A few weeks ago the news broke that in Germany there was a remnant of unused covid-19 vaccines. Although they had received many doses, the potential vaccinated were reluctant to get the vaccine in question. The brand was AstraZeneca and its vaccine was highly unpopular in the country, generating a high rejection. Doses were running out then.

This was weeks ago, before AstraZeneca became the stuff of tons of news stories and many disturbing headlines once different European countries cascaded down its use in vaccination. The decision was connected to the suspicion that the vaccine caused clots.

Although at first voices came out criticizing the decision - those who did it explained that statistically it was a very rare side effect and that there are drugs on the market, such as the contraceptive pill, that cause them much more often - the stoppage in vaccinations it became something of a knockout blow to the reputation of the AstraZeneca vaccine. If its reputation was already doubtful, with that measure it was completely damaged.

In the final stretch of the race to create the coronavirus vaccine, AstraZeneca was one of the first teams to deliver results. His name was repeated over and over again in the stories about how they worked against the clock to get a vaccine as quickly as possible and their brand image was linked to innovation and positive values.

In terms of growth in brand awareness and consumer intent, 2020 was a very positive year for AstraZeneca and its brand identity. Consumers suddenly knew his name and appreciated him, something that generally happened to the pharmaceutical industry .

2021 has already been another story for AstraZeneca and just as quickly it was elevated in terms of reputation and brand recognition it has been falling apart. The news about the side effects of its vaccine have added to its stumbling blocks to cover the previous agreements closed on vaccine purchases (the European Union has criticized the company many times for breaching its contracts and not delivering all the promised doses). Overall, the news about AstraZeneca has been negative so far this year and its brand image has suffered powerfully.

A reputational crisis
When in February people in Germany refused to wear it, analysts from within the country were already pointing out that AstraZeneca had been hampered by poor communication. What was happening with the vaccine was not being explained well and the "horror stories" about it circulated without any kind of counterweight. "To say that the AstraZeneca vaccine is second-rate is completely out of place, both from a scientific point of view and in terms of real effects," lamented Carsten Watzl of the German Immunology Society at the time.

A YouGov study in February, just before the outbreak of the great reputation crisis after the vaccination pause, already concluded that Europeans were much more hesitant about getting the AstraZeneca vaccine than they had with other vaccines. It matters little what the experts repeat and what the public health agencies insist. In the collective imagination, the AstraZeneca vaccine has established itself as 'the bad one'. In terms of reputation, the company and its product are in a very difficult situation.

And, therefore, the latest move by the Last Databasecompany is not surprising. AstraZeneca must do a job of communicating and repairing your public reputation and that of your product. Regaining lost confidence, when these levels have been reached, usually requires a lot of time, long-term strategy, and a lot of communication. However, the times in the coronavirus crisis tend to be more accelerated.

AstraZeneca has chosen to rebranding: its vaccine will now be called Vaxzevria. The European Medicines Agency has already authorized the change of the trademark name, which the company had requested from the European regulator.

The name change is a patch for its reputational woes - right now, for example, it is facing an aftershock of what happened in Europe with the vaccine pause in Canada - but perhaps it could serve as first base to regain ownership. public image lost. The rebranding must come, yes, with a clear action of public communication.