GlaxoSmithKline P.L.C.'s recently appointed chief executive, Andrew Witty, found lots of inspiration as he ran the London Marathon in April.

There was a blind man running seven marathons on seven continents in seven days.

Another man carried a sign that read: "I've run 35 marathons in the last 22 days."

But what really got Witty and other runners kicking was a man in a "Borat mankini," the low-slung one-piece swimsuit for men made famous in the movie Borat.

"That was the biggest incentive for everybody to speed up," he said, grimacing to suggest that runners were eager to get away from the dubious choice of sportswear.

Witty himself is getting a lot of attention these days as the 43-year-old who in May became CEO of the British drug giant, which has a U.S. headquarters in Philadelphia. With patents expiring industrywide on best-selling drugs, Witty is pursuing new ways to develop drugs and bolster sales of consumer products, including Breathe Right strips and Sensodyne toothpaste.

He recently discussed running, marketing directly to consumers, and other topics with reporters from several news organizations.

Question: You said you found the London Marathon to be a moving experience. What inspired you?

Answer: You see all these people who are disabled or whose shirts say they are running for a relative or to raise money to fight a disease. It really shows you what people are prepared to do for their cause.

Q: You ran for charity?

A: Yes, my money went to Over the Wall, the U.K. branch of Hole in the Wall Gang, the Paul Newman charity that sends sick kids on vacation. I raised $60,000. I was pretty pleased with that.

Q: In England, you have invited representatives from the national health-insurance program to say whether they would be likely to pay for some of the drugs you have in development. Have you tried that in the United States?

A: Yes, well, we don't want to develop drugs that people don't want to pay for. Imagine if the car companies came to market with a new car without going to do any research to see whether anyone would pay for it, or how much they would pay.

In the United States, we have had some dialogue with large managed-care providers, but, obviously, it's a different system here.