Accenture a Strategy for Focused Growth

8/2/2019 Accenture a Strategy for Focused Growth

1/16

Mergers & Acquisitions

A Strategy for Focused Growth

in the Biopharmaceutical Industry

During Uncertain Times


2/16

and Pfizer-King. As the globaleconomy picks up steam andcompanies enjoy continued access

to cheap credit, Accentureexpects further consolidationin the pharmaceutical andbiotechnology segments overthe next two to three years.Accenture research indicatesthat the biopharmaceuticalM&A landscape will likely beshaped by three major trends:health care reform, the innovationgap, and the need for morepredictable revenue streams.As these trends apply additionalpressure to the blockbuster model,they will force the industry touse M&A more aggressively.

The life sciences industry isundergoing a major transformation,evolving from a blockbuster-

based business model to one offocused growth. In the process,life sciences companies areexperimenting with a varietyof business and operatingmodels1 in search of theright mix of businesses andcompetencies to fuel sustainablegrowth. The scale-orientedmegamergers of the recentrecession, such as Pfizer-Wyethand Merck-Schering Plough,have been augmented by a newbreed of M&A activity that isoriented toward focused growth,exemplified by Astellas-OSI,Novartis-Alcon, J&J-Crucell

2 | M&A: A Strategy for Focused Growth in the Biopharmaceutical Industry During Uncertain Times


3/16

3

Since the end of the recession in 2009,many U.S. corporations have aggressivelydeleveraged, driving the cash-to-assetratio for non-financial companies to

the highest levels (7.4 percent) seen indecades and making it easier to raisecheap capital for acquisitions.2 Inparticular, the continued cost-cuttingefforts and cash-rich positions of largepharma companies have put themin a prime position to drive furtheracquisition activities as the economyimproves. In addition to the strengthof large companies, a variety ofmacroeconomic factors and trendsare creating a biopharmaceutical

environment that favors an acceleratingpace of industry consolidation. Thesetrends include:

U.S. healthcare reform

This relatively recent legislation hashad a major impact on the life sciencesindustry by promising to increasehealthcare coverage for 32 millionpreviously uninsured Americans, ofwhich approximately 17 million will beMedicaid beneficiaries starting as earlyas 2010. As life sciences companiesbecome more exposed to Medicaidpatients, they will realize incrementalpatient volume that brings incrementalrevenue, albeit at a lower margin.Accenture also believes that healthcare reform is not just a U.S. phenomenon,

and that there is continuing activityin Europe and other geographiesaround more pricing pressures andaccess controls.3

MacroeconomicFactors and IndustryTrends will LikelyIntensify M&A Activity

Patent cliff and sparse newproduct introductions

During the past few years, multi-billion

dollar household-name blockbusterdrugs such as Zithromax, Prozac, Zoloft,Norvasc, Claritin and Zocor havegone off patent. The ongoing waveof intellectual property expirations ofmajor blockbuster productsonce thegrowth and profit engines of pharma-ceutical companieswill continue tolead to a loss of future revenue in therange of $75 billion between 2010and 2014, in addition to $12 billionalready lost in 2009.4 Because many

established therapeutic areas such asanti-infectives, anti-hypertensives,anti-histamines and antidepressantsalready are commoditized due to lossof patent exclusivity, the pharmadiscovery engine must identify newtargets, and do so quickly. Companieswith de-risked (i.e., post-FDA approval)assets, such as King Pharmaceuticals


4/16

and Crucell, are thus coveted by deep-pocketed acquirers, pushing dealvaluations higher and forcing potentialacquirers to pay heftier premiums.Similarly, for products under developmentand still bearing clinical and regulatoryrisk, recent deal flow patterns showaverage upfront payments decliningdue to biopharma companies preferenceshifting toward milestone-drivendeal structures.5

Increasing regulatory scrutiny

In 2010 only 21 new drugs wereapproved, down from 25 in 2009 and24 in 2008,6 indicating that it takeslonger and is getting more difficult forthe industry to gain approval for newdrug applications (NDA) and biologicslicensing applications (BLA). This reality

is further slowing the replenishmentof the biopharmaceutical new productpipeline. The cause: The bar is beingraised to demonstrate a favorablebalance of safety and efficiency beforean increasingly risk-averse FDA andits advisory panels, which, politicallyspeaking, have little to lose bydeferring approvals.

Migration from pivotal

studies to evidence-basedreal-world outcomes

Prospective, randomized, double-blindclinical trials for FDA registrationpurposeswhile considered the goldstandardhave strict patient inclusionand exclusion criteria. However, thetreatment outcomes generated inthis controlled environment do notnecessarily replicate providersexperiences in real-world patient

care. As a result, the medical communityand some payers increasingly arechallenging the validity of clinicaltrial findings, limiting new productsuse in treatment protocols andundermining their potential value.Consequently, the industry wouldbenefit from establishing the value


proposition of its products to cliniciansand payers with evidence-basedreal-world outcomes. Furthermore,in a landscape increasingly movingtoward personalized medicine,evidence-based medicine also willbe a strategic asset for translationalmedicine to identify the right moleculartargets and patient profiles.

Some bright spots

Despite the preceding challenges, thereare several bright spots for growth.

Exploring diversified growthin devices, consumer health,emerging markets andorphan diseases

With the core pharma discoveryand development engine sputtering,diversification is becoming a strategicchoice to gain more predictability infuture revenue streams (Figure 1). Forinstance, diversification into genericproducts has long been an avenuepharma has pursued, as evidenced bySandoz of Novartis and Greenstoneof Pfizer. However, it remains to beseen if pharma can operate genericsbusinesses as cost-efficiently such as

Teva, which operates a disciplined,low-cost model.

Regardless, because achieving economiesof scale is a critical success factorin the generics segment, we expectdiversification will trigger furtherconsolidation of smaller or regionalgenerics companies by global players.Tevas acquisition of Ratiopharm tostrengthen its European presence is arecent example. In fact, Accentures

research into what will drive highperformance in the future for bio-pharmaceutical companies revealedthat success hinges upon a sharp focuson what differentiates it in the marketand on building true superiority andmarket dominance in carefully selectedsegments. In many cases, this means

In 2010 only 21 new

drugs were approved,

down from 25 in 2009

and 24 in 2008, indicating

that it takes longer and

is getting more difficult

for the industry to gain

approval for new drug

applications (NDA)

and biologics licensing

applications (BLA).


5/16

Figure 1. Life sciences companies vary in extent of and appetite for diversificationRevenue Diversification SplitPharma Majors 2009

Pharma

Source: Jeffries Equity Research, March 2010

0

20

40

60

80

100

BayerJohnson

&Johnson

Abbott

Labs

NovartisMerckGlaxo-

SmithKline

RocheSanofi-

Aventis

Merck &

Co.

Pfizer

Inc.

Astra-

zenecaPLC

Eli Lilly

and Co.

Novo

Nordisk

Bristol

MyersSquibb

Vaccines Generics Diagnostics OTC Other healthcare Chemicals/other

Note: While the graph identifies pharma as a pure strategic focus area, pharma itself comprises of a diverse set of therapeutic areas and technologies which can provide some level ofintrinsic diversification.

5

pharma companies will need thediscipline to divest businesses thatdo not clearly line up with its strategicfocus, the discretion to acquire the right

assets and companies that enhance itscompetitive positioning, and the abilityto overturn its established business modeland concentrate on a select set ofdistinctive capabilities that will drivehigh performance in its focused area.7

In addition to diversifying into genericproducts, pharma players such as Pfizerhave experimented with consumerhealth with varying degrees of success.To operate as effectively as a P&G

or Unilever, pharma companies mustdevelop comparable consumer goodsand retail competencies, which currentlymost lack. On the other hand, thepresence of an established consumerhealth business allows pharma companiesto tap Rx-to-OTC switch opportunitiesfor improved lifecycle management.

Diversification to devices, typified bywhat Johnson & Johnson has beendoing with Ethicon and with Mentor(among other examples), is another

hedging strategy for pharma to pursue.Medical technology companies typicallyare not exposed to cliff-driven patentexpirations, and with their steadier andmore predictable revenue streams andacceptable product margins can beattractive to pharma companies seekingseparate and profitable business units.Some small cap players, such as Endo,have been pursuing this strategycentered around disease areas andspecialties by acquiring smaller drug

and medical technology companiesand, as a result, increased their shareprice considerably in 2010.


6/16


Finally, with growth absent in manydeveloped countries, the industry ispursuing a land grab in the emergingmarkets generally called BRICMT

(Brazil, Russia, India, China, Mexicoand Turkey), which have annual growthof approximately 15 percent.8 Consumersin these markets are gaining moreaccess to health care services and haveincreasing disposable income withwhich to opt for premium treatmentmodalities. This geographic expansionshould help the industry compensatefor the lack of growth in developedmarkets in the next three to five years.This higher revenue growth, however,

comes at the expense of marginerosion due to lower prices, whichis the norm across BRICMT. Consequently,Accenture expects to see an increasingnumber of acquisitions of establishedlocal branded generics companieswith attractive unit market share,distribution networks, supply chainsand customer relationships.

Oncology, diabetes, vaccines andautoimmune diseasesamong a fewothersconstitute a significant unmetmedical need and will be areas of

interest for acquisitions or licensingdeals as exemplified by Takedasacquisition of Millennium to buildpresence in the oncology space. Bio-similars, sometimes called biobetters,are another emerging trend that hasthe potential to change the biologicsspace materially. However, up-frontcapital investment requirements inexcess of $100 million and the recentlygranted 12-year patent exclusivityto existing biologics are barriers to

entry. Finally, orphan drug companiesmay continue to be among favoredacquisition targets, as demonstratedby Genzymes status as a hostiletakeover target for Sanofi-Aventis.

Currently, there are approximately350 orphan drugs approved withapproximately 6,800 rare diseasesfor which no therapies exist.9 Because

these are mostly genetically inheriteddiseases, the treatment effect may bepronounced, justifying a significantprice tag that payers may not resistunder pressure from active patientadvocacy groups. However, in thisregard pharma companies must be carefulto avoid pricing actions that wouldallow them to be labeled as greedy.

In sum, Accenture believes that severaltrends will drive the biopharmaceutical

industry into the next wave ofconsolidation, including new U.S.policy and regulatory developments,an innovation gap, and the need togenerate predictable revenue streams.


7/16

7

Biosimilars, sometimes

called biobetters, are

another emerging trend

that has the potential

to change the biologics

space materially.


8/16


Each year Accentures M&A practiceconducts empirical research on a numberof high-profile industries such as lifesciences to identify industry segmentsthat are ripe for regional or global

consolidation. By looking at an industrysegments scale as measured by revenuea proxy for its ability to fund large-scale M&A activityand by the currentdegree of concentration as measured

Analysis of theBiopharmaceuticalM&A Landscape

Increasing regulatoryintervention

While the global pharma segment has

potential for further consolidation,moderately concentrated HHI levelsin North America and the EU (Figure2) likely will discourage regulatoryauthorities from approving large-scaleconsolidation in their jurisdictions(although consolidation of mid-tierplayers may still be possible).

Asia-Pacific opportunities

The Asia-Pacific pharmaceuticalsegment has significant room forfurther consolidation before it sparkspotential concern. Its relatively smallscale suggests that consolidation maybe driven by larger North American andEuropean firms seeking and participatingin market growth by geographicallyexpanding into Asia Pacific, a regionoffering fewer M&A challenges thantheir base geographies.

by the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index(HHI), Accenture attempts to predictwhere large-scale M&A activity mostlikely will occur for each core geogra-

phy around the globe. We also attemptto gain insight into whether large-scale M&A activity is more probablewithin a segment (pharma companiesacquiring other pharma companies), oracross segments (pharma companiesbuying biotechs).

Our analysis of the global life scienceindustriesin particular its pharma-ceutical and biotech segmentssuggests that the global biopharma-

ceutical segment still has significantpotential for further consolidation.

Within pharma, we further identifiedthree issues:


9/16

9

Figure 2. Pharmaceutical industry in Asia-Pacific is highly competitive and is expected to undergo consolidationIndustry Revenue vs. Industry HHI1 (September 2010)

Notes:1The HHI is a measure of market concentration and has been calculated by adding the squares of the market shares of companies in an industry. Healthcare Supplies, Life Sciences &Services and Healthcare Equipment data points correspond to data for the period ended December 2009.2Revenues for all other points are as per last reported financials.

Source: CapitalIQ, Accenture analysis

Concentrated market > 1,800

Biotech EMEA 09/2010

Biotech 09/2010

4,000

3,100

2,200

1,300

4000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Pharma 09/2010

Biotech Asia-Pac 09/2010

Pharma Asia-Pac 09/2010

Pharma NA 09/2010

Life Sciences Tools & Services 2009

Healthcare Equipment 2009

Healthcare Supplies 2009

Pharma EMEA 09/2010

Biotech NA 09/2010

Herfindahl-HirschmanIndex (HH)

1,000 > moderately concentrated market < 1,800

Revenue2 ($ bn)

Pharmaceutical and Biotechnology industries have beenbroken up into North America (NA), Europe, Middle Eastand Africa (EMEA) and Asia-Pacific to represent therelative size and competitiveness in each geographywithin the industry.

Expansion into adjacencies

Due to challenges resulting fromconsolidation on their own turf, theNorth America and EU geographieswithin pharma likely have the scaleand the need to diversify into adjacentsegments within the life scienceindustry such as biotech or healthcare equipment.

Within biotech, two main pointsstood out:

Big fish chasing small fish

All geographies within the largebiotech segment are moderatelyconcentrated, which may preventinternal consolidation within largebiotechfor instance, as seen withlarge biotechs such as Amgen over thelast 3 yearswhile leaving room forsmaller companies to pursue technologylicensing deals.

Pharma to keep eyeing biotechs

It is possible that major biotech playerscould make alliances or buy intogeographies where they currentlyhave little or no presence. However,Accenture believes it is more likely thatmajor M&A within the biotech industrywill be driven by larger pharma playersthat have more scale and assets, agreater need to diversify, andlimited at-scale M&A opportunitieswithin their core business due toregulatory constraints.

We recognize the limits of predictions

based on summary data sets. Moreimportantly, we recognize the aimof various regulatory authoritiesto determine the levels of industryconcentration that should notbe exceeded.

Research and Data Analysis Methodology

The Industry HHI analysis was conducted on thePharmaceutical and Biotechnology industries as definedby CapitalIQ for the North America (NA), Europe, MiddleEast and Africa (EMEA), and Asia-Pacific (APAC) torepresent the relative size and competitiveness in eachgeography within each industry. Latin America was notincluded due to the limited number of companies withpublicly available data. In total, 152 companies wereanalyzed. The HHI is a measure of market concentrationand has been calculated by adding the squares of themarket shares of companies in an industry and all datapoints are for the period ended 9/30/2010. For Revenuedata points, last reported financials for each companywas used.


10/16


Another tool Accenture uses to identifylikely acquirers and targets withinan industry segment is the StrategicControl Map. By plotting the market

to book ratio (calculated as enterprisevalue/invested capital) versus the size(measured by invested capital) for eachcompany within an industry segment,we attempt to identify which companieshave the scale and currency to drive

Potential ConsolidationScenarios

High enterprise value large-capcompanies like Roche, Johnson& Johnson, Pfizer and GSK retainsignificant currency to continue to

acquire into biotech, as evidenced byJ&Js recent acquisition of Crucell.Similarly, Pfizers recent purchase ofKing shows their ability to acquireinto specialty pharma. Lookingforward, these Potential Buyerscan target biotechs near the bottomleft of the Strategic Control Map, asSanofi-Aventis has done with Genzyme.

At the top left of the map, modestlyscaled biotechs with high EV/ICratios, including Celgene and GileadSciences, are well positioned toeither make strategic acquisitionsor to shop themselves at attractivevaluations to large-cap companies.

consolidation. Generally, companiesnear the upper-right quadrant ofthe Strategic Control Map are likelyacquirers while companies near the

bottom-left are likely targets. Companiesnear the top-left lack the scale todrive consolidation, but commandhigh valuations that may permit themto make targeted deals while alsomaking them too expensive to beacquired. For their part, companies

near the bottom-right lack the currencyto acquire on a large scale but are toolarge themselves to be acquired by rivals.

Because of the potential for pharma

companies to drive M&A activity in thebiotech segment, Accenture has createda Strategic Control Map covering bothsegments with data current at theend of September 2010 (Figure 3). Wefound that:


11/16

11

Figure 3. Potential acquirers can target biotech companies like Grifols, Actelion, Intercell Biomedical and Chengzhi Co. Ltd.which have low valuationsInvested Capital vs. Enterprise Value/Invested Capital Ratio (September 2010)

Notes:1EV and market capitalization values are based on closing share prices as on 9/30/2010. For Invested Capital values, last reported financials have been used.2Top 5 companies by revenue have been taken from Pharmaceutical and Biotech segments for North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific. For Latin America only 4 companies had publicavailable data. For Europe AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck KGaA do not belong to Top 5 and have been added for market perspective. Pfizer and Alexion are outliers andtheir representation is not to scale.

Source: CapitalIQ, Accenture analysis

Top 36 EV/IC median ~ 2.2

6

5

3

2

0$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

Pharmaceutical companiesBiotech companies

Potential

Targets

PotentialBuyers

EnterpriseValue1/InvestedCapitalRatio

Top 36 IC median ~ $8,610

1

4

Invested Capital ($mn)

Top 362 by revenue in North America, Europe,Asia-Pacific and Latin America by TTM revenue

$10 bn

$20 bn

$50 bn

$80 bn

$150 bn

EnterpriseValue

Threshold

Merck

Johnson & Johnson

Bayer

Roche

Abbott

GlaxoSmithKline

Amgen

Peer Average

Takeda

Eli Lilly

AstellasEisai

Gilead Sciences

Genzyme

Biogen Idec

Celgene

Chugai

Shenzhen Neptunus

Vertex

Zeltia

Biomm

Biomarin

Rigel

Shire

Laboratorios Andromoca

CSL

Chengzhi Co. Ltd.

Sino Biopharmaceutical

Biocon

Intercell Biomedical

GrifolsDimed

Endo

AstraZeneca

Merck KGaA

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Instituto RosenbuschUCB

Actelion

Daiichi SankyoSanofi-Aventis

Novartis

Pfizer (129,717,1.4)

Research and Data Analysis Methodology

The 36 companies in the Strategic Control Matrixanalysis were selected by including the top 5 companiesby revenue in the Pharmaceutical and Biotech seg-ments respectively in the North America, Europe andAsia-Pacific regions. For the Latin America region, only4 companies had publicly available data and were thusincluded. For the Europe region, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck KGaA did not meet the top 5revenue criteria but however have been added in orderto provide a holistic market perspective. Pfizer has beenidentified as an outlier as its representation is not toscale and have thus been excluded from the analysis.EV and market capitalization values are based onclosing share prices as on 9/30/2010. For InvestedCapital values, last reported financials for eachcompany was used.

Smaller companies with less-robustEV/IC ratios at the bottom-leftof the map, such as the Japanesepharmas Astellas and Daiichi Sankyo,

could become Potential Targets.They will increasingly be forced tomake larger betssuch as Astellas$4 billion acquisition of OSIorrisk being acquired at a relativelylower premium by larger pharmas.Alternatively, it is conceivable thattwo followers among this groupcould attempt to merge, thus poolingtheir assets and their bets.


12/16


However, the most interesting findingfrom our Strategic Control Map is thehigh number of well-known pharmacompanies that currently exist in the

middle ground. Companies in thisarea need to be tightly focused ontheir strategic approach for continuedgrowth. Accenture believes that ifcompanies in this area do not movewith pace and clarity to gain marketprominence in their area of strategicfocus, they will risk their futureindependence and profitable growth.Furthermore, Accentures experienceacross markets suggests that themiddle ground may not be a viable

long-term landing point, becauseshareholders may slowly abandoncompanies that they view astrapped there.

As such, these companies need to veryclearly articulate their future growthstrategies to their investors. Accenturebelieves there are a number of options

they can pursue: 1) Commit to innovationby refocusing the portfolio, 2) becomean outcomes-focused company thatprovides a range of solutions beyondthe molecule to meet customer goals,or 3) embrace a more diversified modelof consumer health, medical products,generics, etc.1

Bristol-Meyers Squibb (BMS) is a goodexample of a company making such amove toward innovation. The company

has eschewed the traditional largepharma model and adopted a stringof pearls strategy to pursue targetedgrowth. We expect that BMS and otherpharmas such as Takeda, AstraZeneca, andLilly will further evaluate opportunitiesto acquire into biotech to move towardthe right of the chart or will risk fallingbehind to become potential targets.

Even slightly larger and more successfullydiversified pharma companies suchas Bayer and Abbott Laboratories (asuccessful serial acquirer) may find

they need to gain further scale throughcontinued acquisitions, as Abbott didwell with the AMO acquisition. Suchmoves will help these players avoid therisk of becoming targets in a potentialfuture wave of mega-consolidation.


13/16

13

Accentures experience

across markets suggests

that the middle ground

may not be a viable long-

term landing point, because

shareholders may slowly

abandon companies that

they view as trapped there.


14/16


Long known for robust growth andhigh profitability, the biopharmaceuticalindustry is at a critical juncture todeliver shareholder value. The industry

is faced with massive patent expirations,generic commoditization and aninnovation gap, all of which mustbe overcome to sustain profitablegrowth. Much will change in thecoming years as both segments movetoward delivering solutions andimproved health outcomes versusproducts. Currently, ongoing costreduction initiatives, business processoutsourcing and strong cash reservesprovide large pharma companies with

a strategic option to grow throughtargeted acquisitions. In addition, thereare several trends that favor growthvia acquisitions, including US healthcare reform, evolving FDA standards,and increasing pressure for pharma-ceutical companies to diversify intogeneric products, consumer health,devices, and emerging markets.

Accenture research suggests that theglobal pharma and biotech segmentshave the potential for furtherconsolidation and megamergers,

both driven by the strategic intentto cut costs and build scale. Thesegments moderate industryconcentration will likely dissuaderegulatory authorities from approvinglarge-scale consolidations to a greaterextent going forward. This, in turn,is likely to drive increased activity bythe larger players into smaller andtargeted therapeutic areas, highgrowth geographies and/or adjacentsegments including biotech. It may

also force acquirers to divest significantassets to satisfy regulators.

A few well-known pharmaceuticalcompanies occupy a middle-groundin which they may lack the competitivescale or capabilities required forsustainable growth without acquisitions.

Conclusion

These companies will likely need toarticulate a focused growth strategyto their shareholders or risk acquisitionby their larger competitors.

In conclusion, several major factorsand trends in the life sciences industrymake consolidation an inevitable reality.Only through a rigorous process ofstrategic target identification, duediligence and seamless post-mergerintegration will tomorrows leadingpharma companies lay the groundworkfor sustainable shareholder value andhigh performance.


15/16

15

References

1 Accenture Research, Era of Out-comes, Emerging Business Models for

High Performance, 2009

2 Justin Lahart, Companies Cling toCash, the Wall Street Journal, pg A1December 10, 2010

3 Accenture Research, US Health-care Reform: Pharmaceutical IndustryImpact and Opportunities , 2010

4 Accenture Research, AchievingHigh Performance in the BioPharma-ceutical Business, 2010

5 Elsevier Business Intelligence Strate-gic Transactions database; Jan 1, 2007through Aug 31, 2010.

6 Jennifer Corbett Dooren, Drug Ap-provals Slipped in 2010, Wall StreetJournal, page B2, December 31, 2010

7 Accenture Research, Achieving HighPerformance in the BioPharmaceuticalIndustry: How Will You Dominate theGame?, 2010

8 IMS Market Prognosis, IMS HealthPress Release, Oct 6, 2010

9 Cliff Mintz, PhD, Orphan Drugs:Big Pharmas Next Act? Life ScienceLeader, October 2010, pg. 9

David A. Sheehy is a senior executivein Accentures Strategy service lineand is the global lead for its LifeSciences Strategy practice. David has20 years of management consultingexperience working with leadingHealth & Life Sciences companies,with a focus on corporate andcommercial strategies. David hasrecently co-authored AccenturesAchieving Future High Performancein the Biopharmaceutical Industry,a point-of-view which addressesapproaches to sustainable growthand profitability. David is based inWashington, D.C.

[email protected]

About the authors

Tom Herd is a senior executive inAccentures Strategy service line.He has 16 years of managementconsulting experience in M&A, mergerintegration, and strategy consultingwith Fortune1000 and entrepreneurialclients. Prior to joining Accenture,

Tom worked with another leadingconsulting firms North AmericanStrategy and Organization practice.Tom has also worked for Procter &Gamble in multiple countries and withthe U.S. Army in Germany. He is basedin Chicago.

[email protected]

Arda Ural is an experienced seniormanager in Accentures Life SciencesStrategy practice. Prior to joiningthe firm, Arda was a VP StrategicMarketing at Becton Dickinson (BD)and served as the SVP Marketing &Sales for a start-up biotechnologycompany Eyetech (later part of OSI/Astellas). Arda started his careerwith Pfizer and over 10 years hehad responsibilities including theUS Team Leader for Celebrex andworldwide marketing director forViagra launch. He holds BSc & MScdegrees in Mechanical Engineeringfrom the Bosphorus University and anMBA from the Marmara University inIstanbul, Turkey. He also completedPfizer Executive Development Programat Harvard Business School. He is

based in New [email protected]


16/16

Copyright 2011 AccentureAll rights reserved.

Accenture, its logo, and

High Performance Deliveredare trademarks of Accenture.

About Accenture

Accenture is a global managementconsulting, technology services

and outsourcing company, withapproximately 211,000 people servingclients in more than 120 countries.Combining unparalleled experience,comprehensive capabilities across allindustries and business functions,and extensive research on the worldsmost successful companies, Accenturecollaborates with clients to help thembecome high-performance businessesand governments. The companygenerated net revenues of US$21.6

billion for the fiscal year endedAug. 31, 2010. Its home page iswww.accenture.com.

About Accentures LifeSciences Practice

Our Life Sciences industry group works

with pharmaceuticals, biotechnology,medical products, medical technology,regulators, distributors, wholesalersand other companies to help bringlife-enhancing health solutionsto people around the globe. Weprovide consulting, technology andoutsourcing services across theentire life sciences value chain, fromlarge-scale business and technologytransformation to post- mergerintegration. Our key offerings include:

Research and Development, includingpharmacovigilance and regulatoryoutsourcing; Supply Chain andManufacturing Optimization;and Marketing and Sales, includingcommercial services, analytics anddigital marketing.

Documents

Accenture a Strategy for Focused Growth