rohm and haas case study analysis

• Predictive Analytics Workshops
• Corporate Strategy Workshops
• Advanced Excel for MBA
• Powerpoint Workshops
• Digital Transformation
• Competing on Business Analytics
• Aligning Analytics with Strategy
• Building & Sustaining Competitive Advantages
• Corporate Strategy
• Aligning Strategy & Sales
• Digital Marketing
• Hypothesis Testing
• Time Series Analysis
• Regression Analysis
• Machine Learning
• Marketing Strategy
• Branding & Advertising
• Risk Management
• Hedging Strategies
• Network Plotting
• Bar Charts & Time Series
• Technical Analysis of Stocks MACD
• NPV Worksheet
• ABC Analysis Worksheet
• WACC Worksheet
• Porter 5 Forces
• Porter Value Chain
• Amazing Charts
• Garnett Chart
• HBR Case Solution
• 4P Analysis
• 5C Analysis
• NPV Analysis
• SWOT Analysis
• PESTEL Analysis
• Cost Optimization

The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

• Leadership & Managing People / MBA EMBA Resources

Next Case Study Solutions

• Transformation at Ford Case Study Solution
• Cultural Change at Nissan Motors Case Study Solution
• Eyes of Janus: Evaluating Learning and Development at Tata Motors Case Study Solution
• Alta and SAIT: A Potential Private-Public Partnership Case Study Solution
• CARLYLE GROUP AND THE AZ-EM BUYOUT (A2): DUE DILIGENCE Case Study Solution

Previous Case Solutions

• Lukens Inc.: The Melters' Committee (A) Case Study Solution
• Dow's Acquisition Program Case Study Solution
• CARLYLE GROUP AND THE AZ-EM BUYOUT (B): VALUE CREATION AFTER THE TRANSACTION Case Study Solution
• Professionalization of Sudarshan Chemical Industries Case Study Solution
• Johnson & Johnson Company (B) Case Study Solution

Predictive Analytics

August 4, 2024

Popular Tags

Case study solutions.

Case Study Solution | Assignment Help | Case Help

The dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) description.

The Rohm and Haas Board decided how to move forward after its largest shareholder chose to sell all of its shares in the company.

Case Description The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Strategic managment tools used in case study analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), step 1. problem identification in the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 2. external environment analysis - pestel / pest / step analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 3. industry specific / porter five forces analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 4. evaluating alternatives / swot analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 5. porter value chain analysis / vrio / vrin analysis the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 6. recommendations the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, step 7. basis of recommendations for the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study, quality & on time delivery.

100% money back guarantee if the quality doesn't match the promise

100% Plagiarism Free

If the work we produce contain plagiarism then we payback 1000 USD

Paypal Secure

All your payments are secure with Paypal security.

300 Words per Page

We provide 300 words per page unlike competitors' 250 or 275

Free Title Page, Citation Page, References, Exhibits, Revision, Charts

Case study solutions are career defining. Order your custom solution now.

Case Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) is a Harvard Business (HBR) Case Study on Leadership & Managing People , Texas Business School provides HBR case study assignment help for just $9. Texas Business School(TBS) case study solution is based on HBR Case Study Method framework, TBS expertise & global insights. The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) is designed and drafted in a manner to allow the HBR case study reader to analyze a real-world problem by putting reader into the position of the decision maker. The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study will help professionals, MBA, EMBA, and leaders to develop a broad and clear understanding of casecategory challenges. The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) will also provide insight into areas such as – wordlist , strategy, leadership, sales and marketing, and negotiations.

Case Study Solutions Background Work

The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution is focused on solving the strategic and operational challenges the protagonist of the case is facing. The challenges involve – evaluation of strategic options, key role of Leadership & Managing People, leadership qualities of the protagonist, and dynamics of the external environment. The challenge in front of the protagonist, of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A), is to not only build a competitive position of the organization but also to sustain it over a period of time.

Strategic Management Tools Used in Case Study Solution

The The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution requires the MBA, EMBA, executive, professional to have a deep understanding of various strategic management tools such as SWOT Analysis, PESTEL Analysis / PEST Analysis / STEP Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, Go To Market Strategy, BCG Matrix Analysis, Porter Value Chain Analysis, Ansoff Matrix Analysis, VRIO / VRIN and Marketing Mix Analysis.

Texas Business School Approach to Leadership & Managing People Solutions

In the Texas Business School, The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution – following strategic tools are used - SWOT Analysis, PESTEL Analysis / PEST Analysis / STEP Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, Go To Market Strategy, BCG Matrix Analysis, Porter Value Chain Analysis, Ansoff Matrix Analysis, VRIO / VRIN and Marketing Mix Analysis. We have additionally used the concept of supply chain management and leadership framework to build a comprehensive case study solution for the case – The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Step 1 – Problem Identification of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) - Harvard Business School Case Study

The first step to solve HBR The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution is to identify the problem present in the case. The problem statement of the case is provided in the beginning of the case where the protagonist is contemplating various options in the face of numerous challenges that Rohm Haas is facing right now. Even though the problem statement is essentially – “Leadership & Managing People” challenge but it has impacted by others factors such as communication in the organization, uncertainty in the external environment, leadership in Rohm Haas, style of leadership and organization structure, marketing and sales, organizational behavior, strategy, internal politics, stakeholders priorities and more.

Step 2 – External Environment Analysis

Texas Business School approach of case study analysis – Conclusion, Reasons, Evidences - provides a framework to analyze every HBR case study. It requires conducting robust external environmental analysis to decipher evidences for the reasons presented in the The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A). The external environment analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) will ensure that we are keeping a tab on the macro-environment factors that are directly and indirectly impacting the business of the firm.

What is PESTEL Analysis? Briefly Explained

PESTEL stands for political, economic, social, technological, environmental and legal factors that impact the external environment of firm in The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study. PESTEL analysis of " The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)" can help us understand why the organization is performing badly, what are the factors in the external environment that are impacting the performance of the organization, and how the organization can either manage or mitigate the impact of these external factors.

How to do PESTEL / PEST / STEP Analysis? What are the components of PESTEL Analysis?

As mentioned above PESTEL Analysis has six elements – political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal. All the six elements are explained in context with The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) macro-environment and how it impacts the businesses of the firm.

How to do PESTEL Analysis for The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

To do comprehensive PESTEL analysis of case study – The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) , we have researched numerous components under the six factors of PESTEL analysis.

Political Factors that Impact The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Political factors impact seven key decision making areas – economic environment, socio-cultural environment, rate of innovation & investment in research & development, environmental laws, legal requirements, and acceptance of new technologies.

Government policies have significant impact on the business environment of any country. The firm in “ The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) ” needs to navigate these policy decisions to create either an edge for itself or reduce the negative impact of the policy as far as possible.

Data safety laws – The countries in which Rohm Haas is operating, firms are required to store customer data within the premises of the country. Rohm Haas needs to restructure its IT policies to accommodate these changes. In the EU countries, firms are required to make special provision for privacy issues and other laws.

Competition Regulations – Numerous countries have strong competition laws both regarding the monopoly conditions and day to day fair business practices. The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) has numerous instances where the competition regulations aspects can be scrutinized.

Import restrictions on products – Before entering the new market, Rohm Haas in case study The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)" should look into the import restrictions that may be present in the prospective market.

Export restrictions on products – Apart from direct product export restrictions in field of technology and agriculture, a number of countries also have capital controls. Rohm Haas in case study “ The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) ” should look into these export restrictions policies.

Foreign Direct Investment Policies – Government policies favors local companies over international policies, Rohm Haas in case study “ The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) ” should understand in minute details regarding the Foreign Direct Investment policies of the prospective market.

Corporate Taxes – The rate of taxes is often used by governments to lure foreign direct investments or increase domestic investment in a certain sector. Corporate taxation can be divided into two categories – taxes on profits and taxes on operations. Taxes on profits number is important for companies that already have a sustainable business model, while taxes on operations is far more significant for companies that are looking to set up new plants or operations.

Tariffs – Chekout how much tariffs the firm needs to pay in the “ The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) ” case study. The level of tariffs will determine the viability of the business model that the firm is contemplating. If the tariffs are high then it will be extremely difficult to compete with the local competitors. But if the tariffs are between 5-10% then Rohm Haas can compete against other competitors.

Research and Development Subsidies and Policies – Governments often provide tax breaks and other incentives for companies to innovate in various sectors of priority. Managers at The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study have to assess whether their business can benefit from such government assistance and subsidies.

Consumer protection – Different countries have different consumer protection laws. Managers need to clarify not only the consumer protection laws in advance but also legal implications if the firm fails to meet any of them.

Political System and Its Implications – Different political systems have different approach to free market and entrepreneurship. Managers need to assess these factors even before entering the market.

Freedom of Press is critical for fair trade and transparency. Countries where freedom of press is not prevalent there are high chances of both political and commercial corruption.

Corruption level – Rohm Haas needs to assess the level of corruptions both at the official level and at the market level, even before entering a new market. To tackle the menace of corruption – a firm should have a clear SOP that provides managers at each level what to do when they encounter instances of either systematic corruption or bureaucrats looking to take bribes from the firm.

Independence of judiciary – It is critical for fair business practices. If a country doesn’t have independent judiciary then there is no point entry into such a country for business.

Government attitude towards trade unions – Different political systems and government have different attitude towards trade unions and collective bargaining. The firm needs to assess – its comfort dealing with the unions and regulations regarding unions in a given market or industry. If both are on the same page then it makes sense to enter, otherwise it doesn’t.

Economic Factors that Impact The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Social factors that impact the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), technological factors that impact the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), environmental factors that impact the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), legal factors that impact the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), step 3 – industry specific analysis, what is porter five forces analysis, step 4 – swot analysis / internal environment analysis, step 5 – porter value chain / vrio / vrin analysis, step 6 – evaluating alternatives & recommendations, step 7 – basis for recommendations, references :: the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study solution.

• sales & marketing ,
• leadership ,
• corporate governance ,
• Advertising & Branding ,
• Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ,

Amanda Watson

Leave your thought here

© 2019 Texas Business School. All Rights Reserved

USEFUL LINKS

Follow us on.

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive news on update.

Dark Brown Leather Watch

$200.00 $180.00

Dining Chair

$300.00 $220.00

Creative Wooden Stand

$100.00 $80.00

2 x $180.00

2 x $220.00

Subtotal: $200.00

Free Shipping on All Orders Over $100!

Wooden round table

$360.00 $300.00

Hurley Dry-Fit Chino Short. Men's chino short. Outseam Length: 19 Dri-FIT Technology helps keep you dry and comfortable. Made with sweat-wicking fabric. Fitted waist with belt loops. Button waist with zip fly provides a classic look and feel .

The marketplace for case solutions.

Rohm and Haas (A): New Product Marketing Strategy – Case Solution

The market manager of Rohm and Haas, Joan Macey, discovered that the sales of the company's latest biocide product, the Kathon MWX, were disappointingly low in comparison to its other liquid biocide product which maintained a continuing 30% market share. Joan Macey must find a way to communicate the benefits of the new product and find an effective distribution strategy to bring the Kathon MWX to the limelight and reach the company's target sales.

​Susan Lasley Harvard Business Review ( 587055-PDF-ENG ) August 08, 2002

Case questions answered:

• What should Joan Macey, Marketing Manager for Rohm and Haas, do? Specifically, with respect to pricing? Specifically, with respect to distribution?
• What is the appropriate strategy for marketing a Kathon MWX type of product?
• What role do formulators and suppliers play in taking this product to customers?
• What factors have led to the failure of Kathon MWX?
• Why is Kathon 886 MW so successful?

Not the questions you were looking for? Submit your own questions & get answers .

Rohm and Haas (A): New Product Marketing Strategy Case Answers

1. what should joan macey, marketing manager for rohm and haas, do specifically, with respect to pricing specifically, with respect to distribution.

With respect to pricing, Rohm and Haas Marketing Manager Joan Macey should consider the following:

The Kathon MWX biocide costs between $1.01 to $1.25 per packet, but these prices are not what direct consumers pay, and the organization Rohm and Haas does not mention a fixed cost to the consumers. Hence, the cost per packet for end consumers varies from $2 to $6.

The variation and differences in the price may have a different impact on its customers. If it’s priced at a lower cost, consumers might think it is a low-quality product, while the higher price may impact the number of sales and might reduce the demand.

To fix the pricing aspect, Kathon MWX has two competitors:

• Dowicil 75 – Used for tanks above 500 gallons of industrial fluids.
• Tris Nitro – Costs $18 at a similar capacity as Kathon MWX treats large tanks.

According to this, the maximum price that the Kathon MWX could be priced at is $18, while the minimum price could be approximately equal to the manufacturing cost, i.e., $0.5.

The organization should take complete authority over the prices for which consumers buy Kathon MWX by giving distributors a manufacturer’s suggested retail price.

As regards the Distribution, Joan Macey should consider the following:

The company can utilize the additional profits from increasing the price to conduct information sessions about the Kathon products to end-users, improve the packaging and advertising of the products, and train the distributors.

In this case, Rohm and Haas do not distribute directly to users, where products are first sold to distributors, and then they sell the products to tool shops and other retailers in the market.

The formulators use their packaging and give no credit to Rohm and Haas.

The company should use ways to improve the brand name and capture the market share so that end-users recognize that the Kathon products are produced by Rohm and Haas.

2. What is the appropriate strategy for marketing a Kath on MWX type of product?

John Macey should contemplate…

Unlock Case Solution Now!

Get instant access to this case solution with a simple, one-time payment ($24.90).

After purchase:

• You'll be redirected to the full case solution.
• You will receive an access link to the solution via email.

Best decision to get my homework done faster! Michael MBA student, Boston

How do I get access?

Upon purchase, you are forwarded to the full solution and also receive access via email.

Is it safe to pay?

Yes! We use Paypal and Stripe as our secure payment providers of choice.

What is Casehero?

We are the marketplace for case solutions - created by students, for students.

Browse Course Material

Course info.

• Prof. Natalie Mizik

Departments

• Sloan School of Management

As Taught In

Learning resource types, marketing management, case studies.

Cases will be discussed in class. The discussion questions below are provided to guide assigned case readings. A group case analysis write-up is required for the Sonance case, and details can be found in the assignments section of this course.

You are leaving MIT OpenCourseWare

Selected Case Outcomes

Rohm and haas co. v. the dow chemical co..

In a matter that was closely watched on Wall Street and in the financial press, The Dow Chemical Co. settled its dispute with Rohm and Haas. Dow agreed to acquire Rohm and Haas for the original share price that the parties had established in their July 2008 merger agreement. Dow had cited the liquidity crunch and its declining business results in an attempt to avoid closing the deal.

Analysis Group was retained by Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, counsel for Rohm and Haas. We worked closely with Wachtell Lipton attorneys Marc Wolinsky, Ian Boczko, and Elaine Golin in examining the financial implications of the proposed merger on Dow's creditworthiness, liquidity, and ability to raise capital. Analysis Group Co-Founder  Bruce Stangle , and Managing Principals  Maureen M. Chakraborty and Michael Holland , led a team that supported affiliate  William J. Chambers  of Boston University. Professor Chambers, a former senior executive at Standard & Poor's, evaluated the impact the Rohm and Haas acquisition would have on Dow's credit rating, and provided an expert report and deposition testimony. Professor Chambers also was scheduled to deliver expert testimony in Delaware Chancery Court, but the matter settled shortly before the trial was to commence.

Testifying Experts

• William J. Chambers

Associated Experts & Consultants

• Maureen M. Chakraborty
• Michael Holland
• Bruce E. Stangle

Rohm and Haas: A Century of Innovation (review)

• Enterprise and Society 13(1):197-199
• 13(1):197-199
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• Order Status
• Testimonials
• What Makes Us Different

Dows Bid for Rohm and Haas Harvard Case Solution & Analysis

Home >> Finance Case Studies Analysis >> Dows Bid for Rohm and Haas

This case reviews the proposed acquisition of Dow Chemical Company, Rohm and Haas in 2008. $ 18.8 billion acquisition was part of the strategic transformation of Dow slow growth, low profitability, and cyclic producer of basic chemicals to higher growth, higher-margin and more stable producer of performance chemicals. At the same time, Dow signed an agreement to form a joint venture with Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) of Kuwait, a deal that will generate $ 7 billion in cash that could be used to fund all cash offer to buy Rohm and Haas. Dow and Rohm Rohm announced the merger July 10, 2008, just before the financial crisis in September 2008. The focus of the event that occurred after the financial crisis turned into a global economic crisis. Dow, like all chemical products, suffered as the global economy fell into recession in the second half of 2008, and as financial markets froze. What's worse, the PIC has canceled a joint venture with Dow in December 2008. As a result, Dow was wounded on three fronts: first, it has lost an important source of funding for the proposed acquisition, and secondly, the financial condition of the company Dow and internal cash flow deteriorated (its share price fell by more than 70% in 2008), and third, Rem forecast sales, profits, and the cost has gone down thus reducing its attractiveness as a target acquisition. Given this set of circumstances, Dow filed a lawsuit to cancel the merger agreement with Rohm in January 2009. Rohm answered with his lawsuit to force the closing of the transaction. As of February 2009, the board of directors of Dow and CEO Andrew Liveris to decide what to do first to acquire Rohm and pending litigation, but also to reduce the financial firm, the performance of the joint venture and the PIC. by Benjamin C. Esty, David Lane Source: Harvard Business School 22 pages. Publication Date: November 16, 2010. Prod. #: 211020-PDF-ENG

“Dow’s” bid for “Rohm and Haas”

1.    Introduction:

The case presents an American company Dow, producer of commodity chemicals who is in the final stages of acquiring another company Rohm and Haas (Rohm). Dow’s CEO had been working for four years to transform Dow from producer of low-value, highly cyclical commodity chemicals to a producer of high-value specialty chemicals and advanced materials. Rohm is a perfect match for Dow in respect of the strategic and financial perspective. Dow was also pursuing another key deal with Kuwait’s Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) that supposed to generate $7 billion cash net of tax which could be used to finance acquisition of specialty chemical maker Rohm and Haas (Rohm) for $18.8 billion. By late 2008, financial crunch over financial institutions, US and global markets, as well macroeconomic factors grew worse. This in turn effected the global platform as well. PIC terminated the joint venture with Dow in December 2008 and to make matters worse, was Dow’s fourth quarter loss of $1.6 billion. Based on such recessionary period, Dow also went for terminating its proposed acquisition of Rohm, but in response, Rohm approached court to force Dow for the planned acquisition as per the agreement, as there is an explicit provision included in the merger and acquisition agreement which removes any such possibility.

2.    Problem Statement:

Following points are addressed in this report;

-       Determine why does Dow want to acquire Rohm and Haas.

-       Evaluate using the Original Forecast, sensitivity analysis, growth and cost synergies effect, sensitivity analysis of cost synergies and was $78 per share bid reasonable?

-       Evaluate using the Revised Forecast, sensitivity analysis, growth and cost synergies effect, sensitivity analysis of growth and cost synergies. What price per share is reasonable?

-       Analyze various provisions in Exhibit 4 and identify major deal risks, to whom and how does the agreement allocate key risks, what risk does each provision address, which party ultimately bears the risk.

-       Determine what should Andrew Liveris (Dow’s CEO) and Raj Gupta (Rohm and Haas’ CEO) do.

3.    Analysis / Result:

Let us consider and analyze the above mentioned points. Also refer to the Excel Sheet;

Determine why does Dow want to acquire Rohm and Haas:

Rohm and Haas would be a strong operational and strategic fit for Dow. This acquisition would bring synergies as well as benefits in products and technologies, broad geographic reach, and strong industry channels. As discussed earlier, Rohm’ presence in the global market is a plus point for Dow as Rohm will provide Dow with an expanded network into emerging markets, which will be another important source of revenues and the synergies would create an outstanding business portfolio with diversified products and significant growth opportunities. Rohm is also backed up with a strong and experienced leadership team with a culture of customer focus and innovation. Dow’s CEO had been working for four years to transform Dow from producer of low-value, highly cyclical commodity chemicals to a producer of high-value specialty chemicals and advanced materials. Thus Rohm’s acquisition is a perfect match for Dow.

Evaluate using the Original Forecast, sensitivity analysis, growth and cost synergies effect, sensitivity analysis of cost synergies and was $78 per share bid reasonable:

For detailed calculations, please refer the excel sheet.

For the purpose of discounting cash flows to determine the present value of cash flows, we have caluclated WACC. Though Weighted average cost of capital (WACC) is provided in exhibit 7b, but it took tax rate to be 35% instead of 26% (as provided in Exhibit 7a) and debt ratio to be 28% instead of 49% (as provided in Exhibit 2). Following table shows the working of WACC calculation which was found to be 7.44%.

Using the original forcast for cash flows, calculations have been done to value Rohm and Haas on a stand-alone basis. Following table shows calculations.

Enterprise value is calculated to be $14.9 billion, using WACC (7.44%) as calculated above and growth rate 2% as provided in Exhibit 7a. This is calculated without including synergy. Effect of synergy is shown below. Per share equity value is also shown above which excludes the amount of debt and includes cash. Dow’s Bid for Rohm and Haas Case Solution

Perform a sensitivity analysis based on the inputs to the TV (discount rate and growth rate):

Using the sensitivity analysis by variations in WACC and growth rate valuation is done as shown below. WACC as calculated in Exhibit 7b (8.52%) and the highest range of WACC (9.5%) provided in exhibit 7b are used for sensitivity. The lowest range provided therein (7.5%) is already near the WACC (7.44%) calculated above. Growth rate as provided in exhibit 7a is 2% therefore for sensitivity analysis 3% and 1% is used on assumption basis. Using these sensitivity figures, calculations have been done as below:

This is just a sample partial case solution. Please place the order on the website to order your own originally done case solution

Related Case Solutions & Analyses:

Hire us for Originally Written Case Solution/ Analysis

Like us and get updates:.

Harvard Case Solutions

Search Case Solutions

• Accounting Case Solutions
• Auditing Case Studies
• Business Case Studies
• Economics Case Solutions
• Finance Case Studies Analysis
• Harvard Case Study Analysis Solutions
• Human Resource Cases
• Ivey Case Solutions
• Management Case Studies
• Marketing HBS Case Solutions
• Operations Management Case Studies
• Supply Chain Management Cases
• Taxation Case Studies

More From Finance Case Studies Analysis

• Group Project
• Dows Bid for Rohm and Haas
• Goats: The Green Alternative (B)
• NOTE ON COMPANY VALUATION BY DISCOUNTED CASH FLOWS (DCF)
• Warren E. Buffett, 2015
• East Cameron Partners: The Sukuk Bond
• InnoCentive: Open Innovation Platform

Contact us:

Check Order Status

How Does it Work?

Why TheCaseSolutions.com?

• NEW SOLUTION
• Top Visitors
• Popular Topics
• Newest Members
• Newest Papers
• Top Donators

Rohm & Haas

• University Login

Recent Topics

New entries.

• Quality Parts Company
• Lincoln Electric
• Vêtements Ltée
• Google Case Analysis

Most Recent Request

• oilwell cable comp
• research methods
• human resource sho
• toyota adopts a st

Ease your MBA workload and get more time for yourself

Marketing Process Analysis

Segmentation, targeting, positioning, marketing strategic planning, marketing 5 concepts analysis, swot analysis & matrix, porter five forces analysis, pestel / pest / step analysis, cage distance analysis international marketing analysis leadership, organizational resilience analysis, bcg matrix / growth share matrix analysis, block chain supply chain management, paei management roles, leadership with empathy & compassion, triple bottom line analysis, mckinsey 7s analysis, smart analysis, vuca analysis ai ethics analysis analytics, the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study solution & analysis / mba resources.

• The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)
• Leadership & Managing People / MBA Resources

Introduction to case study solution

EMBA Pro case study solution for The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study

At EMBA PRO , we provide corporate level professional case study solution. The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton. The The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) (referred as “Rohm Haas” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Leadership & Managing People. It also touches upon business topics such as - Value proposition, Organizational culture. Our immersive learning methodology from – case study discussions to simulations tools help MBA and EMBA professionals to - gain new insight, deepen their knowledge of the Leadership & Managing People field, and broaden their skill set.

Urgent - 12Hr

• 100% Plagiarism Free
• On Time Delivery | 27x7
• PayPal Secure
• 300 Words / Page

Case Description of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) Case Study

The Rohm and Haas Board decided how to move forward after its largest shareholder chose to sell all of its shares in the company.

Case Authors : Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton

Topic : leadership & managing people, related areas : organizational culture, what is the case study method how can you use it to write case solution for the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a) case study.

Almost all of the case studies contain well defined situations. MBA and EMBA professional can take advantage of these situations to - apply theoretical framework, recommend new processes, and use quantitative methods to suggest course of action. Awareness of the common situations can help MBA & EMBA professionals read the case study more efficiently, discuss it more effectively among the team members, narrow down the options, and write cogently.

Case Study Solution Approaches

Three Step Approach to The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) Case Study Solution

The three step case study solution approach comprises – Conclusions – MBA & EMBA professionals should state their conclusions at the very start. It helps in communicating the points directly and the direction one took. Reasons – At the second stage provide the reasons for the conclusions. Why you choose one course of action over the other. For example why the change effort failed in the case and what can be done to rectify it. Or how the marketing budget can be better spent using social media rather than traditional media. Evidences – Finally you should provide evidences to support your reasons. It has to come from the data provided within the case study rather than data from outside world. Evidences should be both compelling and consistent. In case study method there is ‘no right’ answer, just how effectively you analyzed the situation based on incomplete information and multiple scenarios.

Case Study Solution of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

We write The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution using Harvard Business Review case writing framework & HBR Leadership & Managing People learning notes. We try to cover all the bases in the field of Leadership & Managing People, Organizational culture and other related areas.

Objectives of using various frameworks in The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution

By using the above frameworks for The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solutions, you can clearly draw conclusions on the following areas – What are the strength and weaknesses of Rohm Haas (SWOT Analysis) What are external factors that are impacting the business environment (PESTEL Analysis) Should Rohm Haas enter new market or launch new product (Opportunities & Threats from SWOT Analysis) What will be the expected profitability of the new products or services (Porter Five Forces Analysis) How it can improve the profitability in a given industry (Porter Value Chain Analysis) What are the resources needed to increase profitability (VRIO Analysis) Finally which business to continue, where to invest further and from which to get out (BCG Growth Share Analysis)

SWOT Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

SWOT analysis stands for – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. Strengths and Weaknesses are result of Rohm Haas internal factors, while opportunities and threats arise from developments in external environment in which Rohm Haas operates. SWOT analysis will help us in not only getting a better insight into Rohm Haas present competitive advantage but also help us in how things have to evolve to maintain and consolidate the competitive advantage.

- High customer loyalty & repeat purchase among existing customers – Rohm Haas old customers are still loyal to the firm even though it has limited success with millennial. I believe that Rohm Haas can make a transition even by keeping these people on board.

- Experienced and successful leadership team – Rohm Haas management team has been a success over last decade by successfully predicting trends in the industry.

- Rohm Haas business model can be easily replicated by competitors – According to Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton , the business model of Rohm Haas can be easily replicated by players in the industry.

- Low profitability which can hamper new project investment – Even though Rohm Haas financial statement is stable, but going forward Rohm Haas 5-7% profitability can lead to shortage of funds to invest into new projects.

Opportunities

- Increase in Consumer Disposable Income – Rohm Haas can use the increasing disposable income to build a new business model where customers start paying progressively for using its products. According to Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study, Rohm Haas can use this trend to expand in adjacent areas Organizational culture.

- Developments in Artificial Intelligence – Rohm Haas can use developments in artificial intelligence to better predict consumer demand, cater to niche segments, and make better recommendation engines.

- Growing dominance of digital players such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft etc can reduce the manoeuvring space for Rohm Haas and put upward pressure on marketing budget.

- Age and life-cycle segmentation of Rohm Haas shows that the company still hasn’t able to penetrate the millennial market.

Once all the factors mentioned in the The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study are organized based on SWOT analysis, just remove the non essential factors. This will help you in building a weighted SWOT analysis which reflects the real importance of factors rather than just tabulation of all the factors mentioned in the case.

What is PESTEL Analysis

PESTEL /PEST / STEP Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) Case Study

PESTEL stands for – Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, and Legal factors that impact the macro environment in which Rohm Haas operates in. Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton provides extensive information about PESTEL factors in The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study.

Political Factors

- Little dangers of armed conflict – Based on the research done by international foreign policy institutions, it is safe to conclude that there is very little probability of country entering into an armed conflict with another state.

- Political consensus among various parties regarding taxation rate and investment policies. Over the years the country has progressively worked to lower the entry of barrier and streamline the tax structure.

Economic Factors

- Inflation rate is one of the key criteria to consider for Rohm Haas before entering into a new market.

- Foreign Exchange movement is also an indicator of economic stability. Rohm Haas should closely consider the forex inflow and outflow. A number of Rohm Haas competitors have lost money in countries such as Brazil, Argentina, and Venezuela due to volatile forex market.

Social Factors

- Demographic shifts in the economy are also a good social indicator for Rohm Haas to predict not only overall trend in market but also demand for Rohm Haas product among its core customer segments.

- Consumer buying behavior and consumer buying process – Rohm Haas should closely follow the dynamics of why and how the consumers are buying the products both in existing categories and in segments that Rohm Haas wants to enter.

Technological Factors

- Proliferation of mobile phones has created a generation whose primary tool of entertainment and information consumption is mobile phone. Rohm Haas needs to adjust its marketing strategy accordingly.

- Artificial intelligence and machine learning will give rise to importance of speed over planning. Rohm Haas needs to build strategies to operate in such an environment.

Environmental Factors

- Consumer activism is significantly impacting Rohm Haas branding, marketing and corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives.

- Environmental regulations can impact the cost structure of Rohm Haas. It can further impact the cost of doing business in certain markets.

Legal Factors

- Property rights are also an area of concern for Rohm Haas as it needs to make significant Organizational culture infrastructure investment just to enter new market.

- Health and safety norms in number of markets that Rohm Haas operates in are lax thus impact the competition playing field.

What are Porter Five Forces

Porter Five Forces Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Competition among existing players, bargaining power of suppliers, bargaining power of buyers, threat of new entrants, and threat of substitutes.

What is VRIO Analysis

VRIO Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

VRIO stands for – Value of the resource that Rohm Haas possess, Rareness of those resource, Imitation Risk that competitors pose, and Organizational Competence of Rohm Haas. VRIO and VRIN analysis can help the firm.

What is Porter Value Chain

Porter Value Chain Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

As the name suggests Value Chain framework is developed by Michael Porter in 1980’s and it is primarily used for analyzing Rohm Haas relative cost and value structure. Managers can use Porter Value Chain framework to disaggregate various processes and their relative costs in the Rohm Haas. This will help in answering – the related costs and various sources of competitive advantages of Rohm Haas in the markets it operates in. The process can also be done to competitors to understand their competitive advantages and competitive strategies. According to Michael Porter – Competitive Advantage is a relative term and has to be understood in the context of rivalry within an industry. So Value Chain competitive benchmarking should be done based on industry structure and bottlenecks.

What is BCG Growth Share Matrix

BCG Growth Share Matrix of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

BCG Growth Share Matrix is very valuable tool to analyze Rohm Haas strategic positioning in various sectors that it operates in and strategic options that are available to it. Product Market segmentation in BCG Growth Share matrix should be done with great care as there can be a scenario where Rohm Haas can be market leader in the industry without being a dominant player or segment leader in any of the segment. BCG analysis should comprise not only growth share of industry & Rohm Haas business unit but also Rohm Haas - overall profitability, level of debt, debt paying capacity, growth potential, expansion expertise, dividend requirements from shareholders, and overall competitive strength. Two key considerations while using BCG Growth Share Matrix for The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) case study solution - How to calculate Weighted Average Market Share using BCG Growth Share Matrix Relative Weighted Average Market Share Vs Largest Competitor

5C Marketing Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

4p marketing analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), porter five forces analysis and solution of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), porter value chain analysis and solution of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), case memo & recommendation memo of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), blue ocean analysis and solution of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), marketing strategy and analysis the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), vrio /vrin analysis & solution of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), pestel / step / pest analysis of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), swot analysis and solution of the dow acquisition of rohm and haas (a), references & further readings.

Jay W. Lorsch, Melissa Barton (2018) , "The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A) Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.

Case Study Solution & Analysis

• Transformation at Ford Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Cultural Change at Nissan Motors Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Eyes of Janus: Evaluating Learning and Development at Tata Motors Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Alta and SAIT: A Potential Private-Public Partnership Case Study Solution & Analysis
• CARLYLE GROUP AND THE AZ-EM BUYOUT (A2): DUE DILIGENCE Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Lukens Inc.: The Melters' Committee (A) Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Dow's Acquisition Program Case Study Solution & Analysis
• CARLYLE GROUP AND THE AZ-EM BUYOUT (B): VALUE CREATION AFTER THE TRANSACTION Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Professionalization of Sudarshan Chemical Industries Case Study Solution & Analysis
• Johnson & Johnson Company (B) Case Study Solution & Analysis

Explore More

Feel free to connect with us if you need business research.

You can download Excel Template of Case Study Solution & Analysis of The Dow Acquisition of Rohm and Haas (A)

Fern Fort University

Dow's bid for rohm and haas case study analysis & solution, harvard business case studies solutions - assignment help.

Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas is a Harvard Business (HBR) Case Study on Finance & Accounting , Fern Fort University provides HBR case study assignment help for just $11. Our case solution is based on Case Study Method expertise & our global insights.

Finance & Accounting Case Study | Authors :: Benjamin C. Esty, David Lane

Case study description.

This case analyzes Dow Chemical Company's proposed acquisition of Rohm and Haas in 2008. The $18.8 billion acquisition was part of Dow's strategic transformation from a slow-growth, low-margin, and cyclical producer of basic chemicals into a higher-growth, higher-margin, and more stable producer of performance chemicals. Simultaneously, Dow had signed a joint venture agreement with Petrochemical Industries Company (PIC) of Kuwait, a deal that would generate $7 billion in cash that could be used to finance the all-cash offer to buy Rohm and Haas. Dow and Rohm announced the Rohm merger on July 10, 2008, just before the financial crisis in September 2008. The focus of the case is on what happened after the financial crisis turned into a global economic crisis. Dow, like all chemical producers, suffered as the global economy fell into recession during the second half of 2008, and as financial markets froze. To make matters worse, PIC cancelled the joint venture with Dow in December 2008. As a result, Dow was hurt on three fronts: first, it lost an important funding source for the proposed acquisition; second, Dow's financial condition and internal cash flow deteriorated dramatically (its stock price was down more than 70% during 2008); and third, Rohm's forecast sales, earnings, and value declined precipitously thereby reducing its attractiveness as an acquisition target. Given this confluence of events, Dow sued to cancel the merger agreement with Rohm in January 2009. Rohm responded with its own lawsuit to force consummation of the deal. As of February 2009, Dow's board of directors and its CEO Andrew Liveris have to decide what to do first and foremost about the Rohm acquisition and the pending lawsuits, but also about the firm's declining financial performance and the PIC joint venture.

Financial management, Mergers & acquisitions, Negotiations, Recession, Regulation, Risk management

Order a Finance & Accounting case study solution now

To Search More HBR Case Studies Solution Go to Fern Fort University Search Page

[10 Steps] Case Study Analysis & Solution

Step 1 - reading up harvard business review fundamentals on the finance & accounting.

Even before you start reading a business case study just make sure that you have brushed up the Harvard Business Review (HBR) fundamentals on the Finance & Accounting. Brushing up HBR fundamentals will provide a strong base for investigative reading. Often readers scan through the business case study without having a clear map in mind. This leads to unstructured learning process resulting in missed details and at worse wrong conclusions. Reading up the HBR fundamentals helps in sketching out business case study analysis and solution roadmap even before you start reading the case study. It also provides starting ideas as fundamentals often provide insight into some of the aspects that may not be covered in the business case study itself.

Step 2 - Reading the Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas HBR Case Study

To write an emphatic case study analysis and provide pragmatic and actionable solutions, you must have a strong grasps of the facts and the central problem of the HBR case study. Begin slowly - underline the details and sketch out the business case study description map. In some cases you will able to find the central problem in the beginning itself while in others it may be in the end in form of questions. Business case study paragraph by paragraph mapping will help you in organizing the information correctly and provide a clear guide to go back to the case study if you need further information. My case study strategy involves -

• Marking out the protagonist and key players in the case study from the very start.
• Drawing a motivation chart of the key players and their priorities from the case study description.
• Refine the central problem the protagonist is facing in the case and how it relates to the HBR fundamentals on the topic.
• Evaluate each detail in the case study in light of the HBR case study analysis core ideas.

Step 3 - Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas Case Study Analysis

Once you are comfortable with the details and objective of the business case study proceed forward to put some details into the analysis template. You can do business case study analysis by following Fern Fort University step by step instructions -

• Company history is provided in the first half of the case. You can use this history to draw a growth path and illustrate vision, mission and strategic objectives of the organization. Often history is provided in the case not only to provide a background to the problem but also provide the scope of the solution that you can write for the case study.
• HBR case studies provide anecdotal instances from managers and employees in the organization to give a feel of real situation on the ground. Use these instances and opinions to mark out the organization's culture, its people priorities & inhibitions.
• Make a time line of the events and issues in the case study. Time line can provide the clue for the next step in organization's journey. Time line also provides an insight into the progressive challenges the company is facing in the case study.

Step 4 - SWOT Analysis of Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas

Once you finished the case analysis, time line of the events and other critical details. Focus on the following -

• Zero down on the central problem and two to five related problems in the case study.
• Do the SWOT analysis of the Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas . SWOT analysis is a strategic tool to map out the strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats that a firm is facing.
• SWOT analysis and SWOT Matrix will help you to clearly mark out - Strengths Weakness Opportunities & Threats that the organization or manager is facing in the Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas
• SWOT analysis will also provide a priority list of problem to be solved.
• You can also do a weighted SWOT analysis of Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas HBR case study.

Step 5 - Porter 5 Forces / Strategic Analysis of Industry Analysis Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas

In our live classes we often come across business managers who pinpoint one problem in the case and build a case study analysis and solution around that singular point. Business environments are often complex and require holistic solutions. You should try to understand not only the organization but also the industry which the business operates in. Porter Five Forces is a strategic analysis tool that will help you in understanding the relative powers of the key players in the business case study and what sort of pragmatic and actionable case study solution is viable in the light of given facts.

Step 6 - PESTEL, PEST / STEP Analysis of Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas

Another way of understanding the external environment of the firm in Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas is to do a PESTEL - Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental & Legal analysis of the environment the firm operates in. You should make a list of factors that have significant impact on the organization and factors that drive growth in the industry. You can even identify the source of firm's competitive advantage based on PESTEL analysis and Organization's Core Competencies.

Step 7 - Organizing & Prioritizing the Analysis into Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas Case Study Solution

Once you have developed multipronged approach and work out various suggestions based on the strategic tools. The next step is organizing the solution based on the requirement of the case. You can use the following strategy to organize the findings and suggestions.

• Build a corporate level strategy - organizing your findings and recommendations in a way to answer the larger strategic objective of the firm. It include using the analysis to answer the company's vision, mission and key objectives , and how your suggestions will take the company to next level in achieving those goals.
• Business Unit Level Solution - The case study may put you in a position of a marketing manager of a small brand. So instead of providing recommendations for overall company you need to specify the marketing objectives of that particular brand. You have to recommend business unit level recommendations. The scope of the recommendations will be limited to the particular unit but you have to take care of the fact that your recommendations are don't directly contradict the company's overall strategy. For example you can recommend a low cost strategy but the company core competency is design differentiation.
• Case study solutions can also provide recommendation for the business manager or leader described in the business case study.

Step 8 -Implementation Framework

The goal of the business case study is not only to identify problems and recommend solutions but also to provide a framework to implement those case study solutions. Implementation framework differentiates good case study solutions from great case study solutions. If you able to provide a detailed implementation framework then you have successfully achieved the following objectives -

• Detailed understanding of the case,
• Clarity of HBR case study fundamentals,
• Analyzed case details based on those fundamentals and
• Developed an ability to prioritize recommendations based on probability of their successful implementation.

Implementation framework helps in weeding out non actionable recommendations, resulting in awesome Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas case study solution.

Step 9 - Take a Break

Once you finished the case study implementation framework. Take a small break, grab a cup of coffee or whatever you like, go for a walk or just shoot some hoops.

Step 10 - Critically Examine Dow's Bid for Rohm and Haas case study solution

After refreshing your mind, read your case study solution critically. When we are writing case study solution we often have details on our screen as well as in our head. This leads to either missing details or poor sentence structures. Once refreshed go through the case solution again - improve sentence structures and grammar, double check the numbers provided in your analysis and question your recommendations. Be very slow with this process as rushing through it leads to missing key details. Once done it is time to hit the attach button.

Previous 5 HBR Case Study Solution

• Sippican Corporation (A), Chinese Version Case Study Solution
• Kaiser Steel Corp.--1950 Case Study Solution
• Takeover of the Norton Co. Case Study Solution
• Machinery International (A) Case Study Solution
• Birch Paper Co. Case Study Solution

Next 5 HBR Case Study Solution

• Consolidated Equipment Co. Case Study Solution
• Siemens Electric Motor Works (A) and (B) (Combined) Case Study Solution
• Kanthal (A) Case Study Solution
• Hilton Manufacturing Co., Spanish Version Case Study Solution
• Transfer Pricing at Timken Case Study Solution

Special Offers

Order custom Harvard Business Case Study Analysis & Solution. Starting just $19

Amazing Business Data Maps. Send your data or let us do the research. We make the greatest data maps.

We make beautiful, dynamic charts, heatmaps, co-relation plots, 3D plots & more.

Buy Professional PPT templates to impress your boss

Nobody get fired for buying our Business Reports Templates. They are just awesome.

• More Services

Feel free to drop us an email

• fernfortuniversity[@]gmail.com
• (000) 000-0000

• Introduction
• Conclusions
• Article Information

Random-effects pooled proportions are shown. Boxes represent the effect size of each study and whiskers, 95% CIs. Box size indicates the study’s weight in the analysis. Diamonds indicate pooled estimates, with whiskers indicating 95% CIs. Studies that did not provide data for the “any systemic adverse event” category were not included in these analyses but only in analyses on other adverse event categories. All placebos used were inert saline solutions.

a mRNA-1273 (Moderna, mRNA vaccine, phase 3 trial). Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 50%.

b mRNA-1273 (Moderna, mRNA vaccine, phase 2 trial). Vaccine group was selected for comparison in trials that investigated multiple dosing schemes (100 μg [high dose]). Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 33%.

c NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax, protein-based vaccine, phase 3 trial). Vaccine contained adjuvants. Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 50%.

d NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax, protein-based vaccine, phase 1-2 trial). Vaccine contained adjuvants. Vaccine group was selected for comparison in trials that investigated multiple dosing schemes (5 μg [low dose] + adjuvant). Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 20%.

e BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Pfizer, mRNA vaccine, phase 2-3 trial). Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 50%.

f SCB-2019 (Clover, protein-based vaccine, phase 1 trial). Vaccine contained adjuvants. Vaccine group was selected for comparison in trials that investigated multiple dosing schemes (30 μg [high dose] + adjuvant). Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 20%.

g NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax, protein-based vaccine, phase 2a-b trial); vaccine contained adjuvants. Probability of being randomized to placebo group, 50%.

eAppendix. Search Strategy

eTable 1. Adverse Events in Placebo and Vaccine Groups of the Analyzed Trials

eTable 2. Mixed Meta-analysis of Proportions

eTable 3. Mixed Meta-analysis of Logarithmized Odds Ratios

eFigure 1. Adverse Event Severity Grading in the Phase-3 Trial of the Moderna Vaccine

eFigure 2. Adverse Event Severity Grading in the Phase-3 Trial of the Novavax Vaccine

eReferences

• JAMA Network Articles of the Year 2022 JAMA Medical News & Perspectives December 27, 2022 This Medical News article is our annual roundup of the top-viewed articles from all JAMA Network journals. Melissa Suran, PhD, MSJ
• Error in Figure 1 JAMA Network Open Correction February 11, 2022

See More About

Sign up for emails based on your interests, select your interests.

Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.

• Academic Medicine
• Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
• Allergy and Clinical Immunology
• American Indian or Alaska Natives
• Anesthesiology
• Anticoagulation
• Art and Images in Psychiatry
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assisted Reproduction
• Bleeding and Transfusion
• Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
• Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
• Climate and Health
• Climate Change
• Clinical Challenge
• Clinical Decision Support
• Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
• Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Consensus Statements
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Critical Care Medicine
• Cultural Competency
• Dental Medicine
• Dermatology
• Diabetes and Endocrinology
• Diagnostic Test Interpretation
• Drug Development
• Electronic Health Records
• Emergency Medicine
• End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
• Environmental Health
• Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
• Facial Plastic Surgery
• Gastroenterology and Hepatology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Genomics and Precision Health
• Global Health
• Guide to Statistics and Methods
• Hair Disorders
• Health Care Delivery Models
• Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
• Health Care Quality
• Health Care Reform
• Health Care Safety
• Health Care Workforce
• Health Disparities
• Health Inequities
• Health Policy
• Health Systems Science
• History of Medicine
• Hypertension
• Images in Neurology
• Implementation Science
• Infectious Diseases
• Innovations in Health Care Delivery
• JAMA Infographic
• Law and Medicine
• Leading Change
• Less is More
• LGBTQIA Medicine
• Lifestyle Behaviors
• Medical Coding
• Medical Devices and Equipment
• Medical Education
• Medical Education and Training
• Medical Journals and Publishing
• Mobile Health and Telemedicine
• Narrative Medicine
• Neuroscience and Psychiatry
• Notable Notes
• Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Occupational Health
• Ophthalmology
• Orthopedics
• Otolaryngology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Care
• Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
• Patient Care
• Patient Information
• Performance Improvement
• Performance Measures
• Perioperative Care and Consultation
• Pharmacoeconomics
• Pharmacoepidemiology
• Pharmacogenetics
• Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
• Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• Physical Therapy
• Physician Leadership
• Population Health
• Primary Care
• Professional Well-being
• Professionalism
• Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
• Public Health
• Pulmonary Medicine
• Regulatory Agencies
• Reproductive Health
• Research, Methods, Statistics
• Resuscitation
• Rheumatology
• Risk Management
• Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
• Shared Decision Making and Communication
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports Medicine
• Stem Cell Transplantation
• Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
• Surgical Innovation
• Surgical Pearls
• Teachable Moment
• Technology and Finance
• The Art of JAMA
• The Arts and Medicine
• The Rational Clinical Examination
• Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
• Translational Medicine
• Trauma and Injury
• Treatment Adherence
• Ultrasonography
• Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
• Vaccination
• Venous Thromboembolism
• Veterans Health
• Women's Health
• Workflow and Process
• Wound Care, Infection, Healing

Get the latest research based on your areas of interest.

Others also liked.

• Download PDF
• X Facebook More LinkedIn
• CME & MOC

Haas JW , Bender FL , Ballou S, et al. Frequency of Adverse Events in the Placebo Arms of COVID-19 Vaccine Trials : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis . JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(1):e2143955. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43955

Manage citations:

© 2024

• Permissions

Frequency of Adverse Events in the Placebo Arms of COVID-19 Vaccine Trials : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

• 1 Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
• 2 Division of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
• 3 Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps University Marburg, Marburg, Germany
• 4 Department of Psychology, Endicott College, Beverly, Massachusetts
• 5 Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York
• Medical News & Perspectives JAMA Network Articles of the Year 2022 Melissa Suran, PhD, MSJ JAMA
• Correction Error in Figure 1 JAMA Network Open

Question   What was the frequency of adverse events (AEs) in the placebo groups of COVID-19 vaccine trials?

Findings   In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 articles including AE reports for 45 380 trial participants, systemic AEs were experienced by 35% of placebo recipients after the first dose and 32% after the second. Significantly more AEs were reported in the vaccine groups, but AEs in placebo arms (“nocebo responses”) accounted for 76% of systemic AEs after the first COVID-19 vaccine dose and 52% after the second dose.

Meaning   This study found that the rate of nocebo responses in placebo arms of COVID-19 vaccine trials was substantial; this finding should be considered in public vaccination programs.

Importance   Adverse events (AEs) after placebo treatment are common in randomized clinical drug trials. Systematic evidence regarding these nocebo responses in vaccine trials is important for COVID-19 vaccination worldwide especially because concern about AEs is reported to be a reason for vaccination hesitancy.

Objective   To compare the frequencies of AEs reported in the placebo groups of COVID-19 vaccine trials with those reported in the vaccine groups.

Data Sources   For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the Medline (PubMed) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched systematically using medical subheading terms and free-text keywords for trials of COVID-19 vaccines published up to July 14, 2021.

Study Selection   Randomized clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines that investigated adults aged 16 years or older were selected if they assessed solicited AEs within 7 days of injection, included an inert placebo arm, and provided AE reports for both the vaccine and placebo groups separately. Full texts were reviewed for eligibility by 2 independent reviewers.

Data Extraction and Synthesis   Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by 2 reviewers, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline and using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analyses were based on random-effects models.

Main Outcomes and Measures   The primary outcomes were the proportions of placebo recipients reporting overall, systemic, and local (injection-site) AEs as well as logarithmic odds ratios (ORs) to evaluate group differences. Outcomes were tested for significance using z tests with 95% CIs.

Results   Twelve articles with AE reports for 45 380 participants (22 578 placebo recipients and 22 802 vaccine recipients) were analyzed. After the first dose, 35.2% (95% CI, 26.7%-43.7%) of placebo recipients experienced systemic AEs, with headache (19.3%; 95% CI, 13.6%-25.1%) and fatigue (16.7%; 95% CI, 9.8%-23.6%) being most common. After the second dose, 31.8% (95% CI, 28.7%-35.0%) of placebo recipients reported systemic AEs. The ratio between placebo and vaccine arms showed that nocebo responses accounted for 76.0% of systemic AEs after the first COVID-19 vaccine dose and for 51.8% after the second dose. Significantly more vaccine recipients reported AEs, but the group difference for systemic AEs was small after the first dose (OR, −0.47; 95% CI, −0.54 to −0.40; P  < .001; standardized mean difference, −0.26; 95% CI, −0.30 to −0.22) and large after the second dose (OR, −1.36; 95% CI, −1.86 to −0.86; P  < .001; standardized mean difference, −0.75; 95% CI, −1.03 to −0.47).

Conclusions and Relevance   In this systematic review and meta-analysis, significantly more AEs were reported in vaccine groups compared with placebo groups, but the rates of reported AEs in the placebo arms were still substantial. Public vaccination programs should consider these high rates of AEs in placebo arms.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has caused more than 5 million deaths worldwide 1 and led to tremendous physical, mental, and economic hardships. Several vaccines have been developed and tested within remarkably short periods. Currently, public vaccination programs have already achieved success in reducing the numbers of new infections in several countries. However, a substantial proportion of the population (internationally estimated at approximately 20%) intends to refuse vaccination. 2 - 4 In 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization claimed vaccination hesitancy as a global health threat 5 ; this threat is particularly salient in the case of COVID-19. Counteracting the underlying motivations for vaccination hesitancy is therefore crucial to overcome this worldwide crisis.

Although the reasons for vaccination hesitancy are diverse and complex, concerns about potential adverse events (AEs) from the COVID-19 vaccines seem to be a major factor. 6 According to a global survey from January 2021, 47% of respondents were worried about AEs from a COVID-19 vaccine. 7 With regard to influenza vaccination, there is broad evidence of an association between concerns about AEs and vaccination refusal. 8 - 12 Several systematic reviews of randomized clinical drug trials have demonstrated that the occurrence of AEs can also be substantial in placebo arms. 13 Adverse events seemingly elicited by placebos are often called nocebo responses 14 and are thought to be caused by misattribution of routine background symptoms, 15 anxiety, 16 and expectations of AEs. 17 , 18 Emerging research has shown that informing patients about nocebo responses 19 , 20 and providing a positive framing of potential AEs 21 - 24 may be associated with reduced AE-related anxiety and nocebo responses. Although nocebo phenomena have been investigated in many contexts involving medication, 18 , 25 - 28 evidence of their influence in vaccination remains scarce. However, a recent meta-analysis suggested that a significant proportion of placebo recipients in influenza vaccine trials experienced systemic AEs, such as headache or fatigue, owing to nocebo responses. 29

Researchers of nocebo response have called attention to ubiquitous nocebo responses in COVID-19 vaccination, 30 , 31 but systematic quantification is needed. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the frequencies of AEs reported in the placebo groups of COVID-19 vaccine trials and compare them with the frequencies of AEs reported in the vaccine groups.

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses ( PRISMA ) reporting guideline. 32 The study protocol has been registered in PROSPERO ( CRD42021256905 ).

We included randomized clinical trials of experimental COVID-19 vaccines that investigated adults aged 16 years or older and were published in English. Studies were eligible if they assessed solicited AEs within 7 days of injection, included an inert placebo arm (eg, saline), and provided AE reports for both the vaccine and the placebo groups separately. Studies were excluded if the applied placebo contained any active ingredient that could have caused specific AEs (eg, an adjuvant) or if risk of bias was judged as unknown.

A systematic literature search of studies published up to July 14, 2021, was conducted across the Medline database (PubMed) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). These databases were searched for (1) medical subheading terms and (2) free-text keywords (eAppendix in the Supplement ).

After titles and abstracts were screened for initial eligibility by J.W.H., 2 of us (J.W.H. and F.L.B.) independently reviewed the full texts of potentially eligible articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by J.W.H and F.L.B. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion and, if necessary, evaluation by a third team member (S.B.).

Only AEs in terms of solicited reactogenicity symptoms were derived. Long-term observations or follow-up data were not considered as outcomes in the meta-analysis, and neither were serious AEs. Because all included trials investigated 2-dose schemes of vaccination, data on AEs after the first dose and on those after the second dose were extracted separately. If data on AEs were not provided in sufficient detail in the published material, the authors were emailed with a request. For studies that investigated different dosing schemes within 1 trial, only 1 of the vaccine groups was selected for comparison with the placebo group. To ensure practical relevance, we always selected the dose that was chosen for clinical application or described as the preferred dose for further investigation. The quality of the methods and the internal validity of each included study were rated based on predefined criteria covering the 7 categories of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. 33

Data management and statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation) 34 and the R-based software JASP, version 0.14.1.0 (University of Amsterdam). 35 Adverse events in different trials were summarized into homogeneous categories, combining AEs that were considered to measure the same symptom (eg, arthralgia and joint pain) or represented symptoms closely related to each other (eg, nausea and vomiting). Overall AE categories were any AE, any local (injection-site) AE, and any systemic AE. Adverse event categories had to be reported in at least 4 trials to be included in the meta-analysis. In addition to the analysis of the first and second doses separately, data on both doses were merged by calculating means if studies did not provide overall AE data. This may have underestimated true AE frequencies and was therefore considered to have increased risk of bias.

To examine AE frequencies in the placebo groups, the proportions of participants experiencing the respective symptoms were calculated. To compare AE frequencies between the groups, logarithmic odds ratios (log ORs) were calculated. Log ORs were also calculated to compare frequencies of AEs after the first and second doses within the groups. Significance was set at 2-sided P  < .05. Meta-analyses were performed based on a restricted maximum-likelihood model (random effects) including 95% CIs. For the categories of any systemic AE and any local AE, ratios between the pooled placebo and vaccine AE proportions were used to calculate the percentage of AEs that were accounted for by nocebo responses. The pooled log ORs were tested for significant divergence from 0 using z tests; for the presence of adverse events, no statistical tests were done because for proportions, the null hypothesis (ie, that there were no cases in the population) could be rejected whenever a single case was reported. Heterogeneity was tested using Q tests and quantified using I 2 tests. A variation in outcome ( I 2 ) greater than 50% was considered to derive from heterogeneity. 36 Funnel plots were visually screened for asymmetry to detect publication bias, 37 although publication bias was considered less relevant to a meta-analysis assessing nocebo responses than to one assessing the efficacy of a drug. 28 To control for differences in the quality of the methods as identified by the risk-of-bias assessment, all analyses were rerun including the 3 heterogeneous risk-of-bias categories as factors. Owing to the small number of included trials, the results of these mixed-model analyses may be less reliable than those of the primary analyses and are therefore presented in eTable 2 in the Supplement .

Because data on AE severity grading were not reported in comparable detail by a sufficient number of trials to be analyzed meta-analytically, we descriptively explored the 2 largest trials that provided these data in detail. 38 , 39 In these exploratory analyses, we calculated the proportions of severity grades in participants experiencing any AEs, any local AEs, and any systemic AEs after the first and second doses of placebo or vaccine separately.

Of 87 screened articles, 27 publications were included for full-text review ( Figure 1 ). Twelve of these studies 38 - 49 were included in our analyses ( Table 1 ), resulting in a total of 45 380 participants; 22 578 placebo recipients and 23 817 active-vaccine recipients provided AE reports, but owing to multiple vaccine groups in some trials, 40 - 46 only 22 802 of the vaccine recipients were included in our analyses. The numbers and percentages of AEs reported in the placebo groups and vaccine groups selected for comparison are provided in eTable 1 in the Supplement .

The risk-of-bias assessment revealed that the included publications were of high quality in general. In all included studies, the risk of bias was low with regard to randomization, blinding, and outcome assessment. However, the risk of bias was greater in several studies 40 - 43 owing to the inclusion of sentinel participants (enrolled and evaluated before the other participants for safety purposes). One study 44 reported a high dropout rate (16%) in the placebo group only. Another study 45 provided AE data on the first and second doses within a 14-day period instead of 7 days. One study 50 was excluded owing to an unknown risk of bias in the outcome assessment.

The random-effects pooled proportion of placebo recipients reporting at least 1 systemic AE after the first dose was 35.2% (95% CI, 26.7%-43.7%); 16.2% (95% CI, 11.3%-21.1%) reported at least 1 local AE ( Table 2 ). In comparison, patients treated with vaccines reported higher AE rates, with 46.3% (95% CI, 38.2%-54.3%) reporting at least 1 systemic AE and 66.7% (95% CI, 53.2%-80.3%) reporting at least 1 local AE. The ratios between the placebo and vaccine AE proportions suggest that after the first vaccine dose, nocebo responses accounted for 76.0% of systemic AEs ( Figure 2 ) and 24.3% of local AEs.

After the second dose, AE proportions in placebo groups were lower, with 31.8% (95% CI, 28.7%-35.0%) of participants reporting any systemic AEs and 11.8% (95% CI, 6.6%-17.1%) reporting any local AEs ( Table 2 ). These differences in AE rates between the first and second doses within the placebo groups were statistically significant (any systemic AE: log OR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.18-0.47]; SE, 0.08; z , 4.29; P  < .001; any local AE: log OR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.08-0.36]; SE, 0.07; z , 3.06; P  = .002). However, AE proportions in the vaccine groups were greater after the second dose than after the first, with 61.4% (95% CI, 47.4%-75.4%) of participants reporting any systemic AEs and 72.8% (95% CI, 57.4%-88.2%) reporting any local AEs. The differences between the first and second doses within the vaccine groups were statistically significant for systemic AEs (log OR, −0.71 [95% CI, −1.16 to −0.26]; SE, 0.23; z , −3.09, P  = .002) but not for local AEs (log OR, −0.29 [95% CI, −0.73 to 0.14]; SE, 0.22; z , −1.33; P  = .18).

Thus, compared with the first dose, a larger difference in AE rates between the placebo groups and vaccine groups was found after the second dose ( Figure 2 ). Nevertheless, ratios between AE proportions in the placebo and vaccine groups indicated that nocebo responses accounted for 51.8% of systemic and 16.2% of local AEs after the second dose. The most commonly reported AEs in the placebo groups were headache (first dose: 19.3% [95% CI, 13.6%-25.1%]; second dose: 16.2% [95% CI, 12.5%-19.8%]) and fatigue (first dose: 16.7% [95% CI, 9.8%-23.6%]; second dose: 14.9% [95% CI, 9.8%-20.1%]). Heterogeneity of the included studies was very high ( I 2 ≥50%) for most AE categories.

Mixed-model analyses indicated that the proportions of placebo recipients with AEs may have been higher when controlling for risk-of-bias variables, with 40.5% (95% CI, 32.9%-48.2%) of participants reporting at least 1 systemic AE after the first dose (eTable 2 in the Supplement ). Funnel plots did not show asymmetry of data points, but heterogeneity was still very high for most AE categories.

Most random-effects pooled log ORs were statistically significant, suggesting that AE rates were significantly higher in the vaccine groups compared with the placebo groups ( Table 3 ). After the first dose, the pooled log OR for any systemic AE was −0.47 (95% CI, −0.54 to −0.40; P  < .001), which is equivalent to a standardized mean difference of −0.26 (95% CI, −0.30 to −0.22). For any local AE after the first dose, the pooled log OR was −2.44 (95% CI, −3.21 to −1.66), which is equivalent to a standardized mean difference of −1.34 (95% CI, −1.77 to −0.92). Thus, the difference between placebo and vaccine recipients experiencing any local AE after the first dose equated to a large effect, whereas it equated to only a small effect for any systemic AE. Effect sizes were not significant for nausea and diarrhea, and they were small for fatigue, malaise, joint pain, and headache ( Table 3 ), suggesting only minor differences between the placebo and vaccine groups in the experience of these AEs after the first dose.

After the second dose, however, the random-effects pooled log ORs and equivalent standardized mean differences indicated larger differences between the vaccine and placebo groups in reporting of AEs (OR, −1.36; 95% CI, −1.86 to −0.86; P  < .001). Except for nausea and diarrhea, effects were large or very large for all AE categories ( Table 3 ), with a standardized mean difference of −0.75 (95% CI, 1.03 to −0.47) for any systemic AE and −1.74 (95% CI, −2.16 to −1.32) for any local AE. Heterogeneity of the included studies was very high ( I 2 ≥50%) for most AE categories.

The results of the equivalent log OR meta-analysis controlling for methodologic quality aspects are provided in the eTable 3 in the Supplement . There were no major differences in the results when controlling for risk of bias, and heterogeneity remained high.

Aside from the presence or absence of AEs, the severity of AEs could serve as an additional indicator to quantify the influence of nocebo responses. In exploratory analyses of the 2 largest trials reporting details on severity, 38 , 39 we found that the proportion of severity grades for participants reporting any systemic AEs after the first dose were similar in the placebo and vaccine groups (eFigures 1 and 2 in the Supplement ). However, whereas the pattern of severity grading after the second dose stayed the same for placebo participants, there were proportionally more moderate and severe AEs in the vaccine groups after the second dose.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the frequency of solicited AEs in the placebo groups of randomized clinical trials investigating COVID-19 vaccines. The 12 analyzed trials 38 - 49 included different types of vaccines (mRNA, viral vector, or protein-based) and different clinical trial phases. We found that 76.0% of systemic AEs and 24.3% of local AEs after the first vaccination could be attributed to nocebo responses. After the second vaccination, 51.8% of systemic AEs and 16.2% of local AEs were attributable to nocebo responses. Headache and fatigue were the most common AEs in the placebo groups, experienced by 19.3% and 16.7% of participants, respectively, after the first dose.

Of interest, AE frequencies in the placebo groups were lower after the second dose than after the first dose, although the opposite was true for the vaccine groups. We hypothesize that (1) the second dose of the vaccines may have produced both a more robust immune response and a correspondingly more robust set of AEs and that (2) participants in the vaccine arms, after experiencing more AEs after the first dose than did participants in the control groups, had higher expectations for AEs after the second dose compared with participants in the placebo arms. 51

The finding of decreased AEs in placebo recipients but increased AEs in vaccine recipients after the second dose was supported by our evaluation of standardized mean differences. Although we found significantly higher AE rates in the vaccine groups for nearly every evaluated symptom category, group differences were particularly large after the second dose. After the first dose, however, the group differences for most systemic AEs were small. Headache, fatigue, malaise, and joint pain were common in both groups and seem to have been particularly associated with nocebo. Furthermore, exploratory analyses suggested that nocebo responses may produce AEs of severity grades similar to those of active vaccines after the first dose.

Given the large number of people who have received or will receive a COVID-19 vaccine, this study’s findings are important for the general population worldwide. Common nonspecific symptoms such as headache and fatigue, which the study’s findings showed to be particularly associated with nocebo, are listed among the most common AEs after COVID-19 vaccination in many information leaflets. 52 - 54 There is evidence that this sort of information may increase nocebo mechanisms such as AE-related anxiety and expectations. 17 Furthermore, the information might cause a misattribution of commonly experienced nonspecific symptoms (eg, headache or fatigue 55 ) as specific AEs due to vaccination, even if these symptoms might have occurred in the absence of receiving any treatment. 56 Thus, the current way of informing the public about potential vaccine AEs via leaflets and in the media may prompt or further increase nocebo responses. 30 Nonetheless, it is ethically necessary to fully inform participants about the vaccines’ potential AEs. Emergent data suggest that full disclosure and education about nocebo responses may be helpful. 19 , 20 For example, adding simple but accurate information about nocebo responses to the usual informed consent procedure (eg, “participants in the placebo arm of the randomized clinical trials testing this intervention reported similar AEs, probably because of worry and anxiety”) helped reduce medication-related AEs in a clinical population. 20 Highlighting the probability of not experiencing AEs might also be beneficial. 21 Although more research on these communication strategies is needed, such honest information adds to full disclosure and is unlikely to cause harm. In addition, informing the public about the potential for nocebo responses may help reduce worries about COVID-19 vaccination, which might decrease vaccination hesitancy. 9 , 31

This study has limitations. The relatively small number of included trials and their high heterogeneity must be considered when interpreting the results. The high heterogeneity may have been caused by (1) different AE assessment methods (ie, the trials used different symptom checklists and did not assess the attributability of symptoms in a standardized way), (2) different types of tested vaccine (mRNA, viral vector, or protein-based), or (3) different probabilities of receiving a vaccine vs a placebo in the different trials (ie, probabilities to receive a placebo ranged from 14% to 50%). Standardization of AE assessment could alleviate the first of these potential causes, 57 and larger meta-analyses should investigate the role of the second and third causes using meta-regression. However, because our analyses included randomized clinical trials of different clinical trial phases and different vaccine manufacturing types that are currently used in practice, we believe the findings of high nocebo responses are relevant for COVID-19 vaccination in everyday health care.

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, approximately one-third of placebo recipients in COVID-19 vaccine randomized clinical trials reported at least 1 systemic AE after both the first and the second dose, with headache and fatigue being the most common. This nocebo response accounted for 76.0% of systemic AEs after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and for 51.8% after the second dose. Public vaccination programs should consider these high nocebo responses.

Accepted for Publication: November 22, 2021.

Published: January 18, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43955

Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License . © 2022 Haas JW et al. JAMA Network Open .

Correction: This article was corrected on February 11, 2022, to fix an error in Figure 1.

Corresponding Author: Julia W. Haas, PhD, Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, Ste 1309, Boston, MA 02215 ( [email protected] ).

Author Contributions: Dr Haas and Ms Bender contributed equally to this study. Dr Rief and Prof Kaptchuk contributed equally to this study. Dr Haas and Ms Bender had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Haas, Bender, Ballou, Wilhelm, Miller, Kaptchuk.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Haas, Bender, Kelley, Rief, Kaptchuk.

Drafting of the manuscript: Haas, Bender, Kaptchuk.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Bender, Ballou, Kelley, Wilhelm, Miller, Rief, Kaptchuk.

Statistical analysis: Haas, Bender, Kelley, Wilhelm.

Obtained funding: Haas.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Rief.

Supervision: Ballou, Kelley, Wilhelm, Rief, Kaptchuk.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Haas reported receiving a postdoctoral scholarship from the German Academic Exchange Service (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst) during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported.

• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts