Closing the Marketing Strategy-Tactics Gap: An Institutional Theory Analysis Pharmaceutical Value Chain

Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2688-7517/231

Closing the Marketing Strategy-Tactics Gap: An Institutional Theory Analysis Pharmaceutical Value Chain

  • Rehan Haider 1*
  • Geetha Kumari Das 2
  • Zameer Ahmed 3
  • Sambreen Zameer 4

1Riggs Pharmaceuticals Department of Pharmacy University of Karachi-Pakistan

2Pharmaceutical Inc OPJS University Rajasthan India                                                  

3Assistant Professor Dow University of Health Sciences Karachi Pakistan                                                                     

4Associate Prof Department of Pathology Dow University of Health Sciences Karachi Pakistan

*Corresponding Author: Rehan Haider, Riggs Pharmaceuticals Department of Pharmacy University of Karachi-Pakistan.

Citation: Rehan Haider, Geetha K. Das, Zameer Ahmed, Sambreen Zameer, (2025), Closing the Marketing Strategy-Tactics Gap: An Institutional Theory Analysis Pharmaceutical Value Chain, J. Pharmaceutics and Pharmacology Research, 8(2); DOI:10.31579/2688-7517/231

Copyright: © 2025, Rehan Haider. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: 05 March 2025 | Accepted: 11 March 2025 | Published: 26 March 2025

Keywords: pharmaceutical manufacturing; marketing strategy; institutional theory; value chain analysis competitive advantage

Abstract

The effectiveness of marketing strategies in pharmaceutical manufacturing significantly influences competitive advantage and regulatory compliance. However, a persistent gap often exists between strategic marketing objectives and their tactical execution within firms. This paper explores this gap through an institutional theory lens, analyzing the pharmaceutical value chain.

First, institutional theory provides a framework for understanding the external pressures that shape corporate behavior and decision-making. In the pharmaceutical industry, regulatory agencies, professional organizations, and societal norms heavily influence marketing strategies. Understanding these institutional forces is crucial for aligning corporate objectives with effective strategy execution.

Second, by deconstructing the pharmaceutical value chain—including research, production, distribution, and sales—this study examines how institutional forces impact each stage. For example, regulatory requirements shape R&D investments, while professional standards influence sales and marketing tactics.

Third, this study highlights the importance of organizational responses to institutional pressures. Companies that successfully navigate these pressures can bridge the strategy-tactics gap by aligning their marketing initiatives with broader industry expectations.

Introduction

This observation identifies an approach-methods hole in preceding studies on pharmaceutical advertising. Using a unique dataset from recently unsealed court docket documents, we examine pharmaceutical firms' marketing strategies via the lens of institutional ideas. Our analysis famous 4 dominant advertising procedures:

Market Penetration approach – specializing in differentiation and marketplace enlargement.

Evidence-based approach – Leveraging medical studies to aid advertising claims.

Clinical schooling strategy – Influencing doctor prescribing conduct via instructional projects.

Surrogate promoting approach – utilizing peer effect among centered physicians.

Those strategies offer coherence to pharmaceutical advertising practices however, they often battle with regulatory expectations and ethical issues. The institutional idea suggests that:

The pharmaceutical fee chain operates underneath conflicting logic.

Those conflicts are exacerbated using advertising and marketing strategies.

Regulatory intervention is essential to mitigate excessive advertising and marketing have an impact on.

Most scholarly studies on pharmaceutical advertising and marketing have targeted optimizing go back on investment (ROI) in promotional spending, paying little interest to the tactical execution of advertising strategies. Manchanda and Chintagunta (2004) emphasize that pharmaceutical corporations prioritize increasing prescription volume and improving value performance via optimized promotional efforts. Numerous studies have tested advertising effectiveness (Venkataraman & Stremersch, 2007; Manchanda & Chintagunta, 2004; Narayanan et al., 2004), but there is a fantastic lack of studies on the particular processes used to execute advertising strategies.

The method represents an enterprise’s blueprint for competitive gain and courses fundamental strategic choices. But tactical execution operationalizes those techniques, shaping the company's interactions with stakeholders. The dearth of studies on the relationship between strategy and tactics creates a gap that leaves marketing practices in large part unscrutinized (Manchanda & Honka, 2005).

Regardless of substantial criticism of pharmaceutical advertising from healthcare professionals and the public (DeAngelis, 2006; Angell, 2005; Brennan & Mello, 2007), few systematic studies have been performed on the strategic good judgment underlying those marketing practices. This look seeks to reply to vital questions:

What wonderful advertising and marketing techniques do pharmaceutical firms use to influence healthcare experts, and the way do those strategies align with broader company objectives?

Under what conditions do pharmaceutical advertising and marketing techniques extend (or mitigate) terrible reactions from stakeholders within the value chain?

To cope with those questions, we conduct a based evaluation of pharmaceutical advertising strategies with the use of an institutional theory attitude. This method lets us explore the underlying logic governing pharmaceutical firms’ marketing choices and their impact on the broader price chain.

This study identifies a strategy-tactics gap in previous research on pharmaceutical marketing. Using a unique dataset from recently unsealed court documents, we analyze pharmaceutical firms' marketing strategies through the lens of institutional theory. Our analysis reveals four dominant marketing approaches:

Market Penetration Strategy – Focusing on differentiation and market expansion.

Evidence-Based Strategy – Leveraging clinical research to support marketing claims.

Medical Education Strategy – Influencing physician prescribing behavior through educational initiatives.

Surrogate Selling Strategy – Utilizing peer influence among targeted physicians.

These strategies provide coherence to pharmaceutical marketing practices but often conflict with regulatory expectations and ethical considerations. Institutional theory suggests that:

The pharmaceutical value chain operates under conflicting logic.

These conflicts are exacerbated by marketing strategies.

Regulatory intervention is necessary to mitigate excessive marketing influence.

Most scholarly research on pharmaceutical marketing has focused on optimizing return on investment (ROI) in promotional spending, paying little attention to the tactical execution of marketing strategies (Manchanda & Chintagunta, 2004) [1]. Several studies have examined marketing effectiveness (Venkataraman & Stremersch, 2007; Narayanan et al., 2004) [2,3], yet there is a notable lack of research on the specific tactics used to execute marketing strategies.

The strategy represents a company’s blueprint for competitive advantage and guides major strategic decisions. However, tactical execution operationalizes these strategies, shaping the firm's interactions with stakeholders (Manchanda & Honka, 2005) [4].

Despite significant criticism of pharmaceutical marketing from healthcare professionals and the public (DeAngelis, 2006; Angell, 2005; Brennan & Mello, 2007) [5,6,7], little systematic research has been conducted on the strategic logic underlying these marketing practices. This study seeks to answer two critical questions:

What distinct marketing strategies do pharmaceutical firms use to influence healthcare professionals, and how do these strategies align with broader corporate objectives?

Under what conditions do pharmaceutical marketing strategies amplify (or mitigate) negative reactions from stakeholders within the value chain?

2. Research Methodology

This study engages a concerning qualities, not quantities research design, utilizing content study of court documents from a main drug shopping lawsuit. We checked over 5,800 pages of allied records, shopping plans, and communications between drug firms and healthcare specialists.

Data Sources:

Internal emails and notes detailing shopping blueprints.

Contracts outlining connections accompanying physicians and key opinion officers.

Financial records appear in the distribution of shopping budgets.

Data Analysis:

A thematic study was administered to label reappearing patterns in marketing plannings. The verdicts were triangulated accompanying existent literature to guarantee dependability.

3. Results

Our study shows that pharmaceutical firms engage pertain shopping actions designed to influence specialist practice. Key verdicts contain:

Market Penetration Strategies: Targeting high-prescribing physicians through creating a likeness in a picture and commercial inducements.

Evidence-Based Strategies: Funding dispassionate research to support promotional claims, consistently accompanying partial newsgathering.

Medical Education Strategies: Leveraging continuing healing instruction (CME) programs to advance distinguishing drugs.

Surrogate Selling Strategies: Using peer networks and thought officers to influence prescribing demeanor.

These game plans enhance the commercialization of medical administration and make necessary more forceful supervisory oversight.

Marketing StrategyKey TacticsInterdependencies
Market Penetration StrategyHigh-prescribing physician targetingEvidence-Based Strategy
Evidence-Based StrategyResearch funding and biased publicationsMedical Education Strategy
Medical Education StrategyCME programs and physician trainingSurrogate Selling Strategy
Surrogate Selling StrategyPeer influence and key opinion leadersMarket Penetration Strategy

Figure 1: Pharmaceutical Marketing Strategies and Their Interdependencies

4. Discussion

The judgments plan that drug shopping strategies join approximately accompanying bland pressures, often prioritizing commercial gain over righteous concerns. The crucial use of medical instruction and research capital blurs foul line 'tween genuine experimental progress and promoting tactics. Regulatory instrumentalities must implement more authoritarian directions to lighten conflicts of interest and ensure transparence related to manufacturing practices.

Furthermore, the confidence in stand-in selling planning raises righteous concerns, as physicians grant permission to suddenly promote partial news. The duty of key belief leaders concedes the possibility be reconsidered to uphold healing integrity.

5. Conclusion

This study focal points the need for raised audit of drug marketing strategies and their adjustment accompanying allied strategy. Future research endures survey:

The complete impact of supervisory interventions on shopping practices.

Alternative trade models that defeat confidence in aggressive promoting strategies.

The part of electronics in enhancing transparence and responsibility in drug shopping.

By integrating bland beliefs into shopping research, we can better believe the complexities of drug game plan killing and allure broader about society suggestions.

Acknowledgement

The crowning glory of this research challenge could no longer be feasible without the contributions and guidance of many individuals and agencies. We’re deeply grateful to all those who performed a position in the achievement of this mission We would also like to thank My Mentor Dr. Naweed Imam Syed Prof. Department of Cell Biology at the College of Calgary and Dr. Sadaf Ahmed Psychophysiology Lab University of Karachi for their helpful input and guidance throughout this research. Their insights and understanding had been instrumental in shaping the direction of this challenge                                                                                                                                                        

Declaration of interest

I, at this second, declare that: I haven’t any pecuniary or another private hobby, direct or oblique, in any dependence that raises or can also boost a war with my duties as a supervisor of my workplace control     

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Financial support and sponsorship   No Funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

References

a