Using the corporate brand in pharma

During covid19 there were several vaccines on the market, the best known being Comirnaty. Everyone knew it, as it was widely written about and administered, but few knew that this vaccine was from Pfizer and BioNTech. BioNTech was the creator and initial developer of the mRNA vaccine, and Pfizer joined from an early stage as a strategic development and collaboration partner for large-scale production and global distribution.

A missed opportunity for manufacturers' brand awareness or a deliberate brand strategy?

In many markets the corporate brand can add significant value and values to the portfolio of product brands and franchises. This is particularly the case in consumer markets, yet in pharma it plays little or no role, other than in communication with financial markets.

Traditionally, the pharmaceutical industry has focused primarily on product brands: clinicians, payers, and patients recognize and trust drug names rather than the company behind them. Yet, the sector is strongly grounded in values like heritage and trust. As product differences become increasingly marginal, a strong corporate brand could offer a significant competitive advantage—something the pharma industry can learn from fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies.

Brand Value and Architecture

In other markets, corporate brands have become valuable financial assets, often exceeding book value. Leading companies such as Coca-Cola, Apple, and Google rank high in global brand value indexes, but healthcare companies are notably underrepresented. While pharmaceutical product brands like Viagra and Prozac have been successful, the corporate image of pharmaceutical companies remains underdeveloped.

Brand architecture—the hierarchy between corporate, master, sub-, and product brands—is key:

• Corporate brand: The company name as the primary brand (e.g., Nestlé, Sony).

• Master brand: Covers a product range without explicitly referencing the corporate brand (e.g., Listerine).

• Sub-brand: A new brand combined with the corporate/master brand (e.g., Nescafé).

• Product brand: Individual product identity with distinct positioning.

• Endorsed brand: Product brand endorsed by the corporate brand, lending credibility (e.g., Dasani by Coca-Cola).

Pharma companies typically adopt a “house of brands” strategy, focusing on product brands. However, due to short patent cycles, product brands lose relevance rapidly, making the corporate brand the enduring asset.

Importance, Risks, and Benefits

Investing in corporate branding involves risks such as reputational damage if a product fails, inconsistency across diverse business units, and the long time frame required to build a credible corporate brand. Nonetheless, the benefits include:

• Strengthening market position and trust,

• Facilitating implementation of corporate vision and values,

• Simplifying brand portfolios,

• Supporting strategic transformation and adapting to new commercial models.

Conclusion

With increasing M&A activity, portfolio diversification, and patent expirations, the pharma sector faces pressure to evolve. To remain competitive and sustainable, pharmaceutical companies must assign a more strategic and proactive role to their corporate brands—taking cues from FMCG industries. A strong corporate brand fosters trust, loyalty, and lasting value.

This article previously appeared in pharmafile.com, was written by Chris Marks and briefly summarised by Readge Chris Marks is partner and brand services principal at The MSI Consultancy Ltd. He can be contacted at cmarks@msi.co.uk