Sunday, June 10, 2012

GlaxoSmithKline joint venture to vaccinate Japan


This week’s reading was another opportunity to acquire more knowledge about a subject, in this case International Alliances. After the awareness you then realize how often you see these types of business transactions and alliances around you all the time but now you have an idea of how it all happens. After analyzing the Wal-Mart/Bharti joint venture, I started searching for other organizations, in 2012, going through similar alliances. Good solid companies in the US joint venturing with solid companies abroad are actually all too common. My most recent finding was through an article in the International Business Times by Bhaskar Prasad, regarding the joint venture between the world’s second largest pharmaceutical firm *GlaxoSmithKline and Japan’s third largest pharmaceutical firm **Daiichi Sankyo (March, 2012).

This article shows similarities to the Wal-Mart Bharti venture. GlaxoSmithKline, a $27 Billion global firm creates a 50-50 joint venture with a $1.6 Billion firm in Japan “to build their presence in a key growth market, creating the first and largest company dedicated solely to vaccines in Japan” stated Christophe Weber, president designate of GlaxoSmithKline Vaccines. The objective of the joint venture will be to bring together the products and technologies of the two companies (Prasad, March, 2012). This joint venture host the three important components that make up the best agreements described by (Kanter,1994): First, they incorporate a specific joint activity – GlaxoSmithKline/Daiichi Sankyo will together develop vaccines in Japan through the joint venture. Second, a commitment to expand the relationship – both companies in the GSK/DS alliance will make a capital investment in the joint venture in preparation for future discoveries and developments, and Third, incorporate clear signs of continuing independence for all partners – in addition to the joint venture both firms in the GSK/DS alliance maintain their own operations and product lines globally.

GlaxoSmithKline and Daiichi Sanko have worked together before but solidifying this joint venture proves that both parties are strong form trustworthy firms (Barney & Hansen, 1994) confident that any vulnerabilities that may exist will not be exploited by either one. Representing the equity ownership concept (Gomes-Casseres, 1993) both firms decided to name the new joint venture Japan Vaccine Co. (Prasad, 2012) splitting the joint venture profits 50/50 with a portion going toward funding ongoing capital needs of the venture and expanding the venture as new vaccines in the JV development pipeline are approved (GSK press, 2012).

I believe the joint venture with GSK/DS will be a good one. They are two good companies committed to improving the quality of human life and growing their model by one growth market at a time and if nothing else, the world will benefit from the venture.

*GlaxoSmithKline is headquartered in England with a large presence in the US.
**Daiichi Sanko is based in the UK with a large presence in China.

Prasad, (March, 2012). Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline agree on joint venture in Japan, International Business Times.com, http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/307811/20120301/daiichi-sankyo-glaxosmithkline-agree-joint-venture-japan.htm

Joyce & Schroter, (March, 2012). Daiichi Sankyo, GSK sign vaccine pact, Wall Street Journal.com, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203753704577256904175147144.html

Gomes-Casseres, (1993). "Managing International Alliances: A Conceptual
Framework." Harvard Business School. pp. 1-20.

Barney & Hansen, (1994). "Trustworthiness as a Source of Competitive Advantage." Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 175-190.

Kanter, R. (2010). "Collaborative Advantage: The Art of Alliances."Harvard Business Review. p.106.


8 comments:

  1. Audrey, was the Japanese government involved in this alliance? Like the Walmart case, what concerns might they have?

    Gomes-Casseres (1993) notes that alliance partners need to have complimentary needs and assets. It seems these two organizations are pretty similar in their specialties. What do you see each partner gaining from this alliance?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe the government was involved in this alliance due to the need to regulate the potential drugs to be used for immunizations that are lacking in Japan. I believe GlaxoSmithKline has a really good government relations strategy. They also have a physical presence in Japan already. I believe this joint venture has been in the works for a long time.

      Besides lots of money I believe both will gain a greater expertise of the others technologies and processes that will strengthen the joint venture. They will both earn a greater respect from the environment because they are developing product that can save lives. GSK will gain a stronger hold in Japan. Both of them will also gain shared intellectual property through the joint venture they can put their name on.

      Delete
  2. You mention that these are strong form trustworthy firms, what characteristics do you think they exhibit to warrant this other than previous partnership? I am beginning to think that strong form trust is ephemeral in nature and like the article that related a JV to a marriage not all are as good as they look on the surface. I looked at a joint venture between HP and Oracle for this weeks application assignment and in the beginning everything seemed to be very good, but the businesses evolved and either the relationship never was strong form or when it began to change neither entity was willing to admit it. HP's revenues, like GSK, were substantially more than Oracles. As Oracle has grown and developed their position in the market has changed weakening the partnership. I wonder what the Achilles's heel to this JV might be...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Other characteristics of strong form trustworthy that these two major firms harness are strong reputations and track records, openess to outside auditing of the exchange relationship (Barney & Hansen, 1994) and confidence and security in making investments in an exchange before contracts are even set in place.

      Delete
  3. I appreciate how you highlighted the importance of both firms investing funds into the joint venture. That's definitely a case of "putting your money where your mouth is."

    I wonder what made both companies decide that vaccines were an area where significant economic growth could occur. That seems to be more of a developing-world problem. I would think that heart medicine, and other drugs for an aging population would be more appropriate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This joint venture will supply globally recommended vaccines to help protect people of all ages in Japan including Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, Rotavirus, Seasonal flu vaccine, Mumps vaccine, Diphtheria Pertussis (DTP) vaccine, and Measles Rubella (MR) vaccine.

      I agree with you on the other drugs and because there is a good number of pharmaceutical companies in Japan they could be working on those types of drugs.

      Delete
  4. I think the choice of name "Japan Vaccine Co" is interesting, it really focuses on the target market. It would be interesting to see how success of a JV correlates to the naming of the JV. Do they do better when they elminate the US business name (as they did in this case)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a 50/50 JV so it looks like both companies agreed to leave their name out of it.

      Delete