PwC Aggregate Spend Benchmarking - Ehcca
www.pwc.comPwC Aggregate SpendBenchmarkingFebruary 2013Strictly private and confidential
Introduction Life sciences companies have been developing aggregate spend programs overthe last three to five years with a focus on US State and Federal reporting Within the next twoyears there will be30 countries withdifferent tracking,disclosure, andbookkeepingrequirements PwC wanted to betterunderstand where most lifesciences companies are in thedevelopment of both US andO-US aggregate spend programsPwC2
Aggregate Spend BenchmarkingIn Q3/Q4 2012, PwC conducted a survey of 14 life sciences companies tounderstand: Historical and planned investments toward US and O-US aggregate spendprograms Number of current and planned dedicated and part-time resources for eachaggregate spend program Biggest challenges with the program What each company would like as part of a “future state” for their programs Average of 28B in annual revenue across 14 respondents; 5 out of 14 under10B in annual revenuePwC3
Aggregate Spend Program CostsTo better understand the breakdown of overall program costs, weasked respondents regarding investments in the followingcategories:Internal/staffing costs Full-time and part-time global compliance and in-country employee costsConsultancy costs Third party consultancy and solution vendor costsTechnology/data costs Aggregate spend solution implementation costs Source system upgrades Third party data costsOther costs Costs shared with other internal initiativesPwC4
Investment over the last three years 15.7 MMRespondents spent an average of 15.7 MM over the last three yearsfor US programs alone.Only two respondents have started building a global program and theinvestments were less than 2 MM over the last three years.PwC5
Investments planned for 2013 and 2014 4.9 MMRespondents plan to spend an average of 4.9 MM over the next two yearsin the US to comply with PPACA.Only one respondent has planned investments ( 1 MM) for a globalaggregate spend program over the next two years.PwC6
Dedicated resources for aggregate spend program4-67 or moreUnknown20 0-10Unknown11-20Respondents have cross-functional teams in place to handle US State andFederal reporting, however 85% of respondents still do not know manyresources will be needed to handle global requirements.PwC7
Investment Findings Respondents will be spending on average 44% of their overall futureinvestments on technology / data costs which is 13% higher than theoverall spend on technology / data over the past 3 years, supporting thenotion that technology solutions have not yet yielded desired results Respondents have budgeted less on future consulting costs despite thecontinued effort of implementing reporting solutions Respondents have budgeted a lower proportion of their futureinvestments on internal/staffing costs despite the increased need fordata management/remediation activities as new requirements emerge While all respondents have spent millions of dollars in implementing areporting solution to handle U.S. requirements, 25% of respondentschanged solution vendors during the U.S. reporting solutionimplementation. Only 25% of respondents have started implementing an approach/strategyto handle O-US requirements.PwC8
Ownership of Aggregate Spend Program79% of responding companies have assigned compliance as the day-to- dayowner of the US and O-US aggregate spend programs.All respondents have assigned the certification process to the ChiefCompliance OfficerPwC9
Aggregate spend program feedbackWhat do you wish your aggregate spend program had that it currently doesnot?DatamanagementChangemanagementMonitoring andbusiness insights“Ability to manage significantvolumes of data better”“Flexibility to change alongwith change in risk tolerance/treatment of the organization”“Better Ad-Hoc inquiry andreporting capabilities"“Global unique customermaster identifiers”“Data processing is stillsomewhat intensive. Newfunctionality or enhancementsto system still requireextensive resources”“Better global scalability andmore automation of currentmanual processes’ organization”“More flexibility for updatesand changes”“Added reporting functionalityto support operations andgrowth businesses”“Monitoring to identifypotential compliance issuesmore pro-actively”10PwC
Benchmarking survey learningsGiven the growing complexity and rising costs, companieswill have to invest more in aggregate spend capabilities toreport accurate and complete information to each country.Future costsCompanies will need to invest more to build programs tohandle all global requirementsMore regional and country requirements are comingInvestments in building US programs have been significantbut have not yielded expected t companies do not have a global approach in placePwC11
Contact InformationIf you would like more information or a consultation please reach out to:Brian RiewertsPrincipal, PwC Global Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences Advisorybrian.riewerts@us.pwc.com 1 410 659-3390Jonathon KellermanPrincipal, PwC Global Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences Advisoryjonathon.l.kellerman@us.pwc.com 1 973 236-7880Jennifer ColapietroPrincipal, PwC Global Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences Advisoryjennifer.a.colapietro@us.pwc.com 1 973 236-4124David WysockyDirector, PwC Global Pharmaceutical and Life Sciences Advisorydavid.j.wysocky@us.pwc.com 1 973 236-5179PwC12
2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers toPricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited,each member firm of which is a separate legal entity. This document is for general information purposes only,and should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors.13
PwC Aggregate Spend Benchmarking In Q3/Q4 2012, PwC conducted a survey of 14 life sciences companies to understand: Historical and planned investments toward US and O-US aggregate spend programs Number of current and planned dedicated and part-time resources for each aggregate spend program Biggest challenges with the program
Bad benchmarking Benchmarking has its limitations. Whilst good benchmarking is about performance and best practice, bad benchmarking can lead to mediocrity. Bad benchmarking is using data to justify average performance, rather than challenging and driving improvements. This
PWC Driving Licence In NSW it is compulsory for every person driving a PWC to hold a current PWC driving licence. There are two types of PWC driving licence: 1. PWC driving licence for those aged 16 years and over. 2. Young Adult PWC driving licence for people aged from 12 to less than 16 years. A Young Adult PWC driving licence
803.6 Aggregate for Plant Mix Wearing Course 655 803.7 Aggregate for Microsurfacing 656 803.8 Aggregate for Chip Seal 656 803.9 Aggregate for Blotter 657 803.10 Aggregate for Bed Course Material 658 803.11 Gravel for Drains 658 803.12 Aggregate for Maintenance Stockpiles 658 803.13 Aggregate for Pervious Backfill Material 660
On May 12, at approximately 2:30 pm, two personal watercraft (PWC) were operating in Biscayne Bay. The PWC were jumping the wakes of other vessels in the area. PWC #1 jumped the wake of a vessel and . Boating Accidents Statistical Report PWC (private) 128,319 98% PWC (rental) 2,838 2% PWC O WNERSHIP BY R EGISTRATION Private vessels 694 / 77% .
Initial Temp of PWC was(27 ), and Electric Heater exchanges its thermal energy to PWC, a PWC heated up to melting Temp(saving energy as a sensible heat). After that, the heat stored as latent heat, thus the PWC melts and becomes liquids phase. Then the energy saved as sensible heat as a liquids phase PWC. The Temp PWC is registered at a period of
In this document, "PwC" refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Priv ate Limited (a limited liability com MS 219-September 2011 S&R .indd Designed by: PwC Brand and Communications, India www.pwc.in Contacts Shashank Tripathi Executive Director 91 98196 78900 shashank.tripathi@in.pwc.com Anurag Garg Senior Manager 91 9711701799 anurag.garg@in.pwc .
Learning Objectives 1.Identify the determinants of aggregate demand and distinguish between a movement along the aggregate demand curve and a shift of the curve. 2.Identify the determinants of aggregate supply and distinguish between a movement along the short-run aggregate supply curve and a shift of the curve.
Asset Management Sector Report 1. This is a report for the House of Commons Committee on Exiting the European Union following the motion passed at the Opposition Day debate on 1 November, which called on the Government to provide the Committee with impact assessments arising from the sectoral analysis it has conducted with regards to the list of 58 sectors referred to in the answer of 26 June .
