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投资决策提供有益借鉴。
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.
关键词
带量采购政策 /
研发 /
营销 /
医药制造企业 /
绩效
Key words
volume procurement policy /
research and development (R&D) /
marketing /
pharmaceutical manufacturer /
performance
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 陈守明,冉毅,陶兴慧.R&D强度与企业价值——股权性质和两职合一的调节作用[J].科学学研究,2012,30(03):441-448.
[2] Lev B, Sougiannis T. The capitalization, amortization, and value-relevance of R&D[J]. Journal of accounting and economics, 1996, 21(1): 107-138.
[3] Kim M C, McAlister L M. Stock market reaction to unexpected growth in marketing expenditure: Negative for sales force, contingent on spending level for advertising[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2011, 75(4): 68-85.
[4] 冯仁涛,张庆,余翔.商标、广告对企业市场价值的贡献研究——基于医药行业的实证分析[J].管理评论,2013,25(06):154-160.
[5] Griffin A, Hauser J R. Integrating R&D and marketing: A review and analysis of the literature[J]. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 1996, 13(3): 191-215.
[6] 寇宗来,毕睿罡,查存.融资约束对企业广告和研发策略的影响:理论与经验证据[J].世界经济,2020,43(04):28-51.
[7] Chauvin K W, Hirschey M. Advertising, R&D expenditures and the market value of the firm[J]. Financial management, 1993,22(4):128-140.
[8] Chen P C, Chan W C, Hung S W, et al. Do R&D expenditures matter more than those of marketing to company performance? The moderating role of industry characteristics and investment density[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2016, 28(2): 205-216.
[9] 孙维峰,黄祖辉.广告支出、研发支出与企业绩效[J].科研管理,2013,34(02):44-51.
[10] 余巧萍.我国公立医院药品带量采购实施效果评价研究——以安徽省安庆市公立医院为例[J].价格理论与实践,2021(08):65-68.
[11] 杨心悦,李亦兵,海桑.我国医药行业可竞争性与市场效率研究——兼析带量采购对药品价格的影响分析[J].价格理论与实践,2019(01):51-55.
[12] Shah S , Akbar S . Value relevance of advertising expenditure: A review of the literature[J]. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2008, 10(4):301-325.
[13] 王文涛,付剑峰,朱义.企业创新、价值链扩张与制造业盈利能力——以中国医药制造企业为例[J].中国工业经济,2012(04):50-62.
[14] Peterson R A, Jeong J. Exploring the impact of advertising and R&D expenditures on corporate brand value and firm-level financial performance[J]. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 2010, 38(6): 677-690.
[15] 赵保国,阙人超.传统企业广告投入与企业绩效的非线性关系研究——基于工业企业数据的门槛分析[J].北京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2016,18(04):92-100.
[16] Christensen C M, Bower J L. Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms[J]. Strategic management journal, 1996, 17(3): 197-218.
[17] Rabiei M , Dadkhah H . Effects of R&D Expenditure on the Profitability of Iran Industrial Firms[J]. Research Journal of Applied Sciences Engineering & Technology, 2014, 7(14):2846-2850.
[18] Sridhar S, Narayanan S, Srinivasan R. Dynamic relationships among R&D, advertising, inventory and firm performance[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2014, 42(3): 277-290.
[19] Vithessonthi C, Racela O C. Short-and long-run effects of internationalization and R&D intensity on firm performance[J]. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 2016, 34: 28-45.
[20] 焦然,温素彬,张金泉.研发影响绩效的门槛现象与企业社会责任的缓解作用研究[J].中国软科学,2020(03):110-121.
[21] Barney J B . Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage[J]. Advances in Strategic Management, 1991, 17(1):3-10.
[22] Tsai H T, Eisingerich A B. Internationalization strategies of emerging markets firms[J]. California Management Review, 2010, 53(1): 114-135.
[23] Srinivasan S, Pauwels K, Silva-Risso J, et al. Product innovations, advertising, and stock returns[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2009, 73(1): 24-43.
[24] Rafiq M, Saxon T. R&D and marketing integration in NPD in the pharmaceutical industry[J]. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2000, 3(4): 222-231.
[25] Fluet C, Garella P G. Advertising and prices as signals of quality in a regime of price rivalry[J]. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2002, 20(7): 907-930.
[26] Lin B W, Lee Y, Hung S C. R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance[J]. Journal of business research, 2006, 59(6): 679-685.
[27] 任海云.广告支出与研发支出的价值相关性研究[J].科研管理,2014,35(08):153-160.
[28] 胡凯,蔡红英,吴清.中国的政府采购促进了技术创新吗?[J].财经研究,2013,39(09):134-144.
基金
教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金：“基于企业技术创新异质性的政府补助政策效果评估与优化研究”（22YJA630067,2022.09—2025.09）；陕西省软科学项目：“陕西省新能源汽车产业政府科技补助的效果评价及优化对策研究——基于‘强链补链’视角”（2022KRM108，2022.03—2024.02）。
PDF(1714 KB)
