Is There a Solution?
Mylan will never be able to erase the fact that they seriously violated the rights and trust of their customers, who are the single most important stakeholder, especially in an industry that provides products that the person needs to live. Through all my research for this blog, not once did I find a sincere apology from Mylan as a company or their CEO Heather Bresch. Instead they continually denied that their price increase was wrong, and blamed the faulted healthcare system and the cost middlemen create in the process.
While the healthcare system is certainly flawed, there is absolutely no reason that Mylan couldn't have taken an apologetic stance in response to criticisms, and admitted that a price of $608 for two EpiPen's is utterly ridiculous. Simply acknowledging their fault and sympathizing with their customers would have at the very least curved the aggressive nature of the criticism they received. Instead, they continually repeated the same facts and used the same rhetoric to morally disengage themselves from the situation, and this caused criticism to get worse as the interviews and hearings went on.
Mylan has made an effort to rebuild trust since the price gouging scandal first emerged. The EpiPens4Schools program allowed for participating schools to have free unmarked EpiPen's so that in the case of an allergic reaction emergency, the patient wouldn't need to have their own specific prescribed pen. This program even expanded into public businesses in some states.They spent as much as a billion dollars on research and development in order to raise awareness about the product and it's patient. They also began offering a $300 per two pack generic version of the EpiPen, which they would sell directly to customers.
Although these are all great ideas that have proved to be effective, they were done in response to a heinous act of exploitation on a group of consumers that relied on them for their livelihood. When you put the solutions in that context I feel that they absolutely didn't do enough. They were still receiving similar profit margins from the sale of the generic model, which was a big talking point during the congressional hearing, as the panel was baffled at how they could call it a "solution" if they aren't even reducing their profits. I think these solutions can be built on, however, to put the scandal to rest.
What I suggest Mylan does is designate a specific employee or team of employees in the company as a liaison or representative for the EpiPen, and groups of their other 100+ products. Considering that EpiPen is their top selling product, I don't feel that this is all that out of reach. This employee(s) could be responsible for listening to their customers feedback, and connecting with patients. Listening to some of their patients stories, and how much they rely on their product will make it literally impossible to disengage themselves from their struggle. This would have been an appropriate as an immediate response, in order to control the situation and show their customers that they do care.
The next step should be for Mylan to look at the supply chain for all of their products. They spoke very frequently about the cost that middlemen in the business create on their products. To combat this, they should analyze the different distributors that are 100 percent necessary to get their product to patients, and emphasize their relationships with those distributors. Mylan has shown that they are not afraid to expand and take over competing pharmaceutical companies, and this has made them a worldwide pharmaceutical presence. However, this does not mean that they are not responsible for seeing their product through to the patient. They aren't simply responsible for producing the drugs.
Lastly, I feel that Mylan can be a catalyst for change in the U.S. healthcare system. Although Heather Bresch wasn't exactly an all-star in her congressional hearing, she was nothing close to the delusion and arrogance expressed by some other price gougers such as Valeant Pharmaceuticals and Turing Pharmaceuticals. I feel like Mylan does want to pioneer change, and with the global reach that they have I feel that they could be the perfect company to do it. What they can do is analyze the pricing and distribution methods for the healthcare systems in the other 100+ countries they operate in. They could use this information to push U.S. lawmakers to perhaps restrict or monitor the system.
My suggested solutions are in line with a deontological ethical framework. Deontological frameworks emphasize duties and responsibilities. Non-consequentialist in nature, they don't factor potential outcomes into the decision making process. Mylan needs to take its duty, keeping its patients alive and living comfortably both physically and financially, far more seriously. If middlemen are creating extremely high costs, Mylan needs to take it upon themselves to table their goals as a company and find a way to get their patients the product for a fair price. I don't feel that a teleological framework, which is outcome based and bases would be effective going forward, because it would put too much emphasis on their company's financial wellness in the decision making process. I believe that virtue ethics could also be effective, because ethical considerations would be fitted into their decision making process, and through practice making ethical decisions virtue would become habitual. They could re-vamp their code of conduct, and try to emulate those standards.
Media Sources:
While the healthcare system is certainly flawed, there is absolutely no reason that Mylan couldn't have taken an apologetic stance in response to criticisms, and admitted that a price of $608 for two EpiPen's is utterly ridiculous. Simply acknowledging their fault and sympathizing with their customers would have at the very least curved the aggressive nature of the criticism they received. Instead, they continually repeated the same facts and used the same rhetoric to morally disengage themselves from the situation, and this caused criticism to get worse as the interviews and hearings went on.
Although these are all great ideas that have proved to be effective, they were done in response to a heinous act of exploitation on a group of consumers that relied on them for their livelihood. When you put the solutions in that context I feel that they absolutely didn't do enough. They were still receiving similar profit margins from the sale of the generic model, which was a big talking point during the congressional hearing, as the panel was baffled at how they could call it a "solution" if they aren't even reducing their profits. I think these solutions can be built on, however, to put the scandal to rest.
What I suggest Mylan does is designate a specific employee or team of employees in the company as a liaison or representative for the EpiPen, and groups of their other 100+ products. Considering that EpiPen is their top selling product, I don't feel that this is all that out of reach. This employee(s) could be responsible for listening to their customers feedback, and connecting with patients. Listening to some of their patients stories, and how much they rely on their product will make it literally impossible to disengage themselves from their struggle. This would have been an appropriate as an immediate response, in order to control the situation and show their customers that they do care.
The next step should be for Mylan to look at the supply chain for all of their products. They spoke very frequently about the cost that middlemen in the business create on their products. To combat this, they should analyze the different distributors that are 100 percent necessary to get their product to patients, and emphasize their relationships with those distributors. Mylan has shown that they are not afraid to expand and take over competing pharmaceutical companies, and this has made them a worldwide pharmaceutical presence. However, this does not mean that they are not responsible for seeing their product through to the patient. They aren't simply responsible for producing the drugs.
Lastly, I feel that Mylan can be a catalyst for change in the U.S. healthcare system. Although Heather Bresch wasn't exactly an all-star in her congressional hearing, she was nothing close to the delusion and arrogance expressed by some other price gougers such as Valeant Pharmaceuticals and Turing Pharmaceuticals. I feel like Mylan does want to pioneer change, and with the global reach that they have I feel that they could be the perfect company to do it. What they can do is analyze the pricing and distribution methods for the healthcare systems in the other 100+ countries they operate in. They could use this information to push U.S. lawmakers to perhaps restrict or monitor the system.
Media Sources:
- https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cs6GpYgVUAA_B0p.jpg:small
- https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2014/06/healthcare%20ranking%202.jpg
- http://www.mylan.com/-/media/mylancom/images/featured_stories/access-programs.jpg
- http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/Health/AP_Valeant_Congress_er_160427_16x9_608.jpg
- https://img.rt.com/files/2016.02/original/56b391c3c361881e7f8b4618.jpg
An apology from Mylan is greatly needed for there to be recovery in any strong relationship they have with their supporters. Not being direct or honest is a very bad image for the company and that is what they are showing to the public. The public can understand and realize when the company is trying to avoid a question or make up excuses, which Bresch doesn’t seem to understand. I also agree with your point of view and I hope too that this will spark a change in the healthcare system, since it’s one of the most important parts of our country and of any society.
ReplyDeleteIt is the most important industry in my opinion, because the use of medication has increased immensely over the last couple of decades and this has provided pharmaceutical companies an opportunity to exploit people. As you mentioned, the public is ins't oblivious, we live in a time where everyone and anyone can be informed, and they have the right to voice their opinion. If any company so much as rubs someone the wrong way, that person could find a way to paint the company in a negative light and tarnish their image. From here on out, Mylan needs to be conscious of this and ensure that their stakeholders are satisfied.
DeleteI think that Mylan has just been pointing fingers instead of speaking out on the issue fully. Their large domestic and international influence means that they have the ability to implement a more effective strategy or at least attempt to look into a more productive solution. I really support your attribute of analyzing the supply chain within the company, as that is something that Mylan said was the root of the issue. Even though their other programs such as EpiPens4Schools are being highlighted, providing statistical data to Congress and the Public could shine a more positive light on to the company.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you completely, I find it hard to believe that a company that has grown so much, and carries so many different medications doesn't know enough about the industry to be able to implement an effective solution to this problem. They need to see it as their duty to fix the systematic problem within the industry they operate in, but instead they utilized it to maximize profits. I think when a business person has worked extremely hard to work their way up to being a CEO, that given the opportunity to increase profits they will do it regardless of their set of values because they want to show they can perform. This is no excuse for those actions, and I feel that one of the most important parts of having a position of power is keeping your morals in-tact regardless of external pressures.
DeleteI absolutely agree that they should work on their supply chain management because they really need to cut down the cost. It's important to see how they can cut their numbers down as much as possible because even if they say that they're trying to do it, then the community will see that they're at least making an effort.
ReplyDeleteI agree, because as a worldwide corporation they have to have an extremely detailed supply chain process and probably have to balance hundreds of different distributors from their numerous production facilities. I think if they evaluated the way they distribute their products there is no way there couldn't be some way to improve efficiency enough to lower costs. Any company that distributes products globally has room for improvement in their supply chain.
Delete