Pharmaceutical Package Testing in Thailand

1. Which one would you pick?

2. Pharmaceutical Package Testing
in Thailand
Adam Acar, PhD
Thanat TengAmnuay

3. Background
• Shift toward (Rx) to Over The Counter
medicine (OTC)
– Patent expirations
– The “self-healing” trend
– FDA regulations

4. Background
• The OTC market has become very competitive
– Need for brand building and also strong market
research
– Need for studies to see if pharmaceutical branding
is similar to branding for CPGs
– Need to answer the branding dilemma (old and
traditional brand but not innovative----young and
innovative brand but not reliable)

5. Background
• The industry is the most regulated
• Patents expire within 15 years--- need for strong
branding
• 29.9 billion USD were spent for pharmaceutical
marketing in the US
– 56% Free Samples
– 25% Drug Detailing
– 12.5% Direct to customer advertising (DTCA)
– 2% on Journal advertising
– 4.5% others (Sufrin & Ross, 2008)

6. Background
• chemical compounds and new delivery
systems
• New drugs might work differently, but they
are not much better when compared to other
drugs in the market. As a result, nowadays
drugs in the market cannot be easily
differentiated from each other by tangible
benefits (Wood, 2006).
• Kotler’s dilemma!

7. Background
• Good packaging design practices can benefit
to three stakeholders (Billing, 2005)
– Manufacturer: Good packaging design can save
costs and emphasize branding
– Pharmacist: Good packaging design can minimize
risk of selection mistakes, reduce the workload of
the pharmacist
– End-user: Good packaging design can avoid risk of
taking wrong medicine, wrong dosage and time. It
also help end-user memorize the brand

8. Literature Review
• Martin Reimann, Judith Zaichkowsky, Carolin
Neuhaus, Thomas Bender, and Bernd Weber
(2010) compared 80 different aesthetic
packaging with another 80 different
standardized packaging.
• Aesthetic package is preferred over standard
packaging!
•

9. Literature Review
• 836 (smoker/nonsmoker) evaluated 3
cigarette pack designs
– Limited-Edition pack is the most appealing
– Regular (existing pack) is the second
– Plain pack is the least preferred
– Gallopel-Morvan, Moodie, Hammond, Eker,
Beguinot, and Martinet (2011)

10. Literature Review
• Light blue and white colors reduce the
perception of risk Hammond & Parkinson
(2009)
• According to Silyou’s (2007) conjoint analysis
– color & graphic
– package shape
– product information
– packaging technology (is the most important)
– layout of graphic and information.

11. Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1a: Curvy graphic style, which portrays most aesthetic, will appeal to participants the most.
Hypothesis 2a: Simple graphic style, which looks subtle and modest, will be the most reliable packaging
to participants.
Hypothesis 1b: Contrast color combination, which is the most outstanding design, will appeal to
participants the most.
Hypothesis 2b: Complement color combination, which is more harmonized, will be the most reliable
packaging to participants.
Hypothesis 1c: Modern typeface, which provides more modernized look, will appeal to participants the
most.
Hypothesis 2c: Traditional typeface, which provides classic look, will be the most reliable packaging to
participants.
Hypothesis 1d: Left-oriented composition, which is the most common orientation in Thailand, will
appeal to participants the most.
Hypothesis 2d: Left-oriented composition, which is the most common orientation in Thailand, will also
be the most reliable packaging to participants.
Hypothesis 1e: Realistic graphic element, which is the most aesthetic, will appeal to participants the
most.
Hypothesis 2e: Symbolic graphic element, which provides lesser aesthetic, will be the most reliable
packaging to participants.
Hypothesis 1f: Yellow background, which is the brightest color in the set, will appeal to participants the
most.
Hypothesis 2f: Light blue background, which is the most common color used in medical product, will be
the most reliable packaging to participants.

12. Procedure
• Color, composition, graphic style, graphic
elements and typeface manipulated
• Via online survey, 186 Thai subjects in March,
2014. Single-choice questions

13. Findings

15. Graphic Style
A
B
C
8.70%
17.50%
73.80%
23.50%
50.80%
25.70%
Reliability
Appeal

17. Color Combination
A
B
C
34.80%
24.50%
40.80%
65.80%
22.80%
11.40%
Reliability
Appeal

19. Typeface
A
B
55.40%
44.60%
52.70%
47.30%
Reliability
Appeal

21. Composition
A
B
C
63.60%
20.10%
16.30%
69.60%
14.10%
16.30%
Reliability
Appeal

23. Graphic Element
A
B
C
14.80%
27.30%
57.90%
38%
26.10%
35.90%
Reliability
Appeal

25. Background
A
B
C
D
17.90%
47.30%
25%
9.80%
19.60%
58.70%
10.90%
10.90%
Reliability
Appeal

26. Which one would you pick?

27. Why did you pick that one?

28. What would you prefer (open ended)?

29. Conclusions
• Package appeal can be dramatically changed
based on curviness of graphics, realistic images
and colors
• Typeface does not have a huge impact on
package evaluations
• Real images increase likability and reliability of
packages
• Aesthetic appeal and trust most of the time are
not related
• Evolutionary theory and the left side view
effects???

30. References
• Smith, M., (2001), Principles of Pharmaceutical Marketing. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger.
• Blackett, T. and Harrison, T., 2001. Brand medicine: Use and future potential of branding in pharmaceutical markets.
International Journal of Medical Marketing 2 (1), 33-49.
• Moss, G., 2001. Pharmaceutical brands: Do they really exist? International Journal of Medical Marketing 2 (1), 23-32.
• Brezis, M., (2008), "Big pharma and health care: unsolvable conflict of interests between private enterprise and public health".
Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 45 (2): 83–9; discussion 90–4.
• Schuiling, I., & Moss, G. (2004), How different are branding strategies in the pharmaceutical industry and the fast-moving
consumer goods sector. The Journal o f Brand Management, Vol. 11, no. 5,36.
• Sufrin CB, Ross JS (September 2008). "Pharmaceutical industry marketing: understanding its impact on women's health".
Obstet Gynecol Surv 63 (9): 585–96.
• Jeremy A. Greene; Pharmaceutical Marketing Research and the Prescribing Physician. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007
May;146(10):742-748.
• Wood, D. (2006, March 3). Pharmaceutical Brands: State of the pharmaceutical brandscape. Retrieved From Brand channel
website: http://www.brandchannel.com/papers_review.asp?sp_id=1228
• Applbaum K (2006) Pharmaceutical marketing and the invention of the medical consumer. PLoS Med 3(4): e189.
• DuPuis, S., & Silva, J. (2008). Package Design Workbook: The Art and Science of Successful Packaging. Beverly,MA : Rockport
Publishers
• Billing, S. (2005-11-03). ANALYSIS: Medical packaging design. Design week, 20(44), 8.
• Slattery, D. (2007-03-01). Packaging Design: Basic Principles. Medical device technology, 18(2), 46.
• Scholfield,J and Thomas,J. (2001). Brand packaging design. Brand medicine (pp. 163-171). New York, NY: Palgrave
• Reimann, M., Zaichkowsky, J., Neuhaus, C., Bender, T., & Weber, B. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and
psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 431-441.
• Gallopel-Morvan, K., Moodie, C., Hammond, D., Eker, F., Beguinot, E., and Martinet, Y. (2011). Consumer perceptions of
cigarette pack design in France: a comparison of regular, limited edition and plain packaging. Tobacco Control, 21(5) 502-506.
• Hammond, D. (2009-09-01). The impact of cigarette package design on perceptions of risk. Journal of public health (Oxford,
England), 31(3), 345-353.doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdp066
• Silayoi, P., Speece, M. (2007) "The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach", European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 41 Iss: 11/12, pp.1495 – 1517

32. Did You Know?
www.marketingjp.com