ROBERT E. MARTINI : Chairman, chief executive officer, Bergen Brunswig Corp.

Flush from a spate of acquisitions that included an Alabama competitor last year, Robert E. Martini is contemplating where his company will go from here. Martini clearly wants to make his firm, Orange-based Bergen Brunswig Corp., the largest drug wholesaler in the nation. Martini is also concerned about talk of controlling pharmaceutical prices, the FDA and the effect of government-mandated managed-care proposals on his company and his clients. Martini recently spoke with Times staff writer James M. Gomez.

*

What makes you such a successful businessman?

I think being able to grow the company in a way that has caused it to be an extremely efficient operation that is extremely customer-oriented, and to really be able to develop a distribution system that is the most efficient in the world. It thereby helps to keep the ultimate cost of drugs very competitive.

What philosophy drives your business decisions?

The customer. It’s as simple as that. As a matter of fact, the credo here is that if you don’t know the answer, just put yourself in the shoes of the customer, and whatever your decision is, it will be supported by the customer. As long as you are customer-driven, that, as far as I am concerned, gives the best results.

What kinds of goals have you set for yourself in regards to your company this year?

We want to continue to, philosophically, be the most efficient and the most competitive company in the industry. To do that we need to have sufficient mass in the marketplace so that we can rationalize having regional distribution centers. We therefore need to develop market share in sufficient quantity in certain geographic areas.

Do you see a general consolidation in the wholesale drug market occurring in the near future?

Yes. The market has consolidated a great deal over the last 10 years. It has taken a breath in between, I believe. Companies such as ours have digested those acquisitions and are now in another phase of acceleration, an accelerated phase of developing more market share, much of which comes through acquisitions. That, therefore, means more consolidation ahead.

Are acquisitions the best strategy for industry growth in the 1990s?

The chief strategy is to build up enough mass in the marketplace. That comes about through acquiring customer business or internally growing the business or acquiring other suppliers or distribution networks in the market area. The last strategy gives us the ability to consolidate that market share into an extremely efficient facility.

What do you think should be the focus of the first 100 days of the new Clinton Administration?

Clearly Clinton is focused on jobs and health care. I don’t know which is the highest priority. But I am hopeful that jobs is the first priority because I really believe that will do more to improve the overall economic climate than (reforming) health care can. But regarding health care, based on the commitment that he has made, it’s clear that he will enhance health care, or the delivery of health care, at least to people who may have had some deprivation of health care in the past.

Will that focus on managed care benefit your industry?

I view that as being not only good for those who haven’t had sufficient health care in the past but I also view it as expanding our markets. I believe the market will grow as a result of providing more health care to more people--and that works well for our business.

But what about price regulation for the pharmaceutical industry?

I am absolutely opposed to any kind of price regulation, regardless of what area it is in. I would simply suggest that every other country in the world is moving away from government regulation to privatization. Price controls in any area haven’t worked very well in the past. So the concept of managed competition might be one that could work well, but I believe that it is a dichotomy to consider managed competition together with price control. They work in opposition to each other.

Overall, do you see a bright future, then, for the drug industry?

Of course. Life expectancy is at least 10 years greater than it was when the Social Security System was founded. I really believe that the proper use of drugs not only can help in the extending of a person’s life and in the quality of life, but also in reducing overall health delivery costs. Many drugs will be replacing more costly and less productive methods from the past. An example of that would be, for instance, where drugs have virtually replaced the need for surgery in ulcer cases.

What are your thoughts about the lengthy approval process required by the Food and Drug Administration?

The FDA can be faulted in many things, not the least of which is the length of time it takes to get a drug approved. But they also can be complimented in many areas too. I firmly believe in the FDA and in maintaining the quality of the product that is delivered in this country under their auspices. But clearly there needs to be a more efficient way in which to get life-saving or high-quality, life-improving drugs to the marketplace more quickly and still preserve the integrity of safety.

Should the North American Free Trade Agreement have stronger provision for harmonization of drug regulations?

I think the people of this country have been willing to have stringent laws. The dichotomy there is that we do it in this country, while drugs are available from across the borders from countries that do not have the same identical scrutiny regarding drugs. That is dangerous.

On the free enterprise system.

“Privatization should win out over government regulation. The more that’s done to encourage the free enterprise system, not only in this country but across our borders, the better we all will be.”

On costs associated with FDA approval process.

“I, for one, am willing to pay to live longer and to live a healthier life and I am willing to support programs that cause that to happen.”

On proposed health care reforms.

“Improving the health care delivery system will take a much longer period of time. I don’t think it’s easy.”

On proposed tax incentives for research and development.

“Every encouragement should be made in R&D.; That way, we can improve productivity in the future, ultimately making costs more efficient.”