By 1998 Novartis results were disappointing, hurt by below par pharmaceutical sales and the Swiss franc’s appreciation. Moreover, Novartis was losing ground in the U.S., the largest and most profitable pharmaceutical market, while U.S. competitors were making major gains. With only a few new drugs in the 1999 pipeline, analysts observed that Novartis risked falling further behind U.S. competitors and should consider a large acquisition or merger.
Instead, Novartis doubled down on R&D. As a result of increased investment, the company was able to accelerate a large pipeline of products in late-stage clinical development, many of which came from Ciba’s labs. By the end of 1999, Novartis had 50 projects in clinical development—23 in Phase III clinical trials, 24 in Phase I and II clinical trials, and three in registration.6 Global Pharmaceuticals Head David Epstein noted: “We launched a new drug every 100 days from 2000 to 2003. Most companies are happy to launch one product per year, let alone three or four.”7
Global Bets for a New Century
At the start of the new century, Vasella decided on several strategic initiatives: 1) shift the focus from life sciences to healthcare, 2) invest in businesses not attractive to competitors, 3) globalize research, 4) globalize the investor base; and 5) transform headquarters to reflect the company’s global scope, innovation and care for its associates.
4
Do N
ot C
op y
or P
os t
This document is authorized for educator review use only by Gregory Theyel, California State University – East Bay until May 2018. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright. Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
Novartis: Leading a Global Enterprise 413-096
From Life Sciences to Healthcare
In 2000, Novartis decided to focus entirely on healthcare. It spun off and merged its agricultural business with the Anglo-Swedish firm AstraZeneca’s business to form a new company, Syngenta, with revenues of $8 billion and a market value of $12 billion, then the world’s largest agrochemical business.8
Also in 2000, the company reorganized its pharmaceutical business to focus on its strongest products, dividing it into primary care, specialty care, and mature products business units, providing each with greater autonomy. “We are aligning our pharmaceutical activities around franchises and strategic brands with a focused management structure,”9 Vasella said. “These changes provide entrepreneurial space, speed, and resources to our leaders.”10
Vasella changed pharmaceutical leadership, replacing Jerry Karabelas with Thomas Ebeling who ran consumer health, having joined Novartis from PepsiCo. Ebeling noted, “The new business unit leaders will have autonomy and clear accountability, with responsibility for managing their portfolios from research through market activities.”11 As a result of shifting marketing resources to key products, sales of the company’s top 10 products grew 12% in 1999.12
In 2001 Novartis purchased 20% of the voting shares of cross-town rival Roche. In 2002-03 it acquired additional shares, bringing its holdings to 32.7%, slightly below the level at which Swiss law required Novartis to make a tender offer for the company. Meanwhile, Roche’s two founding families, which held over 50% of voting shares, were bound together by an agreement prohibiting them to sell. Novartis’s moves were not well received by Roche management, in spite of Novartis’ commitment to be only a passive investor. In 2013 Novartis still retained its shares, with the power to block any change of Roche’s capital structure needed for a large transaction.
Beyond Blockbusters
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH NURSING TERM PAPERS TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT
