This assessment focused on the quantifiable health impact each company achieved through its access and equity initiatives. We examined metrics such as the number of patients reached, treatments provided and measurable health outcomes.
Competitors measure and communicate their health equity impact in distinct ways. J&J, Novartis, and GSK set large-scale health system impact goals, focusing on workforce training, public health partnerships, and disease elimination. Lilly and Novo Nordisk emphasize affordability and chronic disease system support, while Sanofi integrates affordability with local health capacity-building. Roche frames equity through diagnostics access and policy advocacy, focusing on UHC and lab infrastructure.
J&J and Lilly lead with human-centered storytelling, positioning equity as a moral responsibility and community-driven commitment. Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi align more with policy-driven, sustainable system-building narratives, highlighting long-term partnerships and financing models. GSK and Novo Nordisk balance bold ambitions with impact metrics, reinforcing credibility with global health stakeholders.
For Lilly, this competitive landscape presents an opportunity to strengthen its 30x30 initiative by incorporating more impact-driven storytelling and measurable health system improvements. To maintain its leadership, Lilly should consider expanding its *visibility in health workforce development and demonstrating the systemic benefits of its affordability programs.
Key Takeaways:
Elevate health systems strengthening to enhance leadership position: Lilly aligns closely with J&J in using human-centered, bold messaging, but J&J is more explicitly system-focused (workforce training, local capacity-building). Consider Lilly could strengthen its equity positioning by highlighting its role in long-term health system resilience.
Integrating policy-relevant data can enhance Lilly’s appeal to policymakers and GHOs: Novartis, GSK, and Roche lean into health policy and sustainability in reporting. If Lilly wants to appeal more to policymakers and global health organizations, it should integrate long-term system-building data into its impact reporting.
Connecting affordability to long term equity can better position Lilly as driving sustainable impact: Lilly leads in affordability messaging, but competitors are stronger in showing how affordability programs contribute to long-term equity. Novo Nordisk and Sanofi tie affordability to local health capacity-building, while Roche and GSK connect pricing models to global health policy discussions (UHC, disease elimination). Lilly could strengthen its messaging by demonstrating how affordability supports sustained system improvements.
Embedding equity impact into corporate strategy can help frame 30x30 as long term solution: Companies that position health equity as embedded within corporate strategy (Novartis, GSK, Roche) differentiate themselves as health equity leaders. Lilly could evolve its 30x30 messaging to show how access and affordability integrate into its long-term health equity solutions and goals.
More granular data can elevate Lilly’s human-storytelling: Companies either emphasize patient-centered storytelling or structured, policy-driven reporting. J&J and Lilly over index in using human stories to frame equity as a moral and social responsibility vs competitors. Lilly can enhance 30x30 by integrating more structured, data-backed reporting to complement its strong storytelling and strengthen credibility with policymakers
How can Lilly improve its approach to monitoring and evaluation to better track the impact of its initiatives on health outcomes in underserved communities?
How can Lilly better integrate health equity outcomes into its overall business strategy and incentive structure? What changes are needed to elevate the 30x30 to a top priority?