医药制造企业是营销制胜还是研发制胜？
任海云，谢秀翎，王博文
（陕西师范大学 国际商学院，陕西 西安710119)
摘要：我国医药制造企业普遍存在“重营销轻研发”现象，面对激烈的竞争、肆虐的病毒和不断调整的医改政策，医药制造企业究竟应该营销制胜还是研发制胜？以恒瑞医药和哈药股份两个典型企业为案例，采用纵向双案例对比研究法，按照时间序列对比不同营销和研发战略下的两个企业绩效差异，论证营销和研发如何影响企业绩效；并且引入“4+7”带量采购政策，对比政策实施后两个企业绩效的变化，说明不同营销和研发战略下的两个企业抗风险能力和绩效可持续性差异，以此进一步说明医药制造企业究竟营销制胜还是研发制胜。研究结果表明：医药制造企业应该营销研发双轮驱动才能行稳致远，带量采购政策实施后，医药制造企业一方面应该及时调整投资方向，注重研发创新，提高药品质量；另一方面应该积极参与集采保住市场，为研发创新提供持续资金支持。研究结论不仅丰富营销、研发与企业绩效关系的相关理论，而且为带量采购政策实施后企业进行投资决策提供有益借鉴。
关键词：带量采购政策；研发；营销；医药制造企业；绩效
主要研究结论：本文针对“医药制造企业究竟应该研发制胜还是营销制胜？还是二者协同并举？”的核心议题展开讨论，按照时间序列分析对比哈药股份和恒瑞医药各个阶段的研发、营销及绩效差异，以及带量采购政策对两个企业绩效影响程度的差异及其原因，得到以下结论：第一，广告营销可以在短期内扩大普通药品品牌知名度，带来品牌效应，增加普药附加值，提升企业绩效，但长期来看，不注重研发，没有创新药品产出，只靠营销不能保证企业绩效的持续稳定；第二，通过研发创新提高药品质量和形成高附加值的创新药，有利于提高企业毛利率和抗风险能力，而创新药品的上市推广需要高额的营销费用支撑；第三，研发创新可以提高普药质量，有利于药品通过一致性评价，进入集采竞标，中标产品可以实现以量换价，保住市场份额；第四，“4+7”带量采购政策是真正的以量换价，没能中标就意味着要失去市场，医药制造企业在注重研发创新的同时要积极参与集采，研发和营销协同发展才有利于行稳致远。
Should pharmaceutical manufacturers win by marketing or by R&D?
Ren Haiyun, Xie Xiuling, Wang Bowen
(International Business School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi′an 710119, Shaanxi, China)
Abstract:In the face of fierce competition, rampant viruses and constantly adjusted health care reform policies, should pharmaceutical manufacturers win through marketing or R&D? Taking two typical enterprises, Hengrui Medicine Co., Ltd and Harbin Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd, as cases, the author used the longitudinal double case comparison study method to list the typical matters in marketing and R&D in each development stage of the case enterprises according to the time series, compared the performance differences between the two enterprises under different marketing and R&D strategies, and demonstrated how marketing and R&D affect the enterprise performance. The study also introduced the "4+7" Volume Procurement Policy and compared the performance of the two companies after the implementation of the policy to illustrate the difference in risk resistance and performance sustainability between the two enterprises, so as to further illustrate whether pharmaceutical manufacturers should win by marketing or by R&D.
The following conclusions were obtained from this research. Firstly, advertising and marketing can expand brand awareness of generic drugs in the short term, bring brand effect, increase the added value of generic drugs and improve corporate performance, but in the long term, without focusing on R&D and innovative drug output, marketing alone cannot ensure sustainable and stable corporate performance. Secondly, improving drug quality and forming high value-added innovative drugs through R&D innovation is conducive to improving enterprise gross margin and anti-risk ability, while the marketing and promotion of innovative drugs need high marketing expenses to support. Thirdly, R&D innovation can improve the quality of generic drugs, which is conducive to passing the consistency evaluation of drugs and entering centralized procurement, and the winning products can realize the quantity for price and keep the market share. Finally, the "4+7" Volume Procurement Policy can achieve real volume for price and failure to win the bid means to lose the market. Pharmaceutical manufacturers should be driven by both marketing and R&D in order to be stable and far-reaching.
From the above conclusions, the following insights can be drawn. First, in the face of changes in the domestic and international pharmaceutical market and intensified competition, combining R&D and marketing as a two-wheel drive is the way to the foundation of pharmaceutical manufacturers. Secondly, in the face of the Volume Procurement Policy, pharmaceutical manufacturers should, on the one hand, timely adjust their investment direction, focus on R&D innovation and improve drug quality, and, on the other hand, actively participate in centralized procurement to retain the market and provide continuous financial support for R&D innovation.
This paper innovatively adopted a case study approach to explore why and how R&D and marketing affect the performance of pharmaceutical manufacturers. It has not only answered the question of whether pharmaceutical manufacturers should win in R&D or marketing, but also expanded the research on the effect of Volume Procurement Policy. The findings of the study can both enrich the theories related to the relationship between marketing, R&D and corporate performance and provide useful references for corporate investment decisions after the implementation of the band purchasing policy.
引用本文：任海云,谢秀翎,王博文.医药制造企业是营销制胜还是研发制胜?[J].科研管理,2023,44(8):78-88.
转自：“科研管理”微信公众号
如有侵权，请联系本站删除！
