mba class

McKesson Company Analysis

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Executive Summary

Based on the analyses carried out, investing in Holland is the wise choice for McKesson. The company needs to hit the target of 8% revenues, and this can only be achieved through expanding into Holland. This option will be fruitful because it will not exacerbate the cost burden as the Netherlands has lenient tax policies for foreign companies, protects registered patents, has highly skilled labor and has transport and communication infrastructure well developed.

The country that McKesson seeks to invest in is the Netherlands. Healthcare in the country has been rated as the best in Europe a few times in the past. The country spends 10% of the entire GDP on health. It is among the highest spending in the EU. The main challenge for foreigners is that to access the full healthcare services; one must have certain insurance covers. The spending power of the Dutch is high and lucrative. The risks of investing in such a company are mitigated by the fact the country is motivated towards achieving the best healthcare in Europe. However, since the stakes are very high, some policies may require foreign companies to apply the highest quality in their services and products at the expense of profitability strategies.

Based on porter’s five forces, there are weak barriers to entry in the industry mainly because the medical field does not limit entry, it only regulates the quality of entrants. Currently, the rivalry between the company and the competition such as AmerisourceBergen has become intense. Competing with many firms in the industry for a long time has its toll on the profitability of the firm in the long term. Today, with the help of the internet, buyers always want to ensure that they purchase only the best quality drugs and other medical products. With the high competition already in existence, the buyers have high bargaining power. The bargaining power of the suppliers in this industry has significantly high bargaining power. The industry is full of product substitutes. This is especially so in the drug industry where numerous drugs are acting as substitutes.

Concerning the PEST analysis, Holland is famous for its no-barrier policy on international trade. There are few if any political interferences in this industry as reported by various health indices. The country can be termed as too friendly to foreign investments through the protection of patents, favorable taxation and the right to own private. Thus, this raises the risk index for McKesson’s expansion into the Netherlands. Through the years of investment that has taken place in the healthcare system in the Netherlands, investing in the same industry is financially secured due to the availability of medical infrastructure and stakeholders. Therefore, McKesson is in a perfect position to invest in the Netherlands because of the economically, the country is well secured with rare economic turmoil which would favor a new entrant in the market. Socially, medical companies need to operate in a society whereby there is an openness to new medical operations and drugs. McKesson will not face much resistance when offering its product to the Dutch. Regarding technological advancement, Holland boasts of mature communication and internet infrastructure. Therefore, for a company that is invested in technological advancements in healthcare provision, McKesson is in a good position to succeed in the Netherlands.

Introduction

To increase the net margins, companies often must look for opportunities within the market. In the past, such opportunities were reserved for firms with the required financial muscle to leverage market niches and opportunities. Today, however, the global market provides the opportunity to increase revenue for all companies, big and small. Overseas markets have become accessible to virtually all firms regardless of what they produce or offer to the market. The process of expanding into other countries is typically easier said than done. A thorough analysis must be done so that the core competencies of the firm are laid out and identified. From there an assessment is done on the suitability of those competencies of a firm to the identified new international market. All this should be done within the confines that the firm operates within regarding cost limits and revenue targets.

McKesson is one such firm that plans to expand into the Netherlands to raise the annual revenue to between 8-10%. The firm concedes that such a revenue increase is not achievable relying on the domestic market alone. To acquire the margins desired, the firm must tap into a new market altogether to increase the revenue while maintaining a low-cost burden. This is better than instituting aggressive cost reduction strategy involving layoffs and similar procedures. Through the international market, the firm will have the chance not only to increase its revenues but also to diversify its source of income. This is vital in this current era whereby markets can collapse at any time due to the volatility of the stock markets. If the local market fails for instance in the case of McKesson, then the international market will bring in revenue and therefore save the company from total failure. To realize this goal, the firm required a strategy well-crafted and designed based on the firm’s competencies as well as the market situation in the Netherlands.

Organization Profile

McKesson Medical Company Background

McKesson is a medical company dealing with various medical products and services. The company acts as the logistical link between diagnosis and treatment offering services and products to patients as prescribed or recommended by doctors and medical practitioners. Commercially, the company is classified as a company that offers healthcare supplies through its management solutions. The company deals in retail pharmacy, specialty care, community oncology as well as healthcare information technology. Specifically, the firm offers medicines, healthcare services, medical processes and partners with pharmaceutical manufacturers (Clemons & Row, 1988). The company operates in two segments namely the McKesson Technology Solutions and the McKesson Distribution Solutions.

The distribution business transports branded and generic pharmaceutical products in the local market are creating revenue. Additionally, the firm also provides logistical support to medical officers in the U.S. including the integrated pharmacy management systems and the specialty and mail order services. The company further delivers the Mckesson Pharmacy Technology and Services platform in most U.S. states as well as the CoverMyMeds medical service (Young & Kroth, 2017). There is also a medical-surgical service that is offered in major cities within the United States. All these products are meant to diversify the revenues of the company while maintaining them high enough to leverage the investments received. However, this has not worked as the company desires as the revenues have not surpassed the 8% mark in the last few years as the subsequent sections reveal.

Financial Background

Financially, the company has been doing well but not great, given the years that the company has been in operation, since 1883, the company’s financial performance and status fall below expectations. In the year 2017, the company had a total of US$198.5 billion in revenues. This was a slight improvement from $190.8 billion in 2016. The company operates with 68,000 employees. The company’s total assets add up to US$56.52 billion as computed in 2016. The total equity was US$8.92 billion in the same year. The operating income for the company in that same year was a meager US$3.54 compared to other companies in the industry (Schmitz & Forst, 2016).

Currently, the company’s market capitalization stands at US$37 billion. A major part of this perceivable success of the company emanates from the growth in the firm’s employees regarding skill and number. This has currently led to some dismal results posted in the second quarter of 2018. The revenues in this quarter are US$52.1 billion while the gross profit stands at US$2.8 billion. This represents a 5% rate resulting in a net income of US$56 million so far (Schakel, Jeurissen & Glied, 2017). The graphical representation of this situation is shown in the figure below.

Figure 1: MCK Financial Performance

Source: Schakel, Jeurissen, and Glied (2017).

As the graph shows, the gross profit margin has dropped since the financial year 2015. Even though the revenue has been on the rise in the last three years, the gross margins not so much. With increasing revenues and reducing gross profit margins, there is only one explanation; the company has been running an unhealthy cost burden and/or has not leveraged adequately the investments received leading to too many expenses without justifiably earned value. A few more years on this trend and things will get dangerously dismal for the company the need to change this direction is dire.

Organizational Structure

The company utilizes a unidirectional organization structure. The company has worked on the structure for several years with the aim of making more focused as reported by Denysyk and Denton (2016). Currently, the company has single overall authority in the position of the Chairman who also doubles up as the firm’s president as well as the CEO. The current individual in that position is John Hammergren. He oversees seven top management positions. These are headed by the respective leaders. They are the Employee in Value Proposition (EVP) and CFO position, the EVP and President of McKesson Supply Solutions, the EVP human resources, the EVP Corporate Strategy and Business Development, the EVP President of McKesson Provider Technology, the EVP General Counsel and Secretary and the EVP and CIO. The arrangement is as shown below.

The figure above displays the organizational structure at the very top of management at McKesson. The structure has been chosen mainly to have unidirectional top management. The various positions created below the CEO are responsible for the daily running of operations within the designated jobs. They report to the CEO who is the inclusive coordinator.

Location and Target Market

The company’s current headquarters are in San Francisco, US. Founded in 1833, the company was incorporated in the year 1994. With its broad product portfolio, the company’s target market is virtually all buyers within the medical field. The company targets the patients in the various U.S. states through its products and services aimed at either treating or improving the health situation for the patients. The company also targets the medical practitioners by offering logistical solutions as well as management solutions (Clemons & Row, 1988). The company has invested heavily in technology always proving the best and latest technological advancement in the medical field to improve efficiency and quality of medical provision.

Specifically, the firm targets Pharmacies with its products in this area. In addition to partnering with manufacturers in this field, the entity provides a solution in procuring some of the essentials in the production of drugs. Through vertical integration, the firm also offers the technology required to realize the solutions. The firm further targets hospitals through its products that are required in the core processes of running hospitals as well as treating special patients. In the oncology field, the company has biotechnological solutions such as the McKesson Rx Technology Solution and central fill capability in large hospitals. To the insurers, the firm provides the CoverMyMeds (CMM) solution that works as an insurance product for the insurers. The firm targets several industry players thanks to the broad product portfolio.

Strategy and Competitive Strategy Statement

The company has been operating under the illusion that branching and covering all aspects that generate income in the medical industry is the only way to success. The strategy has helped the company secure a huge market share in the local market through its comprehensive product portfolio. By the end of the year 2017, the company boasted of 2700 retail pharmacy franchises making it the leading firm in that respect in the entire U.S. industry. This was a materialization of the said strategy to cover as much of the market as possible. Despite such great fetes, the company has been experiencing low profits with rather high revenues (Young, 2015). This indicates that the firm’s strategy has not worked as expected given that the company has invested a lot with a low return on asset ratio. The subsequent sections will assess the industry to identify why the current strategy is not working before analyzing the international market and making ensuing recommendations.

Industry Analysis

The industry that McKesson operates in is highly competitive. The competition includes companies such as Cardinal health and AmerisourceBergen which are nth well-established companies in the market. The company has been competing in market saturation strategy. This is to say that the company figures that with a broad portfolio, the competition would be suppressed into submission. The strategy may have worked to some extent given that the company is the leading retail pharmacy company in the U.S. However, the major weakness with this strategy lies in the fact that the completion has already ventured into the global market and thus leveraging their investments and receiving a higher return from assets ratio. The company needs to do the same to compete with the competition. Another weakness in the current strategy is that the firm has faced numerous legal complications in its drug testing operations due to patents. As well, the strategy has made the entity depend too much on limited business segments. The high risk in the industry healthcare compounds the problems that the current approach is facing. With such gross weaknesses in the current strategy, the firm has not been in a favorable position in the industry (Dixon, 2015). In turn, the industry is not favorably placed to meet the needs of the company as shown in the subsequent analysis.

Porter’s Five Forces Analysis

This is a tool used to assess an industry as relates to a company. In this context, the company focused upon is McKesson. The model uses five aspects namely entry barriers, the intensity of rivalry, bargaining power of buyers, bargaining power of suppliers, and the threat of substitutes. The analysis is as follows.

Entry Barriers

The threat posed by new entrants in the industry is a source of great pressure on the company. There are weak barriers to entry in the industry mainly because the medical field does not limit entry, it only regulates the quality of entrants. Thus, each new entrant has been bringing innovation in the market causing the company feels the pressure in the form of reduced pricing for certain services and products, low costs for new entrants hence higher profits, and the provision of new value propositions to the customers (Shepley & Song, 2014).

The company can cope with the threat of new entrants in the following ways. Firstly, the company needs to innovate new services and products to maintain the market share while appealing to new demographics in the new population. Secondly, the firm needs to build on the economies of scale to have a lower fixed cost per unit. This will give the firm room to lower its prices when pressured to do so by the new entrants. The company should also spend on research and development. Through research, the company will be able to redefine the industry dynamics much more easily. This will create a new barrier to entry as new small firms will find it hard to compete with the company (Wood, 2016). This also lowers the window of extraordinary profits for the new firms which will effectively discourage new players in the industry.

Intensity of Rivalry

Currently, the rivalry between the company and the competition such as AmerisourceBergen has become intense. According to Porter's five forces, when the intensity is high or on the rise, prices are driven down with the profitability eventually lowering for the entire industry. This is part of the problem that has compounded the company’s low return on assets ratio. The drugs wholesale industry that McKesson operates within has had extremely tough competition. Competing with many firms in the industry for a long time has its toll on the profitability of the firm in the long term (Kuhlmann et al. 2015).

The firm has several solutions available to deal with this challenge. Firstly, the company can build a sustainable differentiation of its product and branding. As well, the firm could build scale to compete better especially in the international market. Still, the company could decide to collaborate with some of the competitors to increase the local market share which can be used as the foundation for investing in the international market rather than looking for additional funding.

Bargaining Power of Buyers

The buyers in this industry are very demanding. Today, with the help of the internet, buyers always want to ensure that they purchase only the best quality drugs and other medical products. With the high competition already in existence, the buyers have high bargaining power (Sadlier, Bergin & Merry, 2014). Further, small market shares often grant the buyers too much bargaining power that can be misused easily. The buyers often buy from sellers with offers or with discounts. The market share for the firm can be perceived as small compared to the level of revenue the firm generates in the U.S. and the size of the industry. Thus, to improve this situation, tapping into the international market is s step in the right direction as it will reduce the bargaining power of the buyers. Further, through rapid innovation, the company will be able to offer discounts and offerings thus maintaining the market share in the long run. Moreover, when the company can produce more products in both the international and local markets without defects and in large scale, then the organization will be able to retain its loyal customer base while hunting for more. With these strategies, the company can cope with the already existent high bargaining power of the buyers.

Bargaining Power of Suppliers

The bargaining power of the suppliers in this industry has significantly high bargaining power. This is mainly because all companies in the industry depend on the suppliers for the raw materials. As such, the suppliers have a greater say on the margins of the companies including McKesson. The power suppliers often negotiate to get high prices from the players in the industry. The net effect of this high bargaining power is that the profitability of the industry reduces significantly. The way to handle the situation is through building efficient supply chains with several of the suppliers to reduce the overall effect of the bargaining power of one single supplier. Also, the firm could engage in experimentations aimed at producing the same products using different designs and raw materials to ensure that if one supplier’s price go up, the company can switch to another supplier’s raw materials. Further, the company can learn from companies such as Nike and Walmart. These companies established several firms of supplies show business solely depends on them. This way the supplier will always sell at constant price ranges that will favor the buyer (Kroneman et al., 2016). With these strategies, the bargaining power of the suppliers will be controlled and turned into strength from being a weakness.

Threat of Substitutes

The industry is full of product substitutes. This is especially so in the drug industry where numerous drugs are acting as substitutes. For instance, there are over a 100 painkiller brands in the U.S. market alone. With such a high threat of substitutes in the industry, companies must have broad product portfolio to maintain their market share. McKesson can overcome this challenge by ensuring that the services they offer as products exceed the physical products. Services have a low-value proposition that exceeds those currently offered. The uniqueness of service determines its demand. Further, the company should research the needs of the target customer instead of focusing on selling alone. In other words, McKesson should focus on what the customer needs rather than what they are buying (Peters, Nusselder & Mackenbach, 2015). A. Another option would be establishing high switching costs for the products offered by the company. With these solutions, the threat of substitute may be regulated to manageable levels.

Country Risk Assessment

The country that McKesson seeks to invest in is the Netherlands. Healthcare in the country has been rated as the best in Europe a few times in the past. In the 2016 Euro Health Consumer Index pitting 35 countries, the Dutch healthcare was rated as the best making it an industry standard. This index was performed in huge economies such as Germany, Switzerland, the UK, Belgium, and Norway. The report revealed that the country excels in all criteria with the waiting time being the only weakness of the system. The country recently opened new 160 primary care centers as well as 24 hours per day medical service in all those centers (Peters, Nusselder & Mackenbach, 2015).

The country spends 10% of the entire GDP on health. It is among the highest spending in the EU. Further, the country spends EUR 4.0 thousand for each inhabitant making the country one of the few countries in the world. The report further revealed that almost all doctors speak excellent English making an increasingly accessible healthcare system for foreigners as well as investors (Verhoef et al., 2015). The main challenge for foreigners is that to access the full healthcare services; one must have certain insurance covers.

From a consumer report, it is reported that annually and specifically 2017, the Dutch spent the extra costs were charged as the excess that must be paid before insurance can apply. The costs include the dentist fees and the medicine charges which residents pay an average of 34% of the cost of the medicine only. Clearly, the spending power of the Dutch is high and lucrative. The risks of investing in such a company are mitigated by the fact the country is motivated towards achieving the best healthcare in Europe (Schakel, Jeurissen & Glied, 2017). However, since the stakes are very high, some policies may require foreign companies to apply the highest quality in their services and products at the expense of profitability strategies.

Analyzing Netherland’s External Environment

As mentioned earlier, the health market is relatively open to foreign investment. The fact most doctors speak excellent English means that finding workers or buyers will not be challenged by language barriers. As a general, the country’s PESTEL analysis reveals that Foreign Direct Investment is encouraged especially in the medical field as the country seeks to maintain the “best” status in healthcare in the EU. This fact coupled with the idea that the country’s economy is driven by the service sector which contributes roughly 80.7% of the economy gives perspective as to where McKesson should focus on when investing here (Schakel, Jeurissen & Glied, 2017).

PEST Analysis

Political Factors

The country is famous for its no-barrier policy on international trade. The economy is open to the world with many companies taking advantage of the many opportunities present. The government policies taken by the government are considered some of the friendliest in the world towards foreign investment. To assure investors that their investment is safe, there a few government instigated political conflicts or interferences providing the most stable environment for business. The medical industry is one of the most heavily invested by the government directly. The state has several profits making medical institutions that operate alongside private firms (Shepley & Song, 2014). There are few if any political interferences in this industry as reported by various health indices. This has helped the country achieve excellent health quality in all areas of the country while encouraging foreign investments to diversify the services and increase access.

Nonetheless, the country’s openness does not always assure investors of profits. This is because investors consider the fact that investing in the market will also be challenged by other companies that may decide to follow suit and invest in the same market. This does not offer the required protection for the investing companies, especially in a new market as the risk exacerbates when the market is entirely open for entry. The country can be termed as too friendly to foreign investments through the protection of patents, favorable taxation and the right to own private. This means that huge companies with economies of scale have better chances of succeeding in the country than small companies seeking to elevate their margins like McKesson (Wood, 2016). Thus, this raises the risk index for McKesson’s expansion into the Netherlands.

Economic Factors

Economically, the country is in a suitable position for McKesson to invest into particularly due to the healthcare financial support from the government. Through the years of investment that has taken place in the healthcare system in the Netherlands, investing in the same industry is financially secured due to the availability of medical infrastructure and stakeholders (Wood, 2016). Further, considering the transport industry’s development in the Netherlands, the logistics products offered by the company will not be deterred. The country has effective and smooth-running transport infrastructure such as the third largest airport in Europe, Schiphol, Rotterdam port, and third best freight transportation in Europe. In a nutshell, the country offers an advanced logistics service industry, matured transport network as well as an advantageous geographical positioning that will allow companies are entering this market to expand to other European countries from here (Kuhlmann et al. 2015). Therefore, McKesson is in a perfect position to invest in the Netherlands because of the economically, the country is well secured with rare economic turmoil which would favor a new entrant in the market.

Social Factors

Socially, medical companies need to operate in a society whereby there is an openness to new medical operations and drugs. The good thing about the Netherlands is that the country is used to foreign entry by companies and tourists. This has prepared the Dutch to deal positively with foreign products as well as individuals. In this regard, McKesson will not face much resistance when offering its product to the Dutch mainly due to two major reasons. Firstly, the company has a strong brand reputation back at home which may play a role in convincing the Dutch society that the products are reliable and of high quality (Sadlier, Bergin & Merry, 2014). Secondly, the society is open to trying new products and methods in treatment due to the open nature of the country as a whole.

Further, the labor market in the Netherlands is high quality. The standards of education and training have been reported to be of high quality. Companies entering this new market will not struggle to find high-quality labor. This reduces the cost burden of venturing into the new market making it possible for the company expands their margins as planned. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the government in the Netherlands is mindful of the local worker's employment ratio. The government has policies that ensure that foreign countries higher locals more than individuals from their home country Kroneman et al., 2016). For McKesson, this will not be a problem since the nature of business includes outsourcing for labor since healthcare quality is rather standardized since the training programs are largely similar universally.

Technological Factors

Regarding technological advancement, Holland holds its own in Europe. The country boasts of mature communication and internet infrastructure. The government is to thank for this development as well as encouraging companies offering technological advancements to operate in Holland. The medical field is one that is friendly to the technological application due to the sensitive nature of most medical services. Incorporating technology reduces fatigue for the medical practitioners helping them offer their services better. It also reduces medical errors effectively increasing the chances of successful treatments (Peters, Nusselder & Mackenbach, 2015). Therefore, for a company that is invested in technological advancements in healthcare provision, McKesson is in a good position to succeed in the Netherlands as it is.

Additionally, the country is seeking to compete with other companies in the field of technology. As such, the government encourages companies with unique technology and innovations to operate in Holland to help give the country a competing edge. With the new and unique technology that McKesson boasts of, the country will be welcome to operate in the Netherlands. The technology will not only improve the healthcare industry, but it will also give the country an edge that few countries have in their medical industry (Peters, Nusselder & Mackenbach, 2015).

Conclusion

In a nutshell, the industry that McKesson operates in is highly competitive. Based on porter’s five forces, there are weak barriers to entry in the industry mainly because the medical field does not limit entry, it only regulates the quality of entrants. Currently, the rivalry between the company and the competition such as AmerisourceBergen has become intense. Competing with many firms in the industry for a long time has its toll on the profitability of the firm in the long term. Today, with the help of the internet, buyers always want to ensure that they purchase only the best quality drugs and other medical products. With the high competition already in existence, the buyers have high bargaining power. The bargaining power of the suppliers in this industry has significantly high bargaining power. The industry is full of product substitutes. This is especially so in the drug industry where numerous drugs are acting as substitutes.

Concerning the PEST analysis, Holland is famous for its no-barrier policy on international trade. There are few if any political interferences in this industry as reported by various health indices. The country can be termed as too friendly to foreign investments through the protection of patents, favorable taxation and the right to own private. Thus, this raises the risk index for McKesson’s expansion into the Netherlands. Through the years of investment that has taken place in the healthcare system in the Netherlands, investing in the same industry is financially secured due to the availability of medical infrastructure and stakeholders. Therefore, McKesson is in a perfect position to invest in the Netherlands because of the economically; the country is well secured with rare economic turmoil which would favor a new entrant in the market. Socially, medical companies need to operate in a society whereby there is an openness to new medical operations and drugs. McKesson will not face much resistance when offering its product to the Dutch. Regarding technological advancement, Holland boasts of mature communication and internet infrastructure. Therefore, for a company that is invested in technological advancements in healthcare provision, McKesson is in a good position to succeed in the Netherlands.

Recommendations

Entry Barriers in Holland

· The company needs to innovate new services and products to maintain the market share while appealing to new demographics in the new population.

· Secondly, the firm needs to build on the economies of scale to have lower fixed cost per unit

Competition intensity in both local and international markets

· The company can build a sustainable differentiation of its product and branding.

· Secondly, the firm could build scale to compete better especially in the international market.

· Thirdly, the company could decide to collaborate with some of the competitors to increase the local market share which can be used as the basis for investing in the international market rather than looking for additional funding.

Bargaining Power of Buyers

The market share for the firm can be perceived as small compared to the level of revenue the firm generates in the U.S. and the size of the industry. Thus, to improve this situation:

· Tapping into the international market is s step in the right direction as it will reduce the bargaining power of the buyers.

· Further, through rapid innovation, the company will be able to offer discounts and offerings thus maintaining the market share in the long run.

· Besides, when the company can produce more products in both the international and local markets without defects and in large scale, then the organization will be able to retain its loyal customer base while hunting for more.

Bargaining Power of Suppliers

The suppliers have a greater say on the margins of the companies including McKesson. To handle the situation:

· The firm should build efficient supply chains with several of the suppliers to reduce the overall effect of the bargaining power of one single supplier.

· Also, the firm could engage in experimentations aimed at producing the same products using different designs and raw materials to ensure that if one supplier’s price goes up, the company can switch to another supplier’s raw materials

Threat of Substitutes

· McKesson can overcome this challenge by ensuring that the services they offer as products exceed the physical products

· Further, the company should research the needs of the target customer instead of focusing on selling alone

Final Recommendation

Based on the analyses carried out above, investing in Holland is the wise choice for McKesson. The company needs to hit the target of 8% revenues, and this can only be achieved through expanding into Holland. This option will be fruitful because it will not exacerbate the cost burden as the Netherlands has lenient tax policies for foreign companies, protects patents, has highly skilled labor and has transport and communication infrastructure well developed.

References

Clemons, E. K., & Row, M. (1988). McKesson Drug Company: A case study of Economost–a strategic information system. Journal of Management Information Systems, 5(1), 36-50.

Denysyk, L. M., & Denton, J. J. (2016). Lessons from European Value-Based Health Care Systems: How an Emerging Focus on Health Care Quality Will Impact the Pharmaceutical Industry in The United States. Value in Health, 19(3), A293.

Dixon, B. (2015). Surge in prices boosts drug industry profits. World Socialist Web Site.

Kroneman, M., Boerma, W., Van den Berg, M., Groenewegen, P., De Jong, J., & Van Ginneken, E. (2016). Netherlands: health system review. Health systems in transition, 18(2), 1-240.

Kuhlmann, E., Blank, R. H., Bourgeault, I. L., & Wendt, C. (2015). Healthcare policy and governance in international perspective. In The Palgrave international handbook of healthcare policy and governance (pp. 3-19). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Peters, F., Nusselder, W. J., & Mackenbach, J. P. (2015). A closer look at the role of healthcare in the recent mortality decline in the Netherlands: results of a record linkage study. J Epidemiol Community Health, 69(6), 536-542.

Sadlier, C., Bergin, C., & Merry, C. (2014). Healthcare globalization and medical tourism. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 58(11), 1642-1643.

Schakel, H. C., Jeurissen, P., & Glied, S. (2017). The influence of fiscal rules on healthcare policy in the United States and the Netherlands. The International journal of health planning and management, 32(4), 595-607.

Schmitz, M., & Forst, L. (2016). Industry and occupation in the electronic health record: an investigation of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Industry and Occupation Computerized Coding System. JMIR medical informatics, 4(1).

Shepley, M. M., & Song, Y. (2014). Design research and the globalization of healthcare environments. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 8(1), 158-198.

Verhoef, L. M., Weenink, J. W., Winters, S., Robben, P. B., Westert, G. P., & Kool, R. B. (2015). The disciplined healthcare professional: a qualitative interview study on the impact of the disciplinary process and imposed measures in the Netherlands. BMJ open, 5(11), e009275.

Wood, V. R. (2016). Globalization, Sustainability and Marketing of Healthcare in Emerging Markets: Doing Good, While Doing Well (Vol. 1). Research Handbook of Marketing in Emerging Economies.

Young, K. M., & Kroth, P. J. (2017). Sultz & Young's Health Care USA. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Young, R. M. (2015). Psychotherapy, Psychiatry and the Drug Industry. Free Associations, (68), 1-30.

John Hammergren

Chairman, President, and CEO

Jeffrey Campbell

EVP and CFO

Paul Julian

EVP and Group President; President, McKesson Supply Solutions

Paul Kirincic

EVP, Human Resources

Marc Owen

EVP, Corporate Strategy and Business Development

Pat Blake

EVP; President, McKesson Provider Technologies

Laureen Seeger

EVP, General Counsel and Secretary

Randall Spratt

EVP and CIO