Lilly and Novo Solved One Path to the Patient. Two Are Still Open.
Lilly and Novo Nordisk have run the same experiment in public for two years, and between them they have proved something the rest of the industry can use.
Both identified a structural gate between their science and their patients. Both removed it the same way. The results diverged, and the divergence is more instructive than either company's individual performance, because it separates the part of the move that transfers to your brand from the part that does not.
Here is what they solved, what they did not, and where that leaves you.
What did both companies build?
The same three changes, about a year apart, and nothing in either is beyond your reach.
LillyDirect arrived first, in January 2024. David Ricks framed it around burden, saying a complex US healthcare system "adds to the burdens patients face when managing a chronic disease." NovoCare Pharmacy followed with the same architecture.
In both cases: a cash price so coverage stops being the gate, a telehealth route so access to a prescriber stops being the gate, and direct fulfillment so the pharmacy counter stops being the gate. Novo added retail and telehealth partners including Ro, LifeMD, Amazon and WeightWatchers, a model STAT examined in detail last year.
Both companies decided the payer did not have to be in the transaction. That is a commercial system change, made by commercial leaders, and it worked. At the J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference in January 2026, Ricks said "basically a million people a month" now buy a GLP-1 medicine directly from a manufacturer. That channel did not exist three years ago.
Which path did they actually solve?
One of three, and naming which one is the whole value of the case.
We model the distance between your science and your patient as three sequential paths. The Path to Prescribe , where a patient is identified, diagnosed, referred and a clinician decides. The Path to Fulfill , where that decision survives coverage, prior authorization, cost and dispensing. The Path to Adhere , where the patient stays on therapy long enough to get the benefit your trial demonstrated.
LillyDirect and NovoCare are Path to Fulfill solutions. Elegant ones. They take the stage where most earned value is lost in the US and they shorten it from weeks to days.
Run your own brand against those three and you will usually find the same thing. Enormous investment in the first path, real but partial investment in the second, and almost nothing systematic in the third. The money sitting in all three is what we call value leakage.
Why did the results diverge?
Three reasons, and the first two have nothing to do with experience.
Tirzepatide outperformed semaglutide on weight loss in the data prescribers and patients were reading. That is a product fact, and no commercial system changes it. Lilly also moved first on the self pay vial and had manufacturing capacity ready behind it, while the category as a whole was absorbing supply constraints and compounded alternatives.
Experience did not create that gap and experience will not close it. Worth saying plainly, because our field has a habit of claiming credit for outcomes it did not produce.
The third reason is the one that belongs to you. Building a channel is a project with a delivery date. Operating as a consumer business is a capability with no end date, and the two look identical in a budget line.
What is Novo's CEO naming?
The harder of the two, and more candidly than most leaders in this industry manage.
At the same January 2026 conference, Maziar Mike Doustdar said the business "acts a lot more as a consumer business than a traditional medication." He described the work ahead as "taking the company back to the DNA we have," and added that "we are really good when we focus." Of the previous year he said Novo had to accept that "we're no longer on our own, and we need to hurry up."
Notice what he is not reaching for. Not a platform, because Novo has one. Not spend. He is pointing at how the company behaves, which is the diagnosis almost nobody at that level says out loud, and the one that takes longest to act on.
That is also the clearest external statement of our central argument that you will find from a sitting pharma CEO. Your patient does not grade you against the pharma company down the road. She grades you against the last excellent thing that happened to her. Meeting that bar is what we call Consumer-Grade, and Doustdar is describing it as an operating standard rather than a marketing ambition.
What does the 2% tell you?
That both leaders are still at the beginning, and that the other two paths are wide open.
Doustdar put it as a question. Novo and Lilly together probably have ten or fifteen million patients, so "what about the other 85 million?" Novo's own material is starker. Around 7% of the 550 million people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes receive a GLP-1, falling to roughly 2% once you include the 900 million people living with obesity.
Two percent. In the most commercially successful category of the decade, with extraordinary demand and awareness, 98 of every 100 eligible people are not on therapy.
Almost none of that gap sits in the path the direct channels fixed. It sits upstream, in people never identified, diagnosed or referred, and downstream, in people who start and stop. Path to Prescribe and Path to Adhere.
Even inside the path they did fix, the US picture is unforgiving for brands without a cash option. A 2026 JAMA study summarized by Johns Hopkins found insurer rejections reached 40.7% of initial brand name attempts in 2024. Of those, 48.4% were never followed by a fill of that drug or anything in its class within 90 days.
What does this mean for your brand?
Three conclusions, and none of them is build a portal.
Treat the channel as table stakes rather than strategy. If a competitor can reproduce it in twelve months, it is a cost of entry. Plan for the version of your market where everyone has one.
Put the investment into capability, because that is what did not transfer between these two companies. Decision speed measured in days. Pricing as a live instrument. Service recovery that can move one patient's stalled order without convening anyone. A standard you hold yourself to when nobody is watching.
Your competitor can hire your platform vendor. They cannot buy eighteen months of changed behavior.
Then measure all three paths rather than the one you just improved. Script to start conversion and time to therapy for Path to Fulfill. Persistence and barrier resolution speed for Path to Adhere. Realized value against the value your brand had already earned, which is your Realization Rate, across all of it. The full set is in how to measure customer experience in pharma, and the discipline that holds it together is Customer Excellence.
Lilly and Novo took the route available to a category where patients will pay cash. Most brands will never have that option, which means doing it the long way. The long way is still a commercial system change rather than an experience program, and it is still available to you.
Key takeaways
- Lilly and Novo both solved the Path to Fulfill by taking the payer out of the transaction, and both proved the move works at scale.
- The channel itself transferred between them. The results did not, which tells you the channel is not where the advantage lives.
- Product performance and manufacturing explain much of the divergence, and experience claims no credit for either.
- Novo's CEO is describing the remaining work as culture, DNA and focus, which is the clearest statement of the Consumer-Grade standard from a sitting pharma CEO.
- At roughly 2% penetration across diabetes and obesity, the Path to Prescribe and the Path to Adhere remain almost entirely unaddressed.
Questions to ask your leadership team
- Of your three paths, which one has received real investment, and which one has never been measured?
- What share of the people eligible for your therapy are on it today, and who owns that number?
- How long does it take this company to change a price, a message or a service rule? Compare that against a consumer business.
- If one patient's order stalls tonight, what can be done before Monday, and by whom?
- Is this year's investment buying a platform or buying a capability? The two look identical in a budget and behave nothing alike.
About the author
Wayne Simmons is the founder of The Customer Excellence AGENCY and the author of The Customer Excellence Enterprise (Wiley, 2024). He is founding faculty of the MS in Customer Experience Management at Michigan State University's Broad College of Business. He led global customer excellence in Pfizer's first Chief Marketing Organization and in Bayer's Customer Powerhouse. Related reading: LillyDirect, what Lilly actually changed, Why consumer CX does not translate to pharma and What is Customer Excellence in pharma?







