MANAGERIAL ANALYSIS AND COMMUNICATION

ASSIGNMENT 1 : Dr.NARENDRAN's DILEMMA

GROUP MEMBERS:
B SECTION.
1.P38085 - PAYAL LADHA
2.P38086 - POOJA CHAWLA
3.P38097 - RAPHAEL MATHEW MAMPILLY
4.P38110 - SURENDRAN S
5.P38113 - TUSHAR BADHERIA

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. GIRISH AGARWAL

1.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Indian Medical College, Chennai had been set up as a center for excellence in Siddha medicine.
The case study starts with Dr. Narendran’s, the director of IMC, dilemma about Dr. Ramkumar’s
proposal. Dr. Ramkumar’s, associate professor and head of the Pharmacology Department of
IMC, had developed a herbo-mineral Siddha cardiovascular product for coronary atherosclerosis.
Dr. Ramkumar wanted IMC to ensure the intellectual property protection of the research and
commercialize the formulation. This is explicitly the central problem of the case. Keeping in
mind all the possible verticals including IMC’s non-exposure to commercialization, Siddha’s
education and provision for medical care being the key objectives, supplementation of textual
authority validating the therapies and drugs used in Siddha, etc, Dr. Narendran should go ahead
with patenting the formulation and enter into an agreement with an entrepreneur, under which
the latter would pay annual royalties on sales of the formulation. Furthermore, going by exhibit
three and comparing all the given three options, IMC entering into an agreement with an
entrepreneur under which the latter would pay annual royalties on sales of the formulation is the
best possible solution to the situation. It would give IMC:

1- Better control
2- Continuity of brand name
3- Assured profit
4- Following of IMC’s mandate.

2.SITUATION ANANLYSIS
Dr. Narendran( Director of IMC, Chennai) is approached by one his colleagues, Dr. Ramkumar,
with a proposal for patenting his formulations for coronary atherosclerosis. Dr. Ramkumar is
very secretive about his formulations. Keeping this aside, it was in turn a unique opportunity for
IMC. But since the domain of patents and commercialization is completely new, so
Dr.Narendran is apprehensive of taking this step. Ramkumar came up with a formulation that
reduces the need for stents during angioplasty. He wants to get his formulations patented through
IMC.The patent will surely help IMC academically and financially and will give recognition to
Siddha system. IMC did not have a department or cell that could deal with the demand of this
kind. Patenting would add value to the work of good faculty. Although Narendran still doubted
whether practitioners would refer their patients to Siddha’s doctors. Also, there is only 10 %
chance that IP protection would not be granted. In the context of globalization, Siddha products
were neither visible.
3.STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVE:
Indian Medical College(IMC), Chennai had been set up as center of excellence in siddha
medicine to impart quality siddha education, provide holistic medical care and do research in the
field of siddha medicine.

Dr.Narendran is the current director of IMC and his objective is to carry on the legacy of IMC
without compromising on its ethics and values.

Dr.Ramkumar, who is the faculty at IMC approached Dr.Narendran with a proposal for getting
his formulations for atherosclerosis patented.

Since patenting was an unexplored are at IMC, Dr.Narendran was in a dilemma on how to
respond to Dr.Ramkumar's proposal.

4.CRITERIA AND DECISION RULE:

We have prioritized six criteria according to their preference below.

1. Decision has to be guided by IMC’s mandate of propagating siddha practices.

2. Safety of the formulation.
3. Return of investment.
4. Risks involved like trust issues.
5. Interest of other faculty members.
6. Ability and availability of manpower.
5.ALTERNATIVES:

1. TRANSFER TO THIRD PARTY

FOR ONE TIME LICENSE FEE

2. USE
REGISTERED
PHARMACEUTICL UNIT TO
MANUFACTURE THE
FORMULATION BUT DO THE
MARKETING THEMSELVES.

3. ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT

WITH N ENTREPRENEUR UNDER
WHICH THE LATER WOULD PAY
PATENT ANNUAL ROYALTIES OF 6% ON
THE TOTAL SALES

4. TO SHARE THE RESEARCH

ALTERNATIVES OUTPUT THROUGH JOURNALS
AND NEWSLETTERS

5. TO USE ITS ORIGINAL

NO PATENT FORMULTION FOR TREATING
ITS OWN PATIENTS WITHOUT
SHARING OUTSIDE
6.EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES:
CRITERIA OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 OPTION 4 OPTION 5
1. Whether IMC's mandate NO YES YES YES YES
of propagating siddha
medicine is satisfied?
2. Whether the formulation NO YES YES NO NO
will be safeguarded?
3. Whether reasonable ROI YES NO YES NA NA
guaranteed?
4. Whether trustworthiness A NA A NA NA
of the partner plays a role?
5. Whether it will serve as YES YES YES YES NA
encouragement for other
faculty members?
6. Whether suitable NA NO NA NA NA
manpower in available?
A- APPLICABLE, NA- NOT APPLICABLE.

7.DECISION OF ALTERNATIVE SELECTION:

The response that we have chosen.

APPLY FOR PATENTING AND THEN ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH AN

ENTREPRENEUR UNDER WHICH THE LATTER WOULD PAY ANNUAL
ROYALTIES OF 6% ON THE SALES OF THE FORMULATION.

REASON FOR SELECTION:

 Satisfying the objective of IMC, that is propagating siddha practices without

compromising on its mandate.
 As per the available data, assured financial returns is guaranteed.
 IMC will have control over the formultion.
 No extra manpower required, since the production and marketing is done by the
entrepreneur.
 Since it is profitable, it will serve as an encouragement for other faculty members to
undertake more research.
 Patenting helps us in preventing the formulation from being misused.

RISKS INVOLVED:

 Finding a suitable partner.

8.ACTION PLAN, IF ANY WITH CONTINGENCY:
Since we have finalized the plan, we need to forward the proposal to the faculty and other
stakeholders for their consent. After consulting all the stakeholders, the proposal is forwarded
to the government for approval as they are also a stakeholder.

Then the formulation is sent for patenting through the law firm. Once the patenting process is
completed then IMC proceeds to enter into an agreement with a suitable partner under which
the latter would pay 6% of the total sales as royalty to the institution in exchange to
institution sharing the formulation. It is bounded by certain laws and conditions

For finding a suitable partner, following criteria can be used

1. S/He should have prior experience in the area of production and marketing of medicine
and should have necessary infrastructure.

2. S/He should have good track record.

3. S/He should sign a legal document which allows institution to take legal action in case
S/He violates the agreement.

4. S/He should submit a security to the institution which can be used by institution to recover
any payment in case S/He defers in paying.

Once all these are satisfied and completed with the assistance of legal firm IMC can sign a
mutual agreement with the suitable partner.

Incase if there are any issues with the chosen option, then the institution can proceed with the
next option which is to the transfer the rights on formulations to the third party for a one time
payment. The procedures for choosing a suitable partner can be used here also with certain
changes such as no security required.