This category evaluates how visibly and transparently each company commits to health equity goals. This includes assessing leadership statements, public goals, transparency in reporting and participation in industrywide initiatives.
Lilly has become increasingly vocal and transparent about its global health commitments, notably through its 30x30 initiative, but is faced with vocal and bold competition from GSK, J&J and Novartis in particular. Lilly is following the lead of these peers in providing updates on its progress, disclosing its targets and outcomes, and shares its governance structure for access. Plans to undertake independent audits of its impact will also help underscore Lilly’s commitment to transparency and accountability. However, there is room for improvement in disclosing more specific data and participating in industry coalitions and global health discussions. By continuing to increase transparency and engaging more actively in external initiatives, Lilly can further enhance its public commitment and solidify its position in global health equity.
Leadership in Transparent Access Reporting: Leading companies provide detailed public disclosures on their R&D investments, access strategies, and patient reach metrics. Companies like GSK, Johnson & Johnson, and Novartis lead with detailed reporting on health equity initiatives, integrating access considerations into corporate governance and sustainability metrics. Lilly has made strides with 30x30 but can enhance its credibility by expanding detailed disclosures, including third-party validation of impact metrics. However, Eli Lilly does not (regularly) publicly disclose disaggregated R&D investment data or detailed information on the outcomes of its access strategies.
Proactive Public Engagement as a Differentiator: GSK and J&J actively shape industry discussions on global health equity through strong CEO commitments, coalition participation and advocacy efforts. Lilly has an opportunity to elevate its voice by engaging in more high-profile partnerships, industry coalitions and global health summits to reinforce its leadership in NCD access.
Audited Transparency as a Competitive Advantage: Independent audits and impact verification are becoming best practices among top-ranking companies in access to medicine. Lilly’s move toward third-party verification of 30x30 could position it as a leader in accountable corporate health commitments, provided it enhances disclosure of specific program outcomes and measurable health improvements.
Interesting Findings
GSK's proactive communication and bold pledges: GSK sets a high standard for public commitment and transparency through proactive communication, bold public pledges from its CEOs, and detailed reporting on its access initiatives. It openly shares its goals, progress and even setbacks, demonstrating accountability and leadership in global health equity.
Johnson & Johnson’s Credo-driven Culture and Comprehensive Reporting: J&J’s Credo, a statement of its core values, explicitly prioritizes social responsibility and guides its actions in public health. The company reinforces this commitment through transparent reporting in its annual Health for Humanity report, which provides detailed metrics on its programs and progress toward its goals.
Novartis's Access Principles and Integrated Strategy: Novartis has institutionalized its commitment to access to medicine through its Access Principles, which are integrated into its corporate strategy and communicated widely. This demonstrates a sustained commitment to health equity and ensures that access considerations are embedded in all aspects of its business.
How can Lilly optimize 30x30 communications to showcase leadership in both access and innovation?
How can Lilly demonstrate global health equity leadership while showing tangible business value? what is the communication balance between global and maintaining strong U.S. presence?
How boldly is Lilly willing to step into the equity leadership space when competitors like J&J, GSK, and Novartis already claim this territory? What specific equity domain could Lilly definitively own—chronic disease system-building, innovative affordability solutions, or pioneering public-private partnerships?