Stakeholder survey 2015
Earlier in 2015 PHARMAC gave stakeholders the opportunity to tell us how we were doing, what it’s like to work with us and what we could do better, through a stakeholder survey. The results from that survey are now live.
PHARMAC has produced a summary of the overall findings, which covers the methodology of the survey, background on our previous, 2007 stakeholder survey and the key findings. A summary of findings by stakeholder group has also been produced. These summaries include the key findings from each stakeholder group who took part in the survey. They cover:
TRI*M Reputation Typology
Included in the full results and the stakeholder summaries is a breakdown of what our stakeholders think of us. This is described in the corporate reputation index and TRI*M Reputation Typology.
The typology highlights which stakeholders are potential advocates (main ambassadors) and which are not (mainly rejecters) based on their affinity and perception of our competence.
'Sympathisers' show fairly strong emotional affinity towards PHARMAC, but don’t think we do a good job in our core business, as product quality and/or success is rated on a low level.
'Rejecters' don’t respect and dislike PHARMAC. They’re emotionally very distanced and also don’t think we do a good job in offering good products or being economically successful.
'Ambassadors' truly admire PHARMAC: they like or even love PHARMAC, highly trust us and think we do a great job through offering good products and being economically successful.
'Rationals' respect PHARMAC, but are emotionally distanced. They attribute a good job through offering good products and being economically successful to the company, while not really liking and trusting PHARMAC.
- The 2015 Stakeholder Survey ran between February and March 2015.
- The survey was run in two parts: an online quantitative survey followed by in-depth qualitative interviews.
- 800 stakeholders completed the online survey and 22 in-depth interviews were conducted.
- A wide range of stakeholders participated in the survey, including primary care health professionals, Māori stakeholders, suppliers, patient advocacy groups and central government.
- The last stakeholder survey, which was qualitative only, was run in 2007.
2015 key findings - progress since 2007
- Stakeholders perceive major improvements since 2007, including PHARMAC’s approachability, transparency and relationships with suppliers, while a strong start has been made regarding devices.
- There is a desire for PHARMAC to balance its management of a fixed budget with a wider view of total sector costs and health outcomes – currently many stakeholders believe PHARMAC is more interested in medicine cost than quality.
- Perceived performance varies across stakeholder groups: central government, PHOs and DHBs have the most positive opinions, whereas suppliers and patient advocacy groups have the lowest opinions of PHARMAC.
- High levels of perceived performance regarding expert knowledge, handling of confidential information, objectivity and delivering to stated objectives; balanced against lower performance in timeliness of decision-making, taking opinions into account and understanding sector issues.
- Strong communication performance though with opportunities to improve further, including genuine listening in meetings, easier ways to sign up to multiple information streams, and developing future channels such as webinars, apps and mobile friendly website content.
A corporate reputation index (TRI*M) has been produced using stakeholder perceptions about affinity and functional competence.
PHARMAC’s overall reputation rating is 45, against a norm of 48 for government and regulatory bodies.
Stakeholders’ views about PHARMAC were mixed, with an almost even split between ‘ambassadors’ (those who admire PHARMAC) and ‘rejecters’ (those who dislike PHARMAC).
A breakdown by stakeholder of the reputation index is available in the full results.
Last updated: 19 February 2016