Pharma loves a good launch. They invest billions. They polish the slides meticulously. A new medicine hits the market with the same excitement as the latest iPhone.
And then… silence.
Most launches fail to meet expectations. Not because the science is weak. Not because the patients don’t exist. But because the industry has a blind spot, it rarely admits.
The hidden reason: misaligned expectations
We like to think launches stumble on pricing, market competition, or even lack of physician awareness. Those matter. But the real, often unspoken problem is this: the people building the launch don’t see it the way the people buying, prescribing, or reimbursing it do.
In other words, companies are too busy celebrating the science to notice the system it’s about to crash into.
Regulators want evidence of safety. Payers want affordability and long-term value. Physicians want simplicity. Patients want access without selling the family car. And yet the launch team? They often prioritise dazzling forecasts and glossy branding. It’s like turning up to a chess match with a cricket bat — impressive effort, wrong game.
How to fix it
- Start with access, not the asset
Don’t wait until the Phase III readout to ask what payers think. Build their perspective in from day one. (And yes, it may be less glamorous than the science update, but it’s a lot cheaper than a failed launch.) - Design with the end in mind
Every trial should double as a launch rehearsal. Does the data package answer the questions payers and clinicians will ask? If not, congratulations, you’ve just funded very expensive trivia. - Honest internal debates
Too often, forecasts are padded with optimism. Teams convince themselves the world will bend to their assumptions. A simple fix: get someone in the room whose job is to poke holes — ideally without being fired for it. - Measure value in human terms
At the end of the day, launches succeed when the medicine changes real lives. That story must be understandable, evidenced, and told clearly. Not in jargon, not in 300-slide decks, but in human outcomes.
A small English truth
In the UK, we like to queue. We understand systems. We know what happens when you cut in line — people notice. Pharma launches often feel like queue-jumping: companies rush ahead without respecting the rules of the system, then act surprised when they’re sent to the back.
The takeaway
Most drug launches underperform not because the medicine is weak but because the strategy is inward-looking. Fix the misalignment, respect the perspectives of those who decide access, and suddenly the odds of success improve dramatically.
Or put simply, we don’t need faster cures. We need smarter brakes.
