Lütkemeyer, Daniel, H. Sebastian Heese, David A. Wuttke and Andreas K. Gernert (2022): Pricing and market entry decisions in personalized medicine, International Journal of Production Economics, 253.
Abstract: In the pharmaceutical industry, personalized medicine is increasingly replacing the traditional blockbuster drug concept. Personalized medicine consists of a targeted drug that is only prescribed if a companion diagnostic test detects the corresponding biomarker. This concept promises improved treatments of various diseases. However, personalized medicine also presents pharmaceutical firms with new challenges resulting from interdependencies in the drug and diagnostic test development processes. Although pharmaceutical firms generally benefit from competition among diagnostic firms, the threat of substitutes from competitors could cause diagnostic firms to step back from new product development in the first place, leading to lost revenues for the pharmaceutical firm. We consider a pharmaceutical firm that may inform two competing differentiated diagnostic firms about a drug under development, such that these firms can develop a corresponding diagnostic test. We show which diagnostic firm the pharmaceutical firm should inform first and how granting early exclusivity to a single diagnostic firm can maximize pharmaceutical profits from personalized medicine.
Gernert, Andreas K., H. Sebastian Heese and David A. Wuttke (2021): Subcontracting New Product Development Projects: The Role of Competition and Commitment, Decision Sciences, 52 (5): 1039-1070.
Abstract: Should a firm, which seeks to subcontract a new product development project, leverage competition among potential suppliers and ask all of them to engage in research and development in parallel? Or should it first invite offers and commit to the supplier with the best offer, before only this supplier engages in development? Building on analytical literature on both formats, we apply game theory to answer these questions. We identify Bayesian Nash equilibrium strategies and characterize advantages of both formats. We find that having multiple suppliers engage in new product development in parallel is favored only if enough suppliers can be attracted, which is the case when development uncertainty and learning benefits are high. The participation decision also depends on the specific structure of the project's development costs. If administrative overhead and material costs are substantial, while engaging in development and exerting effort is relatively cheap but does not offer many learning opportunities, the number of suppliers who would be willing to engage in parallel development is limited. First inviting offers and selecting the best supplier to exclusively engage in new product development then becomes more attractive for the buyer. We discuss further implications and characterize environments that may foster more innovativeness in this context.