KRPIA and members clash over Sean Kim’s resignation

Senior Director Sean Kim’s resignation authorized without consulting with BOD

Organization members questions the real reason behind the action, many wants him back

Apparently, the multinational pharmaceutical companies in Korea have disputed KRPIA’s approval on the resignation of Senior Director Sean Kim.

 

The pharmaceutical industry sources reported Sean Kim, a Senior Director of Market Access and Healthcare Policy at Korean Research-based Pharmaceutical Industry Association (KRPIA), has expressed his intention to resign and CEO Lee Youngshin has made a discretionary approval on his resignation with her delegated authority.

 

Senior Director Kim has been decided to leave the organization on Apr.

 

17.

 

The decision was called without consulting with KRPIA Board of Directors (BOD), consisting of member companies’ leaders, and the organization has not officially announced the news, yet.

 

Caught up with the news late, KRPIA Market Access and Healthcare Policy (MA and HC Policy) Committee and Regulatory Affairs Committee have requested an explanation from the organization and 20 or so members of the committee and the CEO were convened on Apr.

 

14 for an online meeting.

 

However, the organization official did not specify Senior Director Kim’s reason for resignation at the meeting and left it as ‘personal matter.’ The sources confirmed CEO Lee has apologized for the lack of communication when processing the resignation and briefed their plan to recruit a successor in June, if feasible.

 

Senior Director Sean Kim

◆Question One: Was it a proper processing of resignation?

 

The main complaint of the MA and HC Policy Committee and Regulatory Affairs Committee on the Senior Director’s resignation is the process.

 

As stated above, the senior director’s resignation was approved discretionarily by CEO Lee.

 

According to the KRPIA regulation, the CEO has a rightful authority over personnel, which means it was processed by the book.

 

However, the point of issue lies on how a resignation of a board member-level Senior Director Kim, a major decision-maker of the organization, has been approved without prior discussion with the BOD.

 

And the organization’s lack of official notice to the member companies on the matter has fired up the industry’s backlash.

 

Senior Director Kim has served in the government policy sector for eight years since 2012, and led most of government affairs and communication efforts regarding drug pricing system reform.

 

He also took a crucial role in the Korean government making decisions on expanding eligible subject for risk sharing agreement (RSA) and applying RSA on follow-on drugs.

 

KRPIA and the member companies would take a heavy blow without a MA and HC Policy expert like Senior Director Kim or the former CEO Lee Sang Suk with actual experience in a government agency.

 

The member companies argue, regardless of the CEO’s authority, the resignation approval should have been finalized after a thorough discussion and internal communication.

 

An insider of a multinational company commented, “It is quite disappointing to find out about Senior Director Kim’s resignation not through the organization, but through word of mouth.

 

His experience and expertise are unmatched, and the industry is imminently facing a crucial government announcement regarding the drug pricing system revision.

 

We need the organization’s proper explanation and their prospective plan.” ◆ Question Two: Was his resignation ‘voluntary?’ Another point of the dispute is unclear reason and background of the senior director’s resignation.

 

For the organization members, the Kim’s resignation was completely unexpected, raising a few questions to the story.

 

Senior Director Kim has inked a contract with KRPIA in last December that extended his term for two years until November 2021.

 

After signing the contract, he was at MA and HC Policy Committee meeting in January and vowed that he would “retire honorably in 2021 after putting all efforts to contribute in protecting appropriate pricing for new drugs and in expanding coverage until the end of the term.” In other words, he had no other reason to resign except for his health issue.

 

This is also why no one in the industry saw his resignation coming.

 

And the question still remains and it even brews other suspicion as to what internal discrepancy or pressure could have been the real reason behind it.

 

Another associate of a multinational company said, “His reinstatement should be considered depending on the situation, although his intent should come first in making the decision.

 

If there was an unfair treatment, then it should be corrected.

 

Most of government affairs associates in the industry are hoping for him to return.”