跨国公司如何应对印度专利乱象

    跨国医药公司都同意这一点：印度是大医药公司竞争形势最艰难的市场之一，除了价格管制和强制性药品许可制度，这里还存在着知识产权保护薄弱、众多仿制药竞争对手实力强劲等难题。

    最近印度最高法院驳回了诺华（Novartis）提起的新配方抗癌药的知识产权保护要求，消息一出更是陡增业界不满。医药公司和美国商会愤怒地警告称，将缩减在这个全球人口最多的民主国家中的投资，最终可能导致救死扶伤药品的供应受限。眼下，印度迫切需要更多的投资来重启放缓的国内经济，而上述判决只是印度与欧美之间越来越多的贸易争议中最新的例子。

    诺华是很多固守发达市场商业模式的跨国公司的典型代表，不论当前所处的新兴市场在经济和社会现实方面与发达市场存在怎样根本性的不同。它们在拓展新兴市场的过程中选择复制发达市场的定价和分销模式，同时聘请政治掮客来清除监管障碍。

    因此，大多数跨国公司发现自己成为了“1%俱乐部”的一员：印度占公司全球业务的比重只有区区1%，而且它们在印度的市场份额也徘徊在3%左右，甚至更低。一不小心它们就成了新的帝国主义者，市场领导地位也让给了更灵活的竞争对手。

    当然，医药行业也有几家公司在印度做得不错，它们选择主动适应市场而不是让市场来适应它们。自从2005年印度政府首次承认专利至今，外国医药公司的市场份额已经从15%翻番至30%。

    食品行业的雀巢（Nestle）则洞察印度人口结构变化，迎合印度口味打造了庞大的方便面业务，而不是像家乐氏（Kellogg）刚刚进入印度市场时那样试图改造当地人的饮食习惯。德国零售商麦德龙（Metro）打造的批发业务增长迅速，而沃尔玛（Wal-Mart）仍然在努力撬开印度的零售监管障碍。

    苹果（Apple）不愿在这个分销落后的国家投资。这里的运营商不能为高价手机提供补贴，结果给三星（Samsung）和诺基亚（Nokia）主导印度手机市场创造了机会。在这个将牛奉为神灵、素食者众多的国度中，麦当劳（McDonald's）通过将菜单和定价实行本地化成为了快餐业的领导者，现在甚至开起了全素食餐厅。

    印度盗版率高达75%、政府信赖开源软件、互联网基础设施糟糕、电脑使用率低，因此，微软（Microsoft）发现很难在印度经营软件业务。认识到大多数印度人认为“版权”就是“进行复制的权力”，这家公司选择调整商业模式去适应印度，而不是反之。它推出了新的低价版Windows和Office软件，还打造了本地语言版本，大幅增加了分销，结果盗版率下降了10%。

    启示显而易见。混乱是像印度这样的新兴市场的标志性特征，跨国公司要想在这些国家做好，就必须接受这种混乱，战胜混乱，躲避不是办法。所谓混乱，我的意思是低效腐败的政府、官僚的繁文缛节、变化不定的政策、糟糕的基础设施、知识产权保护的缺乏和对跨国企业的不信任等种种因素的大杂烩。

    Multinational pharmaceutical companies agree on one thing -- that India is one of the hardest places in the world for Big Pharma to compete thanks to price controls, compulsory licensing of drugs, poor intellectual property protection, and a host of capable generic competitors.

    The recent decision by India's Supreme Court to deny patent protection to Novartis (NVS) for a reformulated version of an anticancer drug has just added more fuel to the fire, provoking drug companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to unleash angry warnings that it would cut off investment to the world's most populous democracy and ultimately limit access to lifesaving medications. The judgment adds to a growing list of trade tensions between India, the U.S., and Europe at a time when India desperately needs more foreign investment to restart its slowing economy.

    Novartis is emblematic of many multinationals that rigidly stick to their developed market business models even as they try to conquer emerging markets with fundamentally different economic and social realities. They seek to extend their reach into these developing countries by replicating their developed-country pricing and distribution as well as employing lobbyists to pave their way over regulatory barriers where they exist.

    Most multinationals, therefore, find themselves part of a "1% Club" where India accounts for an irrelevant 1% of their global business and their market share is also in the low single digits. They inadvertently allow themselves to be seen as the new imperialists and cede market leadership to more flexible competitors.

    Within the pharmaceutical industry itself, there are several companies that are doing well in India by adapting to the market instead of the other way around. Since 2005 when the Indian government first allowed patents, foreign pharmas have doubled their market share from 15% to 30%.

    In the foods sector, Nestle has built a massive instant noodle business by understanding India's changing demographics and appealing to the Indian palate instead of attempting to change the nation's dietary habits as Kellogg (K) did when it entered the market. German retailer Metro has built a fast-growing wholesale business even as Wal-Mart (WMT) struggles to crack India's retail regulatory barriers.

    Apple's (AAPL) reluctance to invest in a country with poor distribution where carriers cannot subsidize the price of an expensive handset created opportunity for Samsung and Nokia (NOK) to dominate the cellphone market. In a land of vegetarians where the cow is considered sacred, McDonald's (MCD) has become a fast-food leader by localizing its menu and pricing and now even opening completely vegetarian restaurants.

    Microsoft (MSFT) discovered India to be a tough place to run a software business with a piracy rate of 75%, governmental obsession with open source software, poor Internet infrastructure, and low usage of computers. Realizing most Indians think of "copyright" as the "right-to-copy," the company chose to adapt its business model for India instead of vice versa. Launching new lower-priced versions of Windows and Office, creating local language versions, and massively increasing distribution resulted in a 10% decline in piracy.

    The lesson is clear. Chaos is a defining feature of emerging markets like India, and to do well in these countries, multinationals need to embrace and conquer chaos, not shun it. By chaos I mean a cocktail of ineffective and corrupt government, bureaucratic red tape, uncertain policies, bad infrastructure, lack of IP protection, and distrust of multinational corporations.