Assignment 2: Dr.

Narendrans Dilemma
A Report submitted to Dr. Rohini patel

In the partial fulfilment of the requirement of the course

Written Analysis and Communication

BY
Henil Dudhia

Adani Institute of Infrastructure Management, Ahmedabad

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: Dr. Narendran, [do not use colon]
Director,
Indian Medicine (Siddha) College.
From: XYZ [do not use colons]
WIMWI.
Date: xx/xx/2011
Sir,
Subject: Report on analysis and recommended plan of action for Ramkumars
proposal
Enclosed is [the] report detailing the decision to be taken regarding Dr. Ramkumars
proposal that Indian Medical (Siddha) College should file for patent of new drug, for
treatment of atherosclerosis. I recommend that Patent is taken [use filed instead of
taken] and [a] one-time fee for license-transfer for production of drugs is opted.
Sincerely,
XYZ

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Dr. Ramkumar has [had] approached you with [the] proposal that Indian Medical
College should file [a] patent for his discovery of [the] new medicine, [comma not
required] for treatment ofAtherosclerosis [spaces should be maintained].
A decision has to be arrived at [by] taking into account IMCs problems [IMCs
problems have not been specifically stated in the case], [use and here instead of
comma since the next point refers to Siddha and not IMC] objectives and also [the]
welfare of Siddha [kindly be specific, can use propagation instead of welfare] system
along with other factors like faculty motivation.
You can opt to reject the proposal or opt to [no need to use opt to here] file the patent
and if you opt to file the patent, select the best possible way of using the license

obtained from the patent. [Should have given the overview of the options and
evaluated them in brief]
It is recommended to file the patent and exchange the license for production of new
drug for one-time fee payment.
Number of words: 99
Table of Contents
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
SITUATION ANALYSIS 5
PROBLEM STATEMENT 6
OPTIONS 6
DECISION CRITERIA 6
EVALUATION OF OPTIONS 7
RECOMMENDATION 8
ACTION PLAN 8
EXHIBITS 10
SITUATION ANALYSIS
Dr. Ramkumar had approached you, the director of the Indian Medical (Siddha)
College, IMC, in October 2010, with his proposal that IMC should file patent for a
new Siddha drug, which he had invented for the treatment of atherosclerosis.
[Verbose description of case fact] Dr. Ramkumar though perceived as secretive and
a [a not required] loner at times, was brilliant and has [grammatical error, use had
instead of has] successfully formulated other [another would be more appropriate as
you are referring to a single formulation] medicinal formulation, for infertility
treatment, in the past. So the formulation can be trusted.
The Institute, IMC,was [proper spacing required] started with three objectives: to
impart post graduate education and provide medical care through Siddha, to

research various aspects of Siddha and to promote science of Siddha.Thereis

[proper spacing required] still room for development in the research department [how
did you reach this conclusion?]. So a decision should be taken which will help in
promoting Siddha research and as a result whole Siddha system. [The idea
discussed in this paragraph is not in continuity with the previous one]
In a meeting held in August 2010, among the heads of the various departments of
the institute with the director of the institute [incorrect reader orientation], they
[improper use of pronoun] had identified challenges in research capacity building in
Siddha system [research capacity has not been discussed in the case]. They had
noted that in the mainstream medicine research, when pharmaceutical companies
and doctors involved in drug research invented a new drug, they filed patents for it
and obtained exclusive rights to exploit their discoveries commercially. They had
agreed that Siddha system would have to take these developments into account to
gain foothold among parallel medicine streams. [The entire paragraph merely states
case facts]
Filing Patents would be taking IMC into a new domain [which domain?], where it has
not ventured before. Filing for a patent would require twenty five thousand rupees.
Institutes development fund of one lakh could be used for this purpose [flow
between sentences needs to be improved for the 3 previous sentences]. The various
options available after patenting, to commercially produce the medicine, have been
discussed in Exhibit 1. There are also some faculty members [there are two faculty
members] working on other formulations for treatment of aneurysm and septal
defects. Response to Dr. Ramkumar would be closely watched by these faculty
members as well [who else would be watching apart from these faculty members?].
The Siddha systems future and IMCs preferences should also be taken into account
before arriving at a decision. [IMCs preferences have not been discussed in the
situation analysis or case, kindly specify]
[No analysis about the outcome of the previous research carried out in Siddha and
how were they handled. No analysis of the situation that it was the first time that a
Siddha practitioner had tried to get a patent. Also that impact of patent on the
Institute and Siddha needs to be analysed]
PROBLEM STATEMENT
What should the response be to Dr. Ramkumars proposal of IMC filing for patent of
the new medicine that he has invented for atherosclerosis? [Sentence restructuring
needed]

OPTIONS
1. Dr. Ramkumar should be advised to get his research published in leading journals
or conference presentations. [ parallelism error, presented in conferences. Also this
does not flow naturally from the situational analysis as the publishing of research
papers has not been discussed]
2. IMC should file the patent and opt for one-time fee for transfer of license for
production and sale rights of the medicine to a third party.
3. IMC should file the patent and enter into [an] agreement with registered
pharmaceutical unit, [comma is not necessary] for manufacture of [manufacturing]
the medicine and market the medicine itself.
4. IMC should file the patent and enter into agreement with an entrepreneur, who
would pay royalty to IMC from the sale of the medicine.

DECISION CRITERIA
1. The decision should be in line with IMCs objectives.
2. The decision should act as encouragement to other faculty members.
3. Implementation of the decision should lead to financial gain for betterment of the
Institute.
4. The decision should help Siddha system gain importance among parallel systems
of medicine.
5. The decision should not hinder the regular activities of the Institute in the future.
[Criteria 5 cannot be applied to all the options]
[It would be better if you could rate the options in order of preference. The criteria are
verbose]
EVALUATION OF OPTIONS
[Nice style of writing the options instead of referring to it by its number before
evaluation, making it easy to read the report]

1. Dr. Ramkumar should be advised to get his research published in leading journals
or conference presentations.
This option helps research but does not promote the values of Siddha medicinal
system to wider audience [which set of people are you referring to?]. Dr. Ramkumar
will be able to claim Prior Act on his invention. But there will not be any financial gain
from this decision. Also the other faculty members might be discouraged by this
decision as Dr. Ramkumars research has not been fully supported by IMC. So this
option is not recommended. [Criteria 4 and 5 have not been evaluated also
Conclusion is not expected here]
2. IMC should file the patent and opt for one-time fee for transfer of license for
production and sale [sell] rights of the medicine to a third party.
This option is in line with IMCs mandate [there has been no previous mention of
mandate in the report] of developing and propagating the science of Siddha. This
decision will show that IMC is ready to support and encourage the research work of
its faculty members [and hence motivate the faculty members]. As shown in Exhibit
2, this option has an expected value of Rs. 57500. And it will also ensure that the
institutes regular activities are not hindered in any way, in the future [how?]. As it is a
breakthrough medicine, helping in reduction of stents, there is a good chance that it
will help Siddha system gain importance among other parallel systems of medicine
[Assumption]. So this option is feasible. [Conclusion is not expected here]
3. IMC should file the patent and enter into agreement with registered
pharmaceutical unit, for manufacture of the medicine and market the medicine
themselves [itself].
This option is in line with IMCs mandate [there has been no previous mention of
mandate in the report] of promoting Siddha system. This decision will encourage
other faculty members. This decision will provide financial gain for betterment of the
institute [in which aspect?] as shown in Exhibit 2. This decision will help Siddha
system gain importance among other systems of medicine. But in this option, the
marketing of the medicine falls entirely upon IMC and this might become a hindrance
in the regular activities of the institute in the future [there is no mention of the lack of
expertise]. So the feasibility of this option is a little doubtful. [Conclusion is not
expected here]
4. IMC should file the patent and enter into agreement with an entrepreneur, who
would pay royalty to IMC for production [there is no royalty on production] and sale of
the formulation.

This option is also in line with IMCs mandate [there has been no previous mention of
mandate in the report] of promoting Siddha system. It will be a [an] encouragement
to other faculty members. It will provide financial gain for betterment of the Institute,
but compared to option 2, the Net Present Value of the financial gain of this project,
shown in exhibit 2, is not as attractive as that of option 2 [repetition of phase option
2]. But this option is also feasible. [Conclusion is not expected here also criteria 3,4
and 5 have not been evaluated]
[Wasted words by repeating verbose criteria for each option]
RECOMMENDATION
IMC should file the patent and opt for one-time fee for transfer of license for
production and sale rights of the medicine to a third party.
ACTION PLAN
1. IMC should file for patent of the medicine with states Food and Drug
Administration Department.
2. IMC should search for an established partner, and reach agreement about license
transfer for production and sales of the medicine in exchange for one-time fee. An
established partner would ensure that the medicine is marketed well and spread to
new domains. [No need to discuss the benefits of an established partner]
3. Make an agreement [enter an agreement] with the partner, for license transfer for
production and sale of medicines in exchange for one-time fee. Utilise the financial
gain obtained for overcoming other problems of the institute.
[Since the recommendation and the action plan mention the dependence of IMC
regarding finding a suitable partner, hence the report should have a contingency
plan]
Number of words: 1058
EXHIBITS
[Since it is an exact copy of the exhibit in the report, it could have been avoided]
1. Extracts from Report Submitted to IMC [Mention Exhibit 1 instead of 1]
Option 1: One-Time License fee

Survey indicates that there is a probability of 0.7 that Rs.50000 may be obtained,
and a probability of 0.3 that a higher value of Rs.75000 may be received.
Option 2: Job work to be done by registered pharmaceutical unit
| |Year 1 |Year 2 |Year 3 |Year 4 |Year 5 |
|Sales |100000 |80000 |65000 |40000 |32000 |
|Costs |96000 |60000 |45000 |30000 |28000 |
|Sales Costs |4000 |20000 |20000 |10000 |4000 |
Notes:
1. Marketing is done entirely by IMC. Study indicates sales will not be as high as
private entrepreneur taking up manufacture.
2. We have estimated Sales on the basis of comparable products and estimates of
experts in the industry.
3. Sales are assumed to be within India and 90% of sales within Siddha system and
10% of sales, outside the system.
Option 3: Royalty on Gross Sales at 6 %
| |Year 1 |Year 2 |Year 3 |Year 4 |Year 5 |
|Gross Sales |250000 |220000 |200000 |150000 |100000 |
|Royalty at 6% |15000 |13200 |12000 |9000 |6000 |
(Continued)
Exhibit 1 (Contd.)
Notes:
1. Manufacturers who are likely to take up the formulation will have a much better
reach and hence the sales include possible sales to other medicine streams. We are
assuming that most of the sales will be within the Siddha system; 20% of sales may
be outside the system. We also assume all sales are within India.

2. We have estimated the sales on the basis of sales of comparable products, and
the estimates of experts in the industry.
Exhibit 2: Analysis for Gain from Each option discussed in Exhibit 1
Option 1: One-Time Fee
Chance of getting one-time fee of Rs.50000 = 0.7
Chance of getting one-time fee of Rs.75000 = 0.3
Expected value = 0.7 * 50000 + 0.3 * 75000
= Rs.57500
Option 2: Manufacture done by Registered Pharmaceutical unit
Let us assume that discount rate of 10 % to calculate net present value of the
revenue over the next 5 years. (Continued)
Exhibit 2: (Contd.)
Net present Value= R/(1+i)^n
Where R is the revenue or cash flow, i is the discount rate andn is the time of cash
flow.

Net
Present
Value
(4000/1.10)+(20000/1.10^2)+(20000/1.10^3)+(10000/1.10^4)+(4000/1.10^5)
=Rs.44,505
Option 3: Royalty on Gross Sales at 6 %
Net Present Value of Estimated Gain over next 5 years =
(15000/1.1)+(13200/1.1^2)+(12000/1.1^3)+(9000/1.1^4)+(6000/1.1^5)
= Rs.43,433