Building Pharma Brands With the 7Ps, Including the Green P: A 7Ps–3D Conceptual Model of Legitimacy, Equity, and Market Impact

Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 1 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. BUILDING PHARMA BRANDS WITH THE 7PS, INCLUDING THE GREEN P: A 7PS 3D CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF LEGITIMACY, EQUITY, AND MARKET IMPACT Thamburaj Anthuvan, S.B. Patil Institute of Management Kajal Maheshwari, S.B. Patil Institute of Management B. Naresh, Pune Institute of Business Management ABSTRACT Pharmaceutical brands compete in tightly regulated markets where legitimacy with authorities and trust among physicians and patients determine enduring success. Yet most studies remain promotion-centric and overlook how the full marketing mix shapes sustained brand equity and market outcomes. This paper advances a 7Ps–3D framework that embeds a distinct, auditable Green P sustainability as an equal element of the marketing mix. The model links all seven Ps to three sequential outcomes: legitimacy (D₁), trust-based equity (D₂), and market impact (D₃) under a governance overlay of claim–practice congruence, substantiation files, and third-party assurance. Fourteen propositions connect D₁ → D₂ → D₃, moderated by regulatory stringency, therapy risk, and digital maturity, with boundary effects where incongruence weakens outcomes. For managers, the framework offers a diagnostic blueprint to integrate sustainability metrics and governance safeguards into marketing decisions, enabling defensible gains in legitimacy, equity, and performance while aligning competitive advantage with ESG priorities. Keywords: Pharmaceutical Marketing, 7Ps–3D Framework, Green P, Brand Legitimacy, Brand Equity, Market Impact, Sustainability in Marketing, Marketing Governance. INTRODUCTION Pharmaceutical brands compete under intense regulatory scrutiny and rising expectations from physicians, patients, and payers. In this environment, brand credibility is a prerequisite for access and adoption, and performance increasingly depends on demonstrable legitimacy with regulators and healthcare professionals, authentic equity with stakeholders, and market impact that extends beyond promotional spend (Anthuvan & Maheshwari, 2024; Anthuvan & Maheshwari, 2025). Yet despite extensive research on the marketing mix in healthcare, scholarship has struggled to specify how the full set of seven Ps translates into brand-building pathways that matter in regulated markets. A central gap lies in the treatment of sustainability. Although it increasingly influences pricing latitude, access, and reputational risk, sustainability has rarely been integrated as a structured element within pharmaceutical marketing or linked to brand outcomes through testable relationships. Most studies privilege promotion over the full mix, treat trust, authenticity, and legitimacy as implicit or secondary, and separate ESG discourse from marketing decision-making (Festa et al., 2022; Elrod & Fortenberry, 2020; López-Toro, Sánchez-Teba, Benítez-Márquez, & Rodríguez-Fernández, 2021). Our accepted systematic review of pharmaceutical marketing synthesized 64 peer-reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2025 across Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed and revealed persistent weaknesses: overemphasis on promotion, limited attention to brand-building outcomes Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 2 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. (legitimacy, equity, impact), and insufficient integration of sustainability within the marketing mix (Anthuvan, Kumar, Maheshwari, & Naresh, 2026). This paper advances a 7Ps–3D conceptual model in which all seven Ps—including a distinct Green P representing sustainability—jointly shape three sequential brand outcomes: D1 brand legitimacy (regulatory, professional, and patient credibility), D2 brand equity (authenticity and trust), and D3 market impact (adoption intent, market share, and pricing latitude). The model articulates grouped propositions linking each of the seven Ps to D1, D1 to D2 through authenticity and trust, and D2 to D3, while also identifying moderators such as regulatory stringency, therapy risk, firm size, and digital maturity, and boundary conditions where claim–practice incongruence weakens effects. A measurement blueprint and governance safeguards are also provided to guide implementation through managerial dashboards and evidence-based routines, enabling brand teams to translate marketing choices—including sustainability commitments—into defensible performance outcomes. Relation to prior SLR. This manuscript builds on an accepted systematic review that established a broader 7Ps–6D perspective on pharmaceutical marketing (Anthuvan et al., 2025) but constitutes a distinct, brand-focused contribution. The evidence base is adapted to D1–D3 brand outcomes, and new theories, propositions, measures, and figures are developed to advance understanding of how sustainability can strengthen legitimacy, equity, and market impact in pharmaceutical branding International Organization for Standardization (2015). The remainder of the paper outlines the evidence base and methods, presents the 7Ps– 3D model and grouped propositions, and concludes with a constructs-and-measures blueprint, governance safeguards, and implications for managers, policymakers, and researchers International Organization for Standardization (2016). LITERATURE REVIEW Regulatory and Market Heterogeneity: Why Legitimacy (D1) Comes First Pharmaceutical brand building begins with legitimacy (D1) because access, visibility, and pricing latitude depend more on credibility than persuasion. In highly regulated systems, formulary inclusion, reimbursement, and procurement are determined by evidence standards and risk–benefit judgments that precede any marketing effort (Vogler, Salcher-Konrad, & Habimana, 2023; Elrod & Fortenberry, 2020). In prescription-only markets, promotional activity operates under strict ethical codes, making regulatory approval and health‑care professional trust the real gateways to adoption and coverage (Festa et al., 2022; Porcu, García, & Kitchen, 2020). Brands that consistently align scientific claims, safety transparency, access reporting, and code‑compliant engagement earn legitimacy that translates into guideline endorsements, payer acceptance, and formulary listings—core levers for utilization and growth. Conversely, when credibility falters, even large promotional budgets struggle to move share or price realization (Anthuvan et al., 2024; Qiu et al., 2025). Regulatory legitimacy cues (D1) are strengthened by full‑mix branding—coherence across Product, Price, Place, People, and Process—which also compounds downstream D2 outcomes such as trust, loyalty, and equity. In practice, D1 credibility is the precondition through which D2 relationships are built and, ultimately, converted into D3 market impact via coverage breadth, prescribing latitude, and payer willingness to pay (Milanesi, Runfola, & Guercini, 2020; López‑Toro et al., 2021). Full-Mix Branding Beyond Promotion Promotion-centric strategies often underperform on brand legitimacy (D1) and brand equity (D2) because credibility in regulated markets arises from coherence across the entire Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 3 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. marketing mix—not from messaging alone (Elrod & Fortenberry, 2020; Anthuvan et al., 2026). While prescriptions may initially respond to promotional stimuli or pricing offers, these effects rarely translate into enduring trust or loyalty without broader strategic alignment (Hailu, Workneh, & Kahissay, 2021; Desveaud et al., 2024). Empirical research linking CSR initiatives and marketing-mix levers to brand loyalty shows that authenticity and perceived credibility mediate the pathway from firm actions to sustained brand outcomes (Štreimikienė & Ahmed, 2021; Porcu, García, & Kitchen, 2020). This evidence underscores the need to reposition the full set of seven Ps—including a distinct Green P—as inputs to D1 and D2, correcting the long-standing bias toward promotion alone (Anthuvan et al., 2026; Festa et al., 2022). In pharmaceutical contexts, product choices (quality and evidence transparency), price policies (fairness and access), process design (reliability and compliance-by-design), and people practices (ethical, code-compliant engagement) all serve as credibility cues that regulators and clinicians interpret as markers of legitimacy (D1). These same levers reinforce authenticity and trust (D2) among wider stakeholders (Elrod & Fortenberry, 2020; Milanesi et al., 2020). The traditional Physical Evidence element is therefore redefined as the Green P, framing sustainability as a measurable marketing input—through verified environmental claims, responsible sourcing, or reduced packaging intensity—rather than as a peripheral CSR activity (López-Toro et al., 2021; Soete, Jiménez-González, Dahlin, & Dewulf, 2017). This full-mix orientation aligns with emerging empirical findings that integrated levers— rather than isolated promotional tactics—drive higher levels of loyalty and brand equity (Štreimikienė & Ahmed, 2021; Hailu et al., 2021). Table 1 summarizes empirical models connecting the marketing mix—including sustainability components where present—to D1– D3 brand outcomes (Shi & Jiang, 2023). Green P as a Brand Input: From Compliance to Authenticity Sustainability becomes a genuine part of brand-building only when it is treated as a managed and measurable element of the marketing mix—the Green P. In pharmaceuticals, this takes the form of verifiable environmental and social claims within code-compliant materials, access programs that disclose eligibility and outcomes transparently, carbonefficient packaging and take-back pilots, ethical sourcing with traceable suppliers, and lifecycle assessments verified by independent agencies. Each of these actions supports brand legitimacy (D1) when evidence, claims, and behavior are consistent with regulatory and professional expectations, and they reinforce authenticity and trust (D2) when physicians, patients, and partners can clearly see that what the brand communicates is matched by what it does (Elrod & Fortenberry, 2020; Milanesi et al., 2020; López-Toro et al., 2021). These initiatives lend themselves to quantification through practical indicators such as the percentage of recycled or bio-based content per standard dose, packaging-to-dose weight, share of verified claims in promotional content, depth of ESG disclosure against recognized benchmarks, supplier due-diligence coverage, and the proportion of life-cycle reports backed by third-party assurance (Soete et al., 2017; Štreimikienė & Ahmed, 2021). Unlike routine compliance lists, an authenticity-driven Green P stresses audited evidence and codeconsistent communication that can withstand regulatory and public scrutiny. By connecting sustainability choices directly to D1 credibility and, in turn, to D2 equity through perceived integrity and reliability (Porcu et al., 2020; Anthuvan et al., 2026), the Green P shifts sustainability from a peripheral CSR exercise to a core element of marketing strategy. In essence, the Green P is a measurable marketing input grounded in traceability, verification, and anti-greenwashing discipline—setting the stage for cross-industry metrics discussed in Section 2.5. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 4 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Where Current Models Fall Short—and What We Add Despite incremental advances, prevailing pharmaceutical marketing models remain promotion-centric, foregrounding messaging and financial inducements while underspecifying non-promotional levers such as Product, Price, Process, People, and Place. This bias weakens external validity in regulated settings where credibility arises from coherence across the full mix. Second, most studies omit explicit brand outcomes for decision legitimacy and brand equity (D1 and D2), concentrating instead on tactical prescribing metrics (D3). As summarized in Table 1 (Section 3), even sophisticated approaches (e.g., SEM, meta-analytic models, and neuromarketing tools) predominantly explain prescriptions or short-run engagement, with loyalty, trust, and legitimacy either proxied imperfectly or excluded. Third, sustainability is rarely embedded as a structured marketing input; green claims are treated as peripheral CSR rather than a measurable lever within the mix. This omission invites construct under-representation and greenwashing risk because firms can communicate sustainability without operational alignment in product, packaging, or process. To address these deficits, we advance a 7Ps–3D architecture that (i) rebalances the mix beyond promotion, (ii) centers D1/D2 as primary brand outcomes with D3 as consequential performance, and (iii) formalizes a Green P with auditable metrics, assurance pathways, and governance safeguards. These observed gaps provide the foundation for the 7Ps–3D conceptual model proposed in the subsequent section. Table 1 MARKETING-MIX COMPONENTS AND SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSIONS: MAPPING THE 7PS AND THE GREEN P Author(s) & Year Model Type Independent Variables (IVs) Dependent Variables (DVs) Key Insights Sustainability/Green P Inclusion Hailu et al. (2021) Multiple Linear Regression Product, Price, Place, Promotion (4Ps) Prescribing Behavior (D1) Price and promotion exert strong influence on prescriptions but do not build trust or loyalty. No Al Thabbah et al. (2022) Binary Logistic Regression Demographics, Marketing Exposure Prescribing Practices (D1) Private-sector physicians more responsive to pricing stimuli than public sector. No Štreimikienė & Ahmed (2021) SEM (Mediation/Moderation) CSR, Marketing Mix Brand Loyalty (D2), Buying Behavior CSR effects on loyalty are mediated by authenticity and moderated by technology use. Partial Desveaud et al. (2024) Meta-Analytical SEM Brand Experience, Consumer– Brand Bonding Brand Loyalty (D2) Brand experience and bonding consistently mediate No Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 5 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. marketing strategies and loyalty. Alsharif et al., (2023) Neuromarketing Analysis Advertising, Product Packaging, Price Neural Responses (Emotion, Attention, Memory) Validates emotional and cognitive pathways activated by marketing stimuli. No Anthuvan et al. (2026) Systematic Review – Conceptual Model (7Ps– 6D with Green P) Product, Price, Place, Promotion, People, Process, Green P Prescribing Behavior (D1), Brand Loyalty (D2), Stakeholder Engagement (D3) Introduces 7Ps–6D model integrating sustainability (Green P) as a strategic input for legitimacy and equity. Explicit Note: The final column indicates whether sustainability or green marketing elements were explicitly (Yes), indirectly (Partial), or not (No) incorporated in the model. All references are included in the manuscript reference list. Cross-Industry Signals, Pharma-Ready Measures Cross‑industry evidence from FMCG, packaging, and circular‑economy research shows that auditable Green P levers can be operationalized through standards‑aligned, transferable metrics. Packaging intensity—material use per clinical exposure (grams per DDD or per pack)—is complemented by recycled‑content shares and validated recyclability benchmarks, all linked to EPR design and recovery outcomes (OECD, 2022; Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2019). Verified sustainability claims reduce deception risk when aligned with ISO 14001 environmental management systems, ISO 14021 self‑declared environmental claims, and the GHG Protocol scopes, while emerging digital product passport requirements strengthen traceability and component‑level disclosure (European Commission, 2023). Supplier ESG assurance enhances credibility through certified audits across critical tiers (e.g., FSC, 2021; PEFC, 2020; ISO 19011 audit guidance; SA8000/SMETA practice). Within pharmaceuticals, these translate into KPIs such as packaging‑to‑dose ratios, PCR/PIR content by component, recyclability compliance rates, EPR participation and take‑back performance, claim‑verification ratios, and DPP‑enabled SKU share—providing auditable inputs and governance signals that pre‑empt greenwashing and underpin the Section 3 measurement architecture. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS The 7Ps–3D framework integrates classical marketing theory, outcome-based models, and ethical–relational perspectives. These foundations are grouped thematically to clarify how they inform the model’s design and practical relevance Li & Kallas, (2021). Marketing Strategy Theories Marketing-mix theory has long underpinned strategic thinking, evolving from McCarthy’s 4Ps to Booms and Bitner’s 7Ps, which extended its applicability to service contexts (McCarthy, 1960; Booms & Bitner, 1981). Within pharmaceuticals, structured Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 6 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. syntheses of these dimensions confirm their persistent relevance and contextual adaptations (Štros & Lee, 2015). Building on this lineage, the 7Ps–3D model replaces Physical Evidence with the Green P (Sustainability), emphasizing the integration of environmental and social priorities into the marketing core. Unlike earlier interpretations that treated sustainability as peripheral CSR, the Green P integrates eco-efficient packaging, ethical sourcing, responsible product design, and transparent ESG communication as central drivers of differentiation (Milanesi et al., 2020). This reframing positions sustainability at the heart of pharmaceutical marketing and aligns with emerging expectations of ESG-anchored legitimacy and green branding. Outcome-Centric and Behavioral Models The “3D” dimension introduces a sequential outcome pathway linking marketing inputs to progressive brand responses. Prescribing behavior (D1) represents the immediate behavioral response to marketing stimuli, which subsequently builds attitudinal loyalty and trust (D2) and expands into multi-stakeholder engagement (D3). This cascade reflects empirical links between marketing-mix strategies and physician decision-making (Hailu et al., 2021) and brand-equity models demonstrating how trust and emotional attachment sustain brand preference and repeat prescribing (Kotler & Keller, 2016). Incorporating this logic moves the framework beyond transactional effects toward the cultivation of long-term, sustainability-anchored brand relationships. Ethical and Relational Anchors Amid increasing scrutiny, legitimacy in pharmaceutical marketing depends on ethical conduct and stakeholder trust. Stakeholder theory extends engagement beyond prescribers to include regulators, institutions, and wider communities (Freeman, 1984). Carroll’s CSR Pyramid positions ethical responsibility as the foundation of legitimacy (Štreimikienė & Ahmed, 2021), Cohen, (2025). Customer engagement theory highlights how participatory approaches deepen loyalty and advocacy (Barari et al., 2021), while co-creation research underscores the credibility gained when clinicians and patients are involved in program design (Scandelius & Cohen, 2016). Internal green marketing further strengthens employee alignment and external brand citizenship (Amireh, 2021). Collectively, these perspectives reinforce the Green P’s integrative role and explain the outcome chain from D1 to D3, as summarized in Table 2. Table 2 SUMMARY OF THEORETICAL CONSTRUCTS INFORMING THE 7PS–3D FRAMEWORK Thematic Group Theory/Model Purpose in Framework Mapped to Key Reference(s) Strategic Marketing Foundations Marketing Mix Theory (4Ps/7Ps) Structure of strategic inputs All 7Ps McCarthy (1960); Booms & Bitner (1981) Green Marketing & ESG Branding Strategic role of sustainability in brand differentiation Green P Milanesi et al. (2020); Barbosa et al. (2023) Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 7 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. ESG Integration Models How ESG criteria are embedded into business and marketing Green P Aldowaish et al., (2022); Yu et al. (2024) Safe & Sustainable by Design (SSbD) Embedding sustainability into product design and packaging Green P Puhlmann et al. (2024); Soete et al. (2017) Outcome & Behavior Models Outcome-Based Evaluation Links marketing-mix strategies to measurable relational outcomes D1–D3 Kumar et al. (2020); Anthuvan et al. (2026) Behavioral Marketing Theory Explains prescriber response to marketing stimuli D1 Hailu et al. (2021); Lieb & Scheurich (2014) Brand Equity & Loyalty Models Basis for repeat prescriptions and emotional loyalty D2 Kotler & Keller (2016) Omnichannel & Digital Integration Builds trust through coherent, personalized engagement D1, D2 Porcu et al. (2020); Yang et al. (2025) Ethical & Stakeholder Anchors Stakeholder Theory Engagement beyond prescribers to regulators and communities D3 Freeman (1984); Aksoy et al. (2022) CSR Pyramid Ethical responsibility as foundation of legitimacy D2, D3 Štreimikienė & Ahmed (2021) Customer Engagement Theory Participatory loyalty and advocacy D2, D3 Barari et al. (2020) Co-Creation / Participation Involving doctors and patients in design and communication Green P, D2 Scandelius & Cohen (2016); Chowdhury (2024) Internal Green Marketing Employee alignment and brand citizenship Green P Amireh (2021) Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 8 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Model Development and Propositions The 7Ps–3D framework was developed through a structured, three-stage process: (i) literature mapping, (ii) theoretical synthesis, and (iii) expert validation through a focus group discussion (FGD) with senior pharmaceutical marketers. Literature Mapping and Theoretical Synthesis This study extends an accepted systematic review of pharmaceutical marketing (Anthuvan, Kumar, and Maheshwari, 2025, World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development) that established the 7Ps–6D framework. The present work narrows that evidence base to brand-building outcomes and develops a 7Ps–3D conceptual model linking the full marketing mix—including a distinct Green P—to D1 brand legitimacy, D2 brand equity (authenticity and trust), and D3 market impact (adoption intent, market share, and pricing latitude). The evidence base consisted of peer-reviewed English-language publications from 2013 to 2024 indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. Bibliometric mapping was applied to identify networked studies examining pharmaceutical marketing strategies and their branding, regulatory, or market effects. Both conceptual and empirical works were reviewed, and quantitative indicators (β-values, odds ratios, p-values) informed directional interpretation. An additional brand-building filter was applied to the accepted SLR’s included set, retaining studies that operationalized at least one of the D1–D3 outcomes. Each study was coded across the seven Ps—Product, Price, Place, Promotion, People, Process, and Green P— and mapped to brand-building pathways. Practitioner input from senior pharmaceutical marketers guided refinements in construct definitions, measurement indicators, and moderator identification (regulatory stringency, therapy risk, firm size, and digital maturity). Boundary conditions were also noted where claim–practice incongruence could weaken effects. Findings were synthesized into grouped propositions mapping the full 7Ps (including the Green P) to D1, D2, and D3 via the directional chain 7Ps → D1, D1 → D2, and D2 → D3, with empirical estimates guiding directional plausibility and qualitative insights explicating mechanisms. The adapted PRISMA flow diagram for the brand-building subset is presented in Appendix A (Figure 2 ) (Page et al., 2021). Expert Validation Through Focus Group Insights To ensure practitioner relevance, a pilot FGD was conducted with twelve senior professionals from leading Indian pharmaceutical companies, including marketing heads, business-unit leaders, brand managers, and digital specialists. Each participant had over a decade of strategic or operational experience. The discussion focused on four themes: (1) effectiveness of traditional versus extended 7Ps strategies, (2) the role of sustainability in brand building, (3) connections between marketing actions and long-term outcomes, and (4) organizational readiness for ESG-aligned marketing. Insights emphasized the pivotal role of People, Process, and the Green P, particularly in the context of digital transformation and ESG integration. Participants endorsed inclusion of the Green P, sharing examples from CSR campaigns, sustainable packaging, and compliance dashboards that enhance transparency and stakeholder trust. The D1–D3 outcome chain was validated as a realistic structure for understanding brand equity building in regulated markets. Based on the discussion, constructs such as phygital outreach, compliance communication, and CSR visibility were refined to bridge academic framing with field practice and to inform future empirical testing. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 9 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Participation was voluntary, non-attributable, and limited to professional insights; no patientlevel or personally identifiable data were collected. Model Rationale Prevailing approaches to pharmaceutical marketing remain promotion-centric and under-specify how the full marketing mix contributes to credible brand building in regulated contexts. The 7Ps–3D framework advances this field by integrating a distinct, auditable Green P as a full peer within the mix and by positioning legitimacy (D₁) as the necessary precursor to equity (D₂: authenticity and trust) and, in turn, to market impact (D₃). The central premise is that sustainable, well-governed marketing decisions signal credible intent and evidence-based practice—first establishing legitimacy with professional and consumer stakeholders (D₁), then translating into perceived authenticity and trust (D₂), and ultimately driving adoption, share growth, and pricing latitude (D₃) Streimikiene & Ahmed, (2021). The framework departs from CSR sidebars by treating sustainability as an operationalized marketing lever anchored in verifiable actions such as responsible product design, decarbonized operations, sustainable packaging, take-back programs, and supplierstandard enforcement. A governance overlay—comprising claim substantiation, compliance, and transparency—binds People, Process, and Promotion to Product realities, mitigating greenwashing risk and strengthening decision credibility. Three context moderators— regulatory stringency, therapy risk, and digital maturity—shape the strength of pathways from the Ps to legitimacy (D₁) and from legitimacy to equity (D₂), explaining variations across prescription (Rx) versus over-the-counter (OTC) segments and across markets such as India, the EU, and the US Lopez-Toro et al., (2021). Designed for empirical validation, the model specifies propositions (PR1–PR5) covering: 1. positive effects of P₁–P₇ on D₁; 2. sequential D₁ → D₂ → D₃ links; 3. moderation by regulatory stringency, therapy risk, and digital maturity; and 4. Attenuation of all positive paths under claim–practice incongruence. This structure supports multi-informant, two-wave empirical designs (marketers for mixed inputs and governance; prescribers for D₁/D₂ in prescription markets; consumers for D₂/D₃ in OTC settings) and enables testing of mediation, moderation, and the incremental validity of the Green P through SEM frameworks. Conceptual Model Overview The 7Ps–3D framework models how the full marketing mix—including a distinct, auditable Green P—builds credible brands in regulated pharmaceutical contexts. Sustainable, well-governed decisions across P₁–P₇ first establish brand legitimacy (D₁), which then translates into equity (D₂: authenticity and trust) and ultimately market impact (D₃: adoption, share growth, and pricing latitude). A governance overlay (claim substantiation, compliance, transparency) ensures claim–practice congruence and mitigates greenwashing risk, while three moderators—regulatory stringency, therapy risk, and digital maturity—shape the strength of the Ps → D₁ and D₁ → D₂ pathways across Rx and OTC contexts and across markets (e.g., India, EU, US). Propositions PR1–PR5 summarize these relationships, enabling empirical tests of mediation, moderation, and the incremental validity of the Green P. The overall structure of these relationships is illustrated in Figure 1, and Propositions PR1– PR5 summarize the expected mediation, moderation, and incremental validity of the Green P within the model. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 16 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. incremental predictive power for legitimacy and its downstream effects on equity and impact, beyond the traditional levers of product and promotion. Conceived in India’s regulated pharmaceutical ecosystem, the framework is designed for global scalability and provides a conceptual foundation for future research linking sustainability, governance, and brand performance. Declaration Context This conceptual paper originates from the author’s doctoral research on marketing strategies and brand building in the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Conflict of Interest The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to this study and confirm that the manuscript is original and not under consideration elsewhere. Author Contributions All authors contributed to the conceptualization, literature synthesis, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript. Data Availability No datasets were generated or analyzed for this conceptual study. Ethics Statement Not applicable for this conceptual phase; future empirical work will be preregistered and obtain formal institutional ethics or IRB approval prior to data collection. REFERENCES Aksoy, L., Banda, S., Harmeling, C., Keiningham, T. L., & Pansari, A. (2022). Marketing’s role in multistakeholder engagement. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(2), 445-461. Al Thabbah, D. H., Almahairah, M. S., Naser, A. Y., Alrawashdeh, H. M., & Araidah, M. (2022). The effect of pharmaceutical companies’ marketing mix strategies on physicians prescribing practices in Jordan: a cross-sectional study. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), 1293 Alden, D. L. (2021). The time is right for the journal of sustainable marketing and your involvement is critical. Journal of Sustainable Marketing, 2(2), 24-26. Aldowaish, A., Kokuryo, J., Almazyad, O., & Goi, H. C. (2022). Environmental, social, and governance integration into the business model: Literature review and research agenda. Sustainability, 14(5), 2959. Alsharif, A. H., Salleh, N. Z. M., Abdullah, M., Khraiwish, A., & Ashaari, A. (2023). Neuromarketing tools used in the marketing mix: A systematic literature and future research agenda. Sage Open, 13(1), 21582440231156563 Aly, A. S., Santos-Roldán, L., & Palacios-Florencio, B. (2025). Building consumer loyalty through green marketing: an Egyptian perspective. Environmental Research Communications, 7(4), 045015. Amireh, E. (2021). Boosting brand citizenship behavior through internal green marketing: The role of brand trust and willingness to be environmentally friendly. Journal of Sustainable Marketing, 2(1), 1-11. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 17 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Anthuvan, T., Kumar, A., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026). A Systematic Review of Pharmaceutical Marketing Strategies and Outcomes: The 7Ps–6D Framework with Sustainability as a Key Emerging Theme. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 22(1–2). Anthuvan, T., & Maheshwari, K. (2024). Leveraging the 7Ps Framework in Pharmaceutical Marketing: A Narrative Review. The Indian Journal of Technical Education (IJTE), 47(S1), 45–48. Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Dantu, R. (2025). Trends in pharmaceutical marketing and branding research: a bibliometric analysis (2009–2023). IIM Ranchi Journal of Management Studies, 4(1), 55-71 Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., Ramanan, E. A., & Ravi, S. (2025). Digital marketing in the Indian pharmaceutical sector: Adoption patterns, strategic frameworks, and emerging trends. Journal of Management Research and Analysis, 12(2), 107–117. Barari, M., Ross, M., Thaichon, S., & Surachartkumtonkun, J. (2021). A meta‐analysis of customer engagement behaviour. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 457-477. Becker, J., Manske, C., & Randl, S. (2022). Green chemistry and sustainability metrics in the pharmaceutical manufacturing sector. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 33, 100562. Chaudhuri, M., Hirunyawipada, T., & Pan, Y. (2024). How promotion mix helps sustain brand sales during market transitions: insights from the pharmaceutical industry. European Journal of Marketing, 58(11), 2508-2538. Chowdhury, R. H. (2024). Sustainability marketing and ethical branding in the digital space. Journal of Trends in Applied Science and Advanced Technologies, 1(1), 18-27. Cohen, E. S., Kringos, D. S., Grandiek, F., Kouwenberg, L. H., Sperna Weiland, N. H., Richie, C., ... & Aarts, J. W. (2025). Patients' Attitudes Towards Integrating Environmental Sustainability Into Healthcare Decision‐Making: An Interview Study. Health Expectations, 28(1), e70155. Daú, G., Scavarda, A., Scavarda, L. F., & Portugal, V. J. T. (2019). The healthcare sustainable supply chain 4.0: The circular economy transition conceptual framework with the corporate social responsibility mirror. Sustainability, 11(12), 3259 De Soete, W., Jiménez-González, C., Dahlin, P., & Dewulf, J. (2017). Challenges and recommendations for environmental sustainability assessments of pharmaceutical products in the healthcare sector. Green Chemistry, 19(15), 3493-3509. de Souza Barbosa, A., da Silva, M. C. B. C., da Silva, L. B., Morioka, S. N., & de Souza, V. F. (2023). Integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria: their impacts on corporate sustainability performance. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-18 Desveaud, K., Mandler, T., & Eisend, M. (2024). A meta-model of customer brand loyalty and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 176, 114589. Elrod, J. K., & Fortenberry Jr, J. L. (2020). Integrated marketing communications: a strategic priority in health and medicine. BMC health services research, 20(Suppl 1), 825. European Commission. (2023). Proposal for a regulation establishing a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products (including Digital Product Passport). Festa, G., Kolte, A., Carli, M. R., & Rossi, M. (2022). Envisioning the challenges of the pharmaceutical sector in the Indian health-care industry: a scenario analysis. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(8), 1662-1674. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman Publishing. García-Salirrosas, E. E., & Rondon-Eusebio, R. F. (2022). Green marketing practices related to key variables of consumer purchasing behavior. Sustainability, 14(14), 8499. Hailu, A. D., Workneh, B. D., & Kahissay, M. H. (2021). Influence of pharmaceutical marketing mix strategies on physicians’ prescribing behaviors in public and private hospitals, Dessie, Ethiopia: a mixed study design. BMC public health, 21(1), 65. Ilyas, Z., & Siddiqi, M. A. (2024). Revealing the synergetic influence of pharmaceutical marketing strategies on physician prescription patterns: a moderated mediation investigation. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, 18(4), 692-708. International Organization for Standardization. (2015). ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems— Requirements with guidance for use. International Organization for Standardization. (2016). ISO 14021:2016 Environmental labels and declarations—Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling). Kaladharan, S., Manayath, D., & Sahib, K. K. (2024). Minimizing medicine wastage through sustainabilityoriented anti-consumption: an exploration of enablers using M-TISM and MICMAC approach. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy, 40, 101637. Kamboj, S., & Matharu, M. (2021). Modelling the predictors of consumers’ willingness to pay premium price for sustainable products. Journal of Asia business studies, 15(4), 559-583. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 18 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Kumar, M., Mohanty, B., Narayan, M., & Vadera, M. L. (2020). Sustainability Reporting Pattern in Pharmaceutical Sector: A Study of Top 10 Economies across the Globe. Int. J. Res. Pharm. Sci, 11, 460465. Li, S., & Kallas, Z. (2021). Meta-analysis of consumers' willingness to pay for sustainable food products. Appetite, 163, 105239 Lieb, K., & Scheurich, A. (2014). Contact between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry, their perceptions, and the effects on prescribing habits. PloS one, 9(10), e110130. Liu, L., Song, W., & Liu, Y. (2023). Leveraging digital capabilities toward a circular economy: Reinforcing sustainable supply chain management with Industry 4.0 technologies. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 178, 109113. Lopez-Toro, A. A., Sánchez-Teba, E. M., Benítez-Márquez, M. D., & Rodríguez-Fernández, M. (2021). Influence of ESGC indicators on financial performance of listed pharmaceutical companies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9), 4556. Macarthur, E. L. L. E. N., & Heading, H. E. A. D. I. N. G. (2019). How the circular economy tackles climate change. Ellen MacArthur Found, 1, 1-71. McCarthy, E. J. (1960). Basic marketing: a managerial approach. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Inc., 1979McCarthyBasic Marketing: A Managerial Approach1979. Milanesi, M., Runfola, A., & Guercini, S. (2020). Pharmaceutical industry riding the wave of sustainability: Review and opportunities for future research. Journal of cleaner production, 261, 121204. MJ, B. B. B. (1981). Marketing strategies and organization structures for service firms in JH Donnelly and WR George (eds) Marketing Services. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 47-51. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2022). Extended producer responsibility: A guidance manual for governments (Updated edition). OECD Publishing. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372. Porcu, L., del Barrio-Garcia, S., Kitchen, P. J., & Tourky, M. (2020). The antecedent role of a collaborative vs. a controlling corporate culture on firm-wide integrated marketing communication and brand performance. Journal of Business Research, 119, 435-443. Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). (2020). PEFC ST 2002:2020 Chain of custody of forest and tree based products—Requirements. Puhlmann, N., Abbate, E., Kümmerer, K., Oomen, A. G., Ragas, A. M., & Moermond, C. (2024). Applicability of the European Commission’s framework on safe and sustainable by design to the pharmaceutical sector. Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy, 42, 101845 Qiu, F., Chen, S., Li, Y., Wang, X., & Zhu, M. (2025). The impact of the centralized volume-based procurement policy on Chinese pharmaceutical manufacturing firms’ R&D investment: A difference-in-differences approach. PLoS One, 20(1), e0315811. Saxena, K., Balani, S., & Srivastava, P. (2021). The relationship among corporate social responsibility, sustainability and organizational performance in pharmaceutical sector: A literature review. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, 15(4), 572-597. Saxena, K., Balani, S., & Srivastava, P. (2022). The role of pharmaceutical industry in building resilient health system. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 964899 Scandelius, C., & Cohen, G. (2016). Sustainability program brands: Platforms for collaboration and cocreation. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 166-176. Shaukat, F., & Ming, J. (2022). Green marketing orientation impact on business performance: Case of pharmaceutical industry of Pakistan. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 940278 Shi, J., & Jiang, Z. (2023). Willingness to pay a premium price for green products: does a reference group matter?. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(8), 8699-8727. Streimikiene, D., & Ahmed, R. R. (2021). The integration of corporate social responsibility and marketing concepts as a business strategy: evidence from SEM-based multivariate and Toda-Yamamoto causality models. Oeconomia Copernicana, 12(1), 125-157. Stros, M., & Lee, N. (2015). Marketing dimensions in the prescription pharmaceutical industry: a systematic literature review. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 23(4), 318-336. Taddei, E., Sassanelli, C., Rosa, P., & Terzi, S. (2022). Circular supply chains in the era of industry 4.0: A systematic literature review. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 170, 108268. Ur Rahman, S., Chwialkowska, A., Hussain, N., Bhatti, W. A., & Luomala, H. (2023). Cross-cultural perspective on sustainable consumption: Implications for consumer motivations and promotion. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 25(2), 997-1016. Vogler, S., Salcher-Konrad, M., & Habimana, K. (2023). Interface policies bridging outpatient and hospital sectors in Europe: can cross-sectorial collaboration in reimbursement and procurement improve access to affordable medicines?. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 23(8), 867-878. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal Volume 30, Issue 1, 2026 19 1528-2678-30-1-116 Citation Information: Anthuvan, T., Maheshwari, K., & Naresh, B. (2026) Building pharma brands with the 7ps, including the green p: a 7ps 3d conceptual model of legitimacy, equity, and market impact. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 30(1), 1-19. Received: 16-Sep-2025, Manuscript No. AMSJ-25-16254; Editor assigned: 17-Sep-2025, PreQC No. AMSJ-25-16254(PQ); Reviewed: 11-Oct-2025, QC No. AMSJ-25-16254; Revised: 28-Oct-2025, Manuscript No. AMSJ-25-16254(R); Published: 02-Nov-2025 Yang, Z., Hu, D., & Chen, X. (2025). The role of omnichannel integration and digital value in building brand trust: a customer psychological perception perspective. Internet Research, 35(3), 1029-1064. Yurteri, S. (2021). Effects of brand priming on sustainable consumption attitudes and behaviors (Master's thesis, Middle East Technical University (Turkey)). Zec, D. N. (2024). Media framing of sustainability: The case of British pharmaceutical companies (2000– 2020). Sustainable Development, 32(4), 4001-4019. APPENDIX Adapted under fair use for scholarly synthesis from Anthuvan, Kumar, and Maheshwari (2025). The diagram is redrawn for this manuscript and adds a D1–D3 brandbuilding filter to the accepted SLR flow. Counts mirror the original SLR up to inclusion; the final two boxes represent the brand-focused subset and the 34 studies informing the 7Ps–3D pathways. FIGURE 2 ADAPTED PRISMA FLOW FOR THE BRAND-BUILDING SUBSET