Those of us who are fortunate enough to travel the world (and have a penchant for fast food) may have noticed that McDonald’s outlets in different countries always offer a menu adapted to the local tastes – the McPaneer in India, the Greek Mac in Greece, the McArabia in the Middle East, even the McRaclette in Switzerland.
At the same time, a Big Mac in any restaurant in the world always tastes exactly the same. This is a very deliberate standard that McDonald’s strives to preserve. It is this strategy of balancing the maintenance of the global brands while also allowing the localisation of the menu to local tastes that has been extremely successful for the company.
Those managing pharmaceutical brands and portfolios have a very similar challenge to face. There is the need to build and maintain a cohesive global strategy but also make sure that this strategy is successful in reflecting the diversity that exists across all markets.
But how much flexibility should be built into a global strategy to allow it to fit each market? How much strategic autonomy should be lent to our affiliates to be able to adapt to local needs? How can a global team guide different affiliate teams to the strategy that best fits them? And how do we organise ourselves to find this balance?
There are several options to consider to reflect significant differences across markets; choosing the right one can be central to a successful strategy.
Local Adaptation
This involves using generalised global assumptions to generate a core global strategy for the brand, which affiliate teams are then encouraged to pressure-test and identify how to adapt to their market.
A global team can support affiliates through this pressure-testing and refinement directly or through workshop-in-a-box toolkits if appropriate.
This is the simplest approach and is most effective in countries where all elements of the overarching core strategy overlap. Nevertheless, allowing and supporting some variation to the strategy and its implementation can make a huge difference to its success on the ground.
Clustering
By identifying and isolating the key features separating the market dynamics and competitive situation across key markets, clusters of countries can be identified for which distinct strategies can be formulated.
Ownership of the strategy is retained at the global level and affiliates can be efficiently served and supported based on their cluster.
This works best where there is a distinct set of strategic approaches that can be adopted for each of the unique market environment categories as appropriate.
Playbook Guidance
A high degree of multi-level diversity means that a tailored strategy is needed for each country. The combination of market characteristics of any affiliate can, through a playbook tool, be linked to a unique set of the most important strategic levers to pull.
This retains the strategic autonomy at the global level which can ensure the continuity of a brand’s essence globally.
These approaches may also vary depending on the stage of the product lifecycle. Local adaptation may be most valuable as an approach in early lifecycle stages, where there is less potential diversity in message and approach. On the other hand, the clustering and playbook strategies may be more relevant in later lifecycle stages, where significant geographic diversity will likely prevail.
The choice can have a significant impact on your brand and the efficiency of supporting regions and affiliates. There is therefore significant value in revisiting a global strategy and questioning how effectively and efficiently it can truly be implemented across the range of markets it concerns. Will employing one of these frameworks give you the confidence that affiliates can get the most out of your product?
