Winning Brand Team Management: Best Practices in Leadership, Work Practices, Structure and Performance Management

Published by: Best Practices, LLC

Published: Jan. 1, 2009

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

RESEARCH APPROACH

Participating Companies

Figure 1.1 - Participating Companies

Table 1.2 - Titles of Study Participants

Report Structure and Organization

Key Findings

LEADERSHIP AND DECISION MAKING

Leadership

Figure 1.2 - Brand Team Leaders: Function

Figure 2.2 - Brand Team Leaders: Level

Figure 2.3 - Brand Team Leaders: Function

Figure 2.4 - Brand Team Reporting Head: Level

Figure 2.5 - Escalating or Resolving Conflict

Decision Making

Figure 2.6 - Decision Tools

Figure 2.7 - Brand Team Accountability and Responsibility

Figure 2.8 - Brand Team Accountability and Responsibility Cont.

Figure 2.9 - Communicating Brand Team Decisions

CRITICAL WORK PRACTICES & TEAM BEHAVIORS

Critical Work Practices

Team Behaviors

Figure 3.1 - Brand Team Meeting Agendas

Figure 3.2 - Meeting Frequency: Core Teams

Figure 3.3 - Team Charter: Template Elements

Figure 3.4 - Communicating Brand Team Decisions

TEAM STRUCTURE, ORGANIZATION AND

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

Team Structure and Organization

Figure 4.1 - Functional Representation: Core or Extended

Functional Representation

Figure 4.2 - Establish Service on Core or Extended Brand Team

Figure 4.3 - Functions Slotted More Often to Extended Team

Figure 4.4 - Additional Functions Involved on Brand Teams

Product Age

Figure 4.5 - Brand Team Size Dependent upon Product Age

Primary Care vs. Specialty Care

Figure 4.6 - Brand Team Size Segmented by Primary/Specialty

Figure 4.7 - Core Team Representation: Primary v. Specialty

Figure 4.8 - Extended Team Representation: Primary v. Specialty

Co-promotion

Figure 4.9 - Brand Team Size Does Not Change for Co-Promotes

Figure 4.10 - Functions that are Commonly Shared Services

Managing Performance

Figure 4.11 - Managing Performance Crucial to Brand Success

Figure 4.12 - Performance-Based Compensation and Brand Growth

Figure 4.13 - Brands’ Performance Metrics Help Chart Progress

Figure 4.14 - Incentives for Brand Performance

Figure 4.15 - Performance Evaluations

Abstract

The driving force behind revenue in biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies is the product. Since the drugs being sold on the market are the most significant assets these companies own and operate, it is only logical that the way these products are managed should be assessed for risk and evaluated in terms of governance principles.

The importance of brand management has led to the emergence of an increasingly sophisticated system to adequately coordinate, communicate and execute the critical activities that propagate brand growth. This system, largely operational and strategic at its core, is fraught with potential pitfalls when management and oversight procedures are not implemented and enforced.

From an operational standpoint, many companies have begun instituting rigorously policed brand identity integrity processes. At a strategic level, the creation of marketing processes to elevate the sophistication of the strategic process around branding is transpiring. Still, brands are not conventional assets, and there is no scientific method for measuring brand management: It is more often a complex and highly subjective endeavor that rests on the leadership and management skills of the people overseeing the projects.

INDUSTRIES PROFILED:

Health Care; Pharmaceutical; Manufacturing; Biotech; Consumer Products; Diagnostic

COMPANIES PROFILED:

Abbott; Wyeth Pharmaceuticals; TAP; Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Stiefel; Shire; Schwarz Pharmaceuticals; Roche; Purdue Pharma; Orchid; Novo Nordisk; Novartis; Merial; Johnson & Johnson; GlaxoSmithKline; Genentech; Eli Lilly; Cephalon Inc.; Biogen Idec; Bayer Schering AG; Bayer; Amylin; Alcon Laboratories

STUDY SNAPSHOT

This report identifies how pharmaceutical and biotech companies structure and manage their cross-functional brand teams to facilitate brand performance. The study examines how brand teams manage their stakeholder relationships and decision rights including:

• Staffing and functional representation for brand teams
• Brand team operations and responsibilities
• Meeting frequencies
• Reporting relationships
• Performance-based compensation and reviews
• Brand performance measures

This research was based on benchmark survey data and executive interviews of 33 participants from 26 pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

Interviews were conducted with 10 senior leaders from among the benchmark partners.

KEY FINDINGS

Among the findings that emerged from this research were the following:

• Brand team structure follows a consistent pattern across most pharmaceutical companies, therapeutic areas and drugs.
• Variations in size and composition of cross-functional teams are usually in response to company-specific conditions.
• Greater meeting frequency is related to work requirements and the need for agility.
• Brand growth shows no correlation to performance-based compensation.
• Despite variations in particular activities and decision rights across brands, most brand teams recognize a similar set of responsibilities, accountabilities and performance measures.
• For many respondents, the success of brand teams is tied more closely to team issues than to brand issues.

Get Full Details About This Report >>

About MarketResearch.com
MarketResearch.com is an online aggregator selling over 300,000 market research reports, company profiles and country profiles from over 700 research firms. Our reports will provide you with the critical business and competitive intelligence you need for strategic planning and marketing research. Coverage includes the US, UK, Europe, Asia and global markets.