Inductive methodology, on the other
hand, consists of starting out without any
preconceived notions. You find out what
consumers think and want and construct
the brand promise from there.”
Another common mistake made by
marketers is to believe that branding is the
result of consistency alone. “People think
that by using the same colors, taglines and
images, you achieve branding. But that’s
nonsense. You can be consistent — but
consistently meaningless.”
With the right insight, Giegerich says,
you can brand anything. Even water.
“Look at Evian and Poland Spring. Both
brands have become bywords for purity,
yet they are essentially the same thing as
tap water, which is free.”
Painkillers provide the same analogy.
“Tylenol has consistently delivered on the
insight that, when it comes to OTC medica-
tions, there is no more powerful motivator
than trust. That’s why the brand continues to
dominate the category, despite competition
from other drugs with similar performance.”
With pharmaceuticals, the problem is
more complex, he explains. “As marketers,
we expect to highlight the good and mini-
mize the bad. But full disclosure means
that we can’t masquerade the down side of
drug therapy.” If the negative features are
too grim, then the solution, he suggests,
might be to brand the product and market
it exclusively to the professional.
“Branding and DTC are not the same
thing,” Giegerich points out. “Branding is
a universal idea, not bound by category or
audience. Branding is essential if a product
is to stand out among the competition and
survive generic substitution.”
“Loyalty to a brand
can outweigh price,
forcing even the
biggest managed
care organizations
to change their
formulary preferences.
It can also drive the
sale of a two-dollar
bottle of water.”
-Matt Giegerich, President,
The Quantum Group
The issue of timing, he says, is short-
sighted. “You can’t judge the future by the
past. We’re seeing that the threat of man-
aged care and generic-driven formularies
hasn’t materialized fully. That’s because
consumers have power. Patients will switch
their healthcare plans if they are unable to
get the branded medications they want.”
Branding, Giegerich concludes, is a
powerful tool that has implications far
beyond DTC. “Loyalty to a brand can
outweigh price, forcing even the biggest
managed care organizations to change their
formulary preferences. It can also drive the
sale of a two-dollar bottle of water.”
Mark Severini, president
and CEO of Gramercy
Group, disagrees. He sees
branding, particularly for
prescription drugs, as an
elusive goal.
“A solid brand is like
money in the bank,” he says. “But building
a brand, like any good savings plan, requires
an investment, both in time and money.
Both are equally important, but with phar-
maceutical products, you don’t have the
luxury of time. You have an average of seven
years to market from FDA approval to the
loss of patent protection. That’s not enough
time to build brand equity.”
Severini points to Coke as the paradigm
of brands. “Coke has been around for over
a hundred years and has spent billions in
advertising and promotion dollars to get
where it is. Pharmaceuticals don’t have the
life expectancy of true brands.” That is why
when Coke has a product recall or a misstep
like the one with Classic Coke, the whole
franchise doesn’t fall apart. Equity that has
been “saved up” over the years pays off.
Branding — or more specifically, brand-
building — can work, he says, both for
OTC and for ethical drugs that are des-
tined to go OTC. These tend to be the
broad-based products — allergy remedies,
such as Claritin, for example — where
timing is not an issue. In fact, companies
planning to take their products OTC will
often invest in branding, knowing that the
payoff will continue when the drug is avail-
able without prescription.
For drugs that are not likely to go OTC,
there are other problems, according to
Severini. The most daunting of these is the
absence of packaging and its bedfellow,
shelf space. On average, half the total
impressions for all brands are generated at
retail through packaging.
With Rx products, there are no visuals,
such a color or shape. The product itself
lacks organoleptics, or an appeal to the sens-
es, such as taste, touch, or smell. These sen-
sory appeals are essential to developing a
brand because they help build a brand per-
sonality, he adds, pointing out that the
sense of touch was critical in building
Charmin’s brand character.
“Most Rx pharmaceuticals are dispensed
in the same bottles that the pharmacy pro-
vides,” he says. “They all look the same —
no logo, no packaging — and generally
they have no taste or smell. There’s nothing
to distinguish one from another. Just as
important, they are never displayed, but
are “hidden” from the consumer behind
the pharmacist’s register. Pharmaceutical
marketers may incorporate branding ele-
ments and techniques in their advertising,
but they cannot actually build a brand.
Those who are trying to do so are kidding
themselves and don’t truly understand the
meaning of brand.”
For those pharmaceutical products
where branding doesn’t pay — and that
includes most prescription drugs —
Severini recommends a number of market-
ing techniques that are designed to create a
dialogue with the patient. The goal is not
just to elicit trial, but to develop patient
compliance, resulting in a significant ROI
on consumer spending. These techniques
— which appeal to the patient’s lifestyle —
include Direct Response TV (DRTV),
which is really direct marketing; newslet-
ters; videos; value-added coupons; certifi-
cates for doctors’ visits and tie-ins with
health-oriented organizations.
Another approach is the Direct Response
TV ad that doesn’t mention the name of the
product. Instead, the spot indicates the dis-
ease or condition to be treated and the alter-
natives that the consumer should know
about. Most important, it initiates a dia-
logue with the consumer which, if done
correctly, strengthens over time.
“… Pharmaceutical
marketers may
incorporate branding
elements and
techniques in their
advertising, but they
cannot actually build
a brand. Those who
are trying to do
so are kidding
themselves and
don’t truly
understand the
meaning of brand.”
-Mark Severini, President/CEO,
Gramercy Group
Although this approach has been aban-
doned by many marketers in favor of the
branded DTC, it still allows for creativity,
according to Severini. With few FDA require-
ments to meet, and no nasty side effects to
broadcast, the marketer can show the emotion
of bonding, add music or imagery and use
copy that is free of medical jargon.
“DTC is a contradiction in terms,” he
sums up. “It is aimed at the consumer, but
it isn’t direct. The consumer is often con-
fused or turned off by the very nature of
the communication. And the patient can’t
make the buying decision anyway.”
Branding transcends DTC,
according to Rich Levy,
President of Adair-Greene
Healthcare Communications.
He sees it as an essential
technique for reaching
both the doctor, through
professional advertising, and the patient,
through DTC.
“A brand is more than a great product,”
Levy explains. “It’s an identity. Branding a
product allows you to establish a value
beyond the product’s utility. It creates a per-
ception of quality in the mind of the buyer,
regardless of whether that person is writing
the prescription or making the purchase.”
The goal of branding, he adds, is to
build equity, and thus wealth, for the man-
ufacturer. “The brand is a product’s per-
sonality. Unlike a product ad, it can’t be
copied. It’s singular and unique.”
How marketers actually
develop branding strate-
gies is an issue for Steve
Barrett, Executive Vice
President and COO of
Consumer Healthworks,
a division of Harrison
and Star. According to Barrett, “We often
do a poor job of defining what we want our
brand to be. Too often, clients provide a
litany of one-word adjectives such as per-
sonable, caring, responsible, or protective.”
The problem with that approach, Barrett
says, is that a list of superlatives provides
neither substance nor focus. Nor does it
offer direction to the creative team.
If establishing a clear definition of the
brand’s character is the critical first step,
committing resources to making that char-
acter distinct and universally recognized is
another key requirement. “Most people
think that great brands are mostly a func-
tion of brilliant creative,” he says. “But if
you don’t put major media dollars behind
it — forget about it. As a brand, you need
to be relevant, believable, and perceptive
about your sufferers’ needs. If your message
can’t be heard above the cacophony of talk-
ing lizards and someone saying ‘McDonalds’
— nothing will stick.”
Beyond spending sufficiently to realize a
brand’s vision, Barrett cites honesty as
another prerequisite for successful brand-
“I call it the personification of a product. A brand is what sticks to the roof of your
customer’s brain. It’s memorable. And it’s what differentiates a product in the marketplace …
Branding is an exercise in perception. … Positioning says the product is square. Branding
says the same thing with flair.”
-John J. Nosta, VP/Creative Director, Catalyst Communications
ing. “As marketers, we must manage expec-
tations and deliver what we promise. A
brand should never claim to be something
it’s not. Nothing undermines the impact of
well-produced TV commercial more than
promising benefits you can’t deliver.
The hallmark of successful brands, says
Barrett, is self-restraint. On the other hand,
if you’re Prilosec and can stand behind the
promise of 24-hour relief, by all means, tell
everyone about it.” If branding is struggling
to find its way in DTC, Barrett feels,
it’s virtually ignored on the professional
side. “Marketers assume that consumers
need understanding, but doctors don’t.
Physicians have emotional hot buttons, too.
Marketers who use substantial doses of
empathy and understanding — much as
they provide in consumer marketing — can
enhance their effectiveness to the profes-
sional audience,” he says.
Positioning and branding, he adds, are
two words often used interchangeably. Yet
they’re radically different. “Positioning is all
about perception — how you want con-
sumers to think about your target. It’s an
unemotional, arms-length exercise.
“Branding, on the other hand, is all
about relationships — the role the brand
plays in the consumer’s life. It’s character-
ized by a hard-to-articulate but unmistak-
able bond. It goes beyond benefits and pro-
tects your franchise and reinforces loyalty.”
Barrett feels that the success of Claritin,
for example, owes much to its crystal clear
imagery, conveying the perception of a
haze being lifted. Both doctors and patients
perceive the product as more than an aller-
gy remedy. Other brands, claiming more
strength, have tried, and failed, to knock
Claritin off its pedestal.
Barrett sees perception as a way to extend
a product, creating a persona for it.
Glucophage, a diabetic drug, spends far less
on advertising than Claritin. But the ads,
which are targeted to a narrow audience,
focus on lifestyle changes that the patient
must make. The perception conveyed is
that Glucophage is a pill, plus everything
else that helps you to lead a healthy life.
For Michael Lazur, Executive
Vice President and Chief
Creative Officer Worldwide
at Torre Lazur Healthcare
Group, branding is more
than perception.
“We create the percep-
tion,” he says. “But this perception must be
backed up by the product’s real, demonstra-
ble attributes. The doctor will be influenced
by his or her perception of the factors that
lead to prescribing or recommending a
drug: safety, efficacy and cost. That’s when
branding will make the difference.”
Lazur cites Advil’s triumph over Nuprin,
a case where two similar painkillers were
introduced at the same time, and the cur-
rent success of Claritin.
“Successful branding to patients may
also keep a product from being over-
whelmed by generics,” Lazur notes. “When
the patient asks for a particular drug, it’s
hard for the doctor to say ‘no’. Especially if
the product is as good as others and has a
recognizable brand name.”
John J. Nosta, Vice President
and Creative Director at
Catalyst Communications,
has a simple definition
of branding:
“I call it the personifica-
tion of a product. A brand
is what sticks to the roof of your customer’s
brain. It’s memorable. And it’s what differen-
tiates a product in the marketplace.”
As Nosta sees it, while marketers seek
out market share, brand-makers seek out
mind share. The brand ‘signature,’ or per-
sonality, is based on sound strategic think-
ing. Positioning — deciding the way you
want the audience to perceive your product
— is the first step in successful branding.
“Branding is an exercise in perception,” he
says. “Positioning says the product is square.
Branding says the same thing with flair.”
Nosta believes that branding applies
equally well to prescription and OTC
drugs, but with different strategies. “If it’s
an ethical drug, time is a problem. You
have to develop the brand very fast, before
the patent runs out. Or be very creative.”
The campaign for Fludara, a cancer
drug to treat chronic leukemia, is a good
example of creative professional branding.
The word remission — as in “Remission
Accomplished,” a pun on a commonly
used phrase — is used in all the medical
journal ads. The play on words reminds
doctors that in cancer, remission is the
prime benefit.
Another approach for pharmaceuticals
is corporate branding — allowing the
company name to drive the brand. This
provides an ethical component, which in
turn inspires trust on the part of both the
physician and the consumer. “Johnson &
Johnson is the best example of this,” Nosta
explains. “Because of their handling of the
Tylenol tampering case, they have a power-
ful positive image, creating instant equity
for any product they launch.”
As J&J demonstrates, even on the OTC
side, corporate branding can play a role.
“Tylenol is one of the most powerfully
branded product of all time,” he says.
“People don’t say acetaminophen, they say
Tylenol. It’s become a household word.”
Branding also builds patient and physi-
cian advocacy, which can be a powerful
weapon in fighting managed care formula-
ries. “Every MCO wants to keep its cus-
tomers happy,” says Nosta.
Rita Sweeney, President
and COO, Dorland,
Sweeney, Jones, believes
that branding means mak-
ing a promise and keeping
it. According to Sweeney,
the way to solve the prob-
lem of a short life expectancy with pharma-
ceuticals is to think “afterlife” instead.
“The pharmaceutical marketer must plan
ahead for when the patent runs out. Ask
questions,” she advises. “Will we switch to
OTC? If not, can we create line extensions?
Or produce our own branded generic?”
Lederle, Teva, and Geneva (a division of
Novartis/Ciba) have all done very well with
branded generics, she says, beating out
“true” generics by being first on the market
or least expensive. This helps to keep the
brand alive — and the profits rolling in.
Sweeney
recommends three
elements in
branding:
communicate
the product’s
differentiation
from its rivals;
price it
competitively and
— for physicians —
emphasize its
performance with
“tons of data.”
Sweeney recommends three elements in
branding: communicate the product’s dif-
ferentiation from its rivals; price it compet-
itively and — for physicians — emphasize
its performance with “tons of data.”
Branding is key when marketing to physi-
cians, she feels. “If and when you go DTC,
you want to launch the product into a friend-
ly environment. By going to the gatekeeper
first, you build brand recognition, brand
preference, and ultimately brand insistence.”
Like Nosta, Sweeney believes that with
prescription drugs, corporate branding is
often more effective than product brand-
ing. “You can’t come out with a product
that isn’t strongly branded. But if the
market is small and the budget limited, a
campaign that builds on the company’s
heritage may be the best way to go.”
Branding, she concludes, is an investment.
To generate a return on that investment takes
money, a commitment to doing it right and
strong brand managers who are willing to
stick with the product beyond its launch.
A strong believer in brand-
ing for all healthcare prod-
ucts, Michael Guarini,
Managing Director of
Ogilvy Healthcare, sees
OTC branding as easier
than its Rx counterpart,
partly because there are fewer restrictions.
“The relative lack of restrictions means that
in OTC, the message can be fairly consis-
tent for the M.D. and the consumer,” he
explains. With prescription drugs, however,
the messages are different.
For example, a drug for chemotherapy-
induced anemia is a case in point. For medical
journals, the ads include full information on
its application, the patient population it’s
intended for, its mode of action, side effects
and other issues. For consumer ads, the
message is much simpler. The key issue,
according to Guarini, is to make the patient
comfortable enough to initiate a dialogue
with a physician. The patient may be reluc-
tant to take a relatively common problem —
such as fatigue — to an oncologist or a sur-
geon. A visit to the primary care physician,
armed with a brand name, is less threatening.
Guarini’s point, which echoes those of most
of his colleagues in this article, is that branding
and DTC are not the same. And while DTC
remains a questionable technique in healthcare
marketing, branding plays an increasingly
important role in the promotion of ethical
and OTC products. ■