Ranking

Results per criterium

Results per company

  • Overall Ranking Index 2012

    The 2012 Access to Medicine Index was published on November 28th, 2012. The report evaluates the top 20 pharmaceutical companies' access to medicine activities.

    Click on a company name to find out more about its 2012 Index performance, or use the tabs at the top to see company rankings in specific areas.

    Scores

    Company scores are calculated on a relative scale of 0 to 5, with 0 indicating the lowest score among the company set and 5 signifying the highest score among the company set. Scores in this graph have been rounded to the nearest tenth for easier reading, but unrounded scores were used in all calculations.

  • General Access to Medicine Management

    This covers overall organisation and management of access programmes. Under this area, we evaluate:

    • Whether the company has a governance system that includes direct board-level responsibility and accountability for access to medicine initiatives.
    • The existence of an access to medicine strategy and specific targets that are monitored.
    • The development of internal incentive structures that encourage and reward staff for effective delivery of initiatives that improve access to medicines.
    • To what extent the company works with stakeholders including universities, patient groups, local governments, employees, local and international NGOs and peers with the aim of improving access to medicines, and to what extent senior management participates in the public debate around access to medicine.
  • Public Policy & Market Influence

    In this area, we examine how companies conduct their relationships with policy-makers, competitors, customers and the general public on matters that have an impact on access to medicine. It assesses evidence of:

    • Transparency regarding lobbying activities and the positions the company seeks to promote when access to medicine is affected.
    • Proactivity in fighting corruption through internal anti-bribery and anti-corruption codes of conduct, application of these codes to contractors, and membership of relevant organisations.
    • Commitment to and enforcement of a code of conduct regarding ethical marketing practices for all sales agents and local distributors and contractors.
    • Anti-competitive behaviour or pursuit of arrangements with manufacturers of generic medicines that might delay access to medicine.
    • Breaches of codes of conduct relating to lobbying, ethical marketing of products, bribery and corruption.
  • Research & Development

    This focuses on research efforts aimed at developing new drugs or locally adapted formulations of existing ones for high priority diseases in countries where there is an unfulfilled research need and a market failure. It captures information such as:

    • The portion of R&D investment dedicated to diseases covered by the Index and the number of such products in the pipeline.
    • Collaborative research conducive to access to medicine.
    • Any recent controversies relating to clinical trial practices in developing countries, and the company's approach to ensuring the ethical standards of research organisations it contracts with to conduct clinical trials.
    • Access-friendly sharing of intellectual capital such as molecules library, patented compounds, processes or technologies, with collaborators, research institutions and drug discovery initiatives working on key diseases.
  • Pricing, Manufacturing & Distribution

    This examines pricing policies and supply chains for products aimed at diseases and countries covered by the Index. The main topics under this area are:

    • Approaches to and disclosure of affordable pricing efforts, including tiered pricing, where companies charge different classes of buyers — between and within countries — different prices for the same product.
    • How the company comes to decisions to register drugs in developing countries and what efforts it makes to expedite the review and approval process.
    • Methods of quality assurance for product delivery and instances of drug recall due to product or packaging quality problems.
    • The extent to which product packaging and information leaflets are tailored to local needs or differentiated to prevent product diversion in areas where tiered pricing is used.
  • Patents & Licencing

    Here we analyse the companies' intellectual property protection strategies and practices with regard to their impact on access to medicine. Issues covered include:

    • Approach to the World Trade Organization agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS); its flexibilities, including compulsory licencing, where developing country governments suspend patent protection and authorize the domestic generic manufacture of patented drugs to facilitate access to medicine; and to measures that provide stronger protection of intellectual property rights than set out in the TRIPS agreement.
    • Engagement in socially responsible licencing practices, including humanitarian use licenses, allowing multiple companies to produce the company's products under non-exclusive voluntary licenses, milestone-based technology transfer agreements, and refraining from filing patents or asserting patent rights in the world's least developed countries.
    • Stance towards patent pools and intellectual property sharing.
  • Capability Advancement in Product Development & Distribution

    This focuses on initiatives that are conducive to supporting developing countries to build capacities to develop and distribute their own drugs, and to monitor drug effects through national pharmacovigilance programmes. We assess efforts to:

    • Engage in research collaborations with local public sector organisations or universities to enhance local capacity for health research and drug development.
    • Support developing country governments and other distributors to develop locally appropriate supply chain systems.
    • Contribute to the development or implementation of national pharmacovigilance programmes.
    • Transfer technology, including know-how, to local manufacturers or local in-house facilities.
  • Product Donations & Philanthropic Activities

    In this area, we evaluate the effectiveness of companies' product donation initiatives and philanthropic activities and whether they are aligned with the needs of the target communities. Indicators cover:

    • The scale and scope of donated products and commitments to ensuring that donated drugs get to patients.
    • Investments in health infrastructure-related philanthropic projects and their relevance to long-term sustainable access to medicine.
    • Evidence that philanthropic activities support implementation of national health system development plans and stated local health priorities.
    • Detailed disclosure about the type, volume and destination of products that are part of multi-drug donation programmes and the process and criteria for selection.
    • Reporting of impact of single-drug donation programmes during the period of analysis.
  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 13 10 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    Management
    2.3
    Public Policy
    2.6
    R&D
    1.8
    Pricing
    2.5
    Patents
    1.2
    Capability
    1.4
    Donations
    2.0
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 15 9 (2010)
    Score 2.3
    2.1
    3.3
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 14 2 (2010)
    Score 2.6
    1.1
    1.7
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 15 14 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    3.1
    1.7
    1.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 5 = 5 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    3.0
    2.4
    3.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 15 17 (2010)
    Score 1.2
    1.8
    2.4
    0.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 15 11 (2010)
    Score 1.4
    1.5
    1.0
    2.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Abbott Laboratories Inc.

    Rank 17 10 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    2.8
    2.3
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 20 19 (2010)
    Score 0.9
    Management
    0.5
    Public Policy
    2.1
    R&D
    1.2
    Pricing
    0.2
    Patents
    0.8
    Capability
    0.8
    Donations
    1.5
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 20 = 20 (2010)
    Score 0.5
    0.7
    1.3
    0.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 16 17 (2010)
    Score 2.1
    0.3
    0.6
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 19 20 (2010)
    Score 1.2
    1.5
    1.2
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 19 = 19 (2010)
    Score 0.2
    0.3
    0.4
    0.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 18 12 (2010)
    Score 0.8
    0.4
    0.8
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 19 20 (2010)
    Score 0.8
    1.4
    1.0
    0.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Astellas Pharma Inc.

    Rank 19 18 (2010)
    Score 1.5
    1.2
    3.0
    1.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 16 7 (2010)
    Score 1.6
    Management
    2.6
    Public Policy
    1.8
    R&D
    2.3
    Pricing
    0.7
    Patents
    1.4
    Capability
    1.3
    Donations
    2.3
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 10 7 (2010)
    Score 2.6
    2.5
    3.3
    2.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 19 4 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    0.8
    1.3
    3.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 12 8 (2010)
    Score 2.3
    3.0
    2.9
    2.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 17 12 (2010)
    Score 0.7
    0.3
    1.0
    0.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 12 8 (2010)
    Score 1.4
    1.4
    2.4
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 17 5 (2010)
    Score 1.3
    1.8
    1.0
    1.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • AstraZeneca plc

    Rank 16 4 (2010)
    Score 2.3
    2.8
    3.5
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 9 14 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    Management
    3.9
    Public Policy
    2.9
    R&D
    1.8
    Pricing
    2.0
    Patents
    1.5
    Capability
    2.8
    Donations
    3.4
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Bayer AG

    Rank 5 10 (2010)
    Score 3.9
    4.0
    5.0
    3.6
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 13 10 (2010)
    Score 2.9
    2.2
    1.7
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 16 11 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    1.8
    0.8
    2.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 12 11 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    2.2
    1.9
    1.9
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 9 16 (2010)
    Score 1.5
    2.5
    2.6
    0.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 6 14 (2010)
    Score 2.8
    3.1
    3.5
    2.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bayer AG

    Rank 9 13 (2010)
    Score 3.4
    4.3
    4.0
    3.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 17 12 (2010)
    Score 1.5
    Management
    1.2
    Public Policy
    1.7
    R&D
    1.0
    Pricing
    0.9
    Patents
    1.8
    Capability
    1.9
    Donations
    3.0
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 17 15 (2010)
    Score 1.2
    1.8
    1.3
    1.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 20 19 (2010)
    Score 1.7
    0.0
    0.0
    4.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 20 17 (2010)
    Score 1.0
    1.1
    0.7
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 15 10 (2010)
    Score 0.9
    1.2
    0.0
    1.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 5 2 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    2.4
    0.8
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 12 9 (2010)
    Score 1.9
    2.4
    1.0
    2.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Boehringer-Ingelheim

    Rank 12 7 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    4.3
    2.5
    2.8
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 12 15 (2010)
    Score 2.1
    Management
    2.4
    Public Policy
    3.6
    R&D
    1.9
    Pricing
    2.0
    Patents
    1.5
    Capability
    1.2
    Donations
    3.0
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 14 = 14 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    4.3
    2.5
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 4 11 (2010)
    Score 3.6
    4.0
    2.3
    5.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 14 16 (2010)
    Score 1.9
    2.7
    1.4
    2.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 11 14 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    2.1
    0.9
    3.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 11 6 (2010)
    Score 1.5
    2.7
    0.8
    1.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 18 = 18 (2010)
    Score 1.2
    1.8
    0.0
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.

    Rank 13 9 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    3.4
    4.6
    2.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 19 20 (2010)
    Score 0.9
    Management
    0.9
    Public Policy
    1.9
    R&D
    1.2
    Pricing
    0.4
    Patents
    0.7
    Capability
    0.6
    Donations
    1.3
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 19 18 (2010)
    Score 0.9
    0.3
    2.5
    0.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 18 20 (2010)
    Score 1.9
    0.1
    0.3
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 18 = 18 (2010)
    Score 1.2
    2.4
    0.8
    1.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 18 17 (2010)
    Score 0.4
    0.9
    0.0
    0.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 20 = 20 (2010)
    Score 0.7
    1.0
    0.8
    0.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 20 19 (2010)
    Score 0.6
    0.8
    1.0
    0.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.

    Rank 20 = 20 (2010)
    Score 1.3
    0.8
    2.5
    1.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 15 16 (2010)
    Score 1.9
    Management
    2.6
    Public Policy
    3.0
    R&D
    2.8
    Pricing
    0.8
    Patents
    0.8
    Capability
    1.6
    Donations
    3.1
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 11 19 (2010)
    Score 2.6
    3.1
    3.3
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 11 16 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    2.5
    1.8
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 7 6 (2010)
    Score 2.8
    3.3
    2.4
    3.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 16 = 16 (2010)
    Score 0.8
    0.3
    1.1
    1.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 17 13 (2010)
    Score 0.8
    0.8
    1.5
    0.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 14 12 (2010)
    Score 1.6
    2.3
    1.0
    2.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eisai Co. Ltd.

    Rank 10 19 (2010)
    Score 3.1
    4.9
    3.8
    2.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 14 13 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    Management
    2.1
    Public Policy
    3.5
    R&D
    2.7
    Pricing
    1.1
    Patents
    1.4
    Capability
    1.4
    Donations
    2.4
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 16 12 (2010)
    Score 2.1
    4.3
    2.5
    1.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 6 13 (2010)
    Score 3.5
    3.6
    2.9
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 9 15 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    2.7
    3.4
    2.2
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 14 15 (2010)
    Score 1.1
    2.2
    0.5
    1.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 13 5 (2010)
    Score 1.4
    1.8
    1.9
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 16 6 (2010)
    Score 1.4
    2.0
    1.0
    1.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Eli Lilly & Company

    Rank 14 12 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    3.4
    3.5
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 5 4 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    Management
    3.4
    Public Policy
    3.1
    R&D
    2.1
    Pricing
    3.2
    Patents
    4.1
    Capability
    2.2
    Donations
    3.0
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 7 3 (2010)
    Score 3.4
    4.3
    3.8
    3.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 10 15 (2010)
    Score 3.1
    2.7
    2.1
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 13 10 (2010)
    Score 2.1
    2.1
    2.3
    2.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 1 2 (2010)
    Score 3.2
    2.3
    3.3
    4.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 1 4 (2010)
    Score 4.1
    4.4
    3.1
    4.3
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 10 7 (2010)
    Score 2.2
    3.1
    1.0
    2.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Gilead Sciences

    Rank 11 15 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    4.2
    3.0
    3.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 1 = 1 (2010)
    Score 3.8
    Management
    4.9
    Public Policy
    3.8
    R&D
    4.7
    Pricing
    2.9
    Patents
    2.6
    Capability
    4.2
    Donations
    4.6
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 1 = 1 (2010)
    Score 4.9
    5.0
    4.5
    5.0
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 2 1 (2010)
    Score 3.8
    4.4
    4.4
    4.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 1 = 1 (2010)
    Score 4.7
    5.0
    4.3
    4.7
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 2 1 (2010)
    Score 2.9
    4.0
    3.3
    2.4
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 3 1 (2010)
    Score 2.6
    3.0
    3.1
    2.2
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 1 = 1 (2010)
    Score 4.2
    4.1
    3.5
    5.0
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • GlaxoSmithKline plc

    Rank 1 2 (2010)
    Score 4.6
    5.0
    4.8
    4.6
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 2 9 (2010)
    Score 3.6
    Management
    4.8
    Public Policy
    3.5
    R&D
    3.8
    Pricing
    2.7
    Patents
    3.2
    Capability
    3.7
    Donations
    4.4
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 2 13 (2010)
    Score 4.8
    5.0
    5.0
    5.0
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 5 12 (2010)
    Score 3.5
    4.1
    2.8
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 3 7 (2010)
    Score 3.8
    4.1
    3.6
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 3 8 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    3.0
    2.6
    3.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 2 11 (2010)
    Score 3.2
    4.7
    3.3
    2.4
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 3 8 (2010)
    Score 3.7
    3.9
    3.5
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Johnson & Johnson

    Rank 3 6 (2010)
    Score 4.4
    5.0
    4.8
    4.1
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 4 2 (2010)
    Score 3.1
    Management
    3.7
    Public Policy
    3.2
    R&D
    3.7
    Pricing
    2.5
    Patents
    2.6
    Capability
    2.7
    Donations
    4.1
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 6 2 (2010)
    Score 3.7
    5.0
    3.3
    4.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 9 5 (2010)
    Score 3.2
    2.5
    2.8
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 4 = 4 (2010)
    Score 3.7
    4.1
    2.1
    4.3
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 8 3 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    3.4
    2.6
    2.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 4 3 (2010)
    Score 2.6
    4.5
    2.9
    1.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 8 3 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    3.5
    1.0
    4.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck & Co. Inc.

    Rank 5 1 (2010)
    Score 4.1
    5.0
    4.2
    4.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 8 17 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    Management
    2.8
    Public Policy
    2.9
    R&D
    2.8
    Pricing
    1.8
    Patents
    1.3
    Capability
    2.9
    Donations
    4.0
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 9 16 (2010)
    Score 2.8
    4.0
    3.3
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 12 8 (2010)
    Score 2.9
    3.9
    2.2
    3.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 6 12 (2010)
    Score 2.8
    4.3
    1.5
    3.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 13 20 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    1.7
    2.8
    1.5
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 14 18 (2010)
    Score 1.3
    2.5
    1.5
    0.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 5 15 (2010)
    Score 2.9
    3.3
    3.5
    2.4
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Merck KGaA

    Rank 6 16 (2010)
    Score 4.0
    5.0
    4.0
    4.0
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 7 3 (2010)
    Score 2.9
    Management
    3.4
    Public Policy
    3.4
    R&D
    3.6
    Pricing
    2.5
    Patents
    1.7
    Capability
    2.8
    Donations
    3.7
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Novartis AG

    Rank 8 5 (2010)
    Score 3.4
    4.0
    5.0
    2.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 7 3 (2010)
    Score 3.4
    1.7
    2.8
    5.0
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 5 2 (2010)
    Score 3.6
    4.5
    2.6
    4.1
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 6 = 6 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    2.9
    2.0
    2.1
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 7 9 (2010)
    Score 1.7
    2.5
    2.9
    0.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 7 2 (2010)
    Score 2.8
    3.8
    1.0
    3.6
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novartis AG

    Rank 8 = 8 (2010)
    Score 3.7
    4.3
    4.2
    4.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 6 8 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    Management
    4.1
    Public Policy
    3.6
    R&D
    2.7
    Pricing
    2.7
    Patents
    1.8
    Capability
    3.0
    Donations
    4.1
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 3 6 (2010)
    Score 4.1
    4.7
    3.3
    4.7
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 3 14 (2010)
    Score 3.6
    4.2
    3.1
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 8 13 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    2.5
    2.3
    3.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 4 = 4 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    3.5
    2.4
    2.7
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 6 10 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    2.5
    2.6
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 4 16 (2010)
    Score 3.0
    3.5
    2.5
    3.5
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Novo Nordisk A/S

    Rank 4 14 (2010)
    Score 4.1
    4.9
    4.8
    4.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 11 = 11 (2010)
    Score 2.2
    Management
    2.4
    Public Policy
    2.4
    R&D
    2.4
    Pricing
    2.1
    Patents
    0.9
    Capability
    1.9
    Donations
    3.8
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 13 11 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    1.2
    5.0
    2.2
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 15 6 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    1.7
    1.5
    4.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 11 5 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    3.3
    1.5
    2.9
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 9 13 (2010)
    Score 2.1
    2.8
    0.9
    2.6
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 16 15 (2010)
    Score 0.9
    1.4
    2.4
    0.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 11 10 (2010)
    Score 1.9
    2.8
    1.0
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Pfizer Inc.

    Rank 7 3 (2010)
    Score 3.8
    4.8
    3.3
    4.3
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 10 6 (2010)
    Score 2.3
    Management
    2.5
    Public Policy
    3.3
    R&D
    2.4
    Pricing
    2.0
    Patents
    1.7
    Capability
    2.7
    Donations
    2.3
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 12 8 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    3.5
    3.3
    2.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 8 9 (2010)
    Score 3.3
    2.9
    2.6
    4.8
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 10 9 (2010)
    Score 2.4
    3.5
    2.0
    2.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 10 9 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    2.5
    2.4
    1.8
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 8 7 (2010)
    Score 1.7
    2.1
    2.4
    1.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 9 4 (2010)
    Score 2.7
    3.1
    1.0
    3.9
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Roche Holding Ltd.

    Rank 15 5 (2010)
    Score 2.3
    2.7
    2.8
    2.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 3 5 (2010)
    Score 3.2
    Management
    4.1
    Public Policy
    3.9
    R&D
    3.8
    Pricing
    2.5
    Patents
    1.5
    Capability
    3.7
    Donations
    4.5
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Sanofi

    Rank 4 = 4 (2010)
    Score 4.1
    5.0
    4.5
    4.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 1 7 (2010)
    Score 3.9
    4.4
    3.3
    5.0
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 2 3 (2010)
    Score 3.8
    4.6
    3.5
    4.5
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 7 = 7 (2010)
    Score 2.5
    2.9
    2.9
    2.4
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 10 14 (2010)
    Score 1.5
    2.5
    2.6
    0.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 2 13 (2010)
    Score 3.7
    4.1
    3.5
    3.9
    2.5
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Sanofi

    Rank 2 11 (2010)
    Score 4.5
    5.0
    5.0
    3.8
    5.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 18 = 18 (2010)
    Score 1.1
    Management
    1.1
    Public Policy
    2.0
    R&D
    1.4
    Pricing
    0.2
    Patents
    0.8
    Capability
    1.6
    Donations
    1.8
    0 1 2 3 4 5
  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 18 17 (2010)
    Score 1.1
    1.5
    2.5
    0.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Management. The company's final Management score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 17 18 (2010)
    Score 2.0
    0.3
    0.3
    4.6
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Public Policy. The company's final Public Policy score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 17 19 (2010)
    Score 1.4
    2.3
    1.2
    1.4
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within R&D. The company's final R&D score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 20 18 (2010)
    Score 0.2
    0.0
    0.4
    0.1
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Pricing. The company's final Pricing score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 19 = 19 (2010)
    Score 0.8
    0.3
    0.8
    1.3
    0.0
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Patents. The company's final Patents score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 13 17 (2010)
    Score 1.6
    1.4
    1.0
    2.0
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Capability. The company's final Capability score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.

    Rank 18 17 (2010)
    Score 1.8
    1.3
    3.0
    1.5
    1.3
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0
    Commitments
    Transparency
    Performance
    Innovation

    The graph above shows the company's unweighted scores for Commitment, Transparency, Performance and Business Innovation within Donations. The company's final Donations score is a weighted combination of these, calculated according to the Index Methodology Framework.

You are here