This New Engagement Model Garners Significant Rewards For Pharma

Posted on November 28, 2022 by Tapan Ray

Last year, on July 26, 2021, I wrote in this blog on gaining a competitive edge with Omnichannel pharma marketing Omnichannel pharma marketing. However, from several recent studies, it appears, it’s still remains in a nascent stage. Most players in the industry haven’t been able to get there, just yet.

This is evident from a paper, published in the Reuters Events on November 08, 2022. It underscored, ‘But few, perhaps none, can say they have yet mastered omnichannel. A 360-degree view of the customer remains a work in progress. The seamless customer experience that physicians have come to expect in their private lives as customers in retail, finance, or hospitality, remains an aspiration.’

That said, the good news is – today – with rapidly declining Covid-19 onslaught, many drug companies have realized that their earlier assumption of ‘we know what our customers want,’ is invalid in the emerging perspective. Thus, it is foolhardy for their marketing strategy planners to believe that have a 360-degree view of their customers. This realization has prompted several companies to find out, based on the data, what the key customers’ needs are and engage with them accordingly.

In this article, I shall, therefore, reemphasize for the consideration of the young marketers that Omnichannel customer engagement, including patients and doctors, would help fetch significant and sustained financial rewards for drug companies.

However, another visualization of 6 years ago seems to have come true:

About 6 years ago, on December 26, 2016, I visualized in this blog: ‘a majority of the doctors’ choices in India would, possibly, involve MRs, while a good number of other important doctors’ choices may probably be independent of them. Nevertheless, from this emerging trend, it’s clear now that multi-channel engagement would be a new normal in pharma sales and marketing, sooner than later.’

This visualization seems to have come true by a great extent, as vindicated by the above study of the Reuters Events. It confirms, currently, most companies are stuck in multi-channel content delivery and, in fact, are still a long way of enjoying the benefits of truly aligned – Omnichannel engagement. This brings us to the question: ‘What’s the difference between Multi-Channel and Omnichannel content delivery strategy for customer engagement?’

Difference between Multi-Channel and Omnichannel content delivery strategy:

The article published in the Pharmaceutical Executive, on June 30, 2021, indicated: ‘An integrated strategy based on Omnichannel marketing is now increasingly replacing multichannel marketing.’

Nonetheless, in my article of July 26, 2021, I highlighted, although both omnichannel and multichannel engagement will be able to deliver targeted contents to patients through several interactive digital platforms, these two aren’t the same. Omnichannel approach connects these channels, including smartphone-based Apps, specially formatted websites, social media, community, and the likes – bridging technology-communication gaps that may exist in multichannel solutions.

Notably, any change from the fragmented and siloed multichannel approach to Omnichannel marketing would entail simultaneous orchestration of channels across personal, non-personal, and media. Besides orchestration of channels, the message of course, needs to be unified, interrelated – without being repetitive. From this perspective: ‘Bringing the channels and stakeholders together in a truly integrated manner is the pivotal shift required to break through today’s noisy and crowded pharmaceutical marketplace,’ as the above Pharmaceutical Executive article concluded.

More and more people are charting the digital space:

Fast increasing penetration into the cyberspace by a large section of the population, especially in the healthcare space – triggered by Covid related lockdowns, is now all pervasive. An increasing number of people now want to know more and more about various disease states, their treatment and prevention options, in the digital space. Patients and healthcare providers’ key requirements include, where to get the right information from, and how.

Information-needs expanding beyond disease or drug efficacy and safety:

A discussion, arranged by the Fingerpaint Group and published in the Fierce Pharma on November 14, 2022, covered some interesting points in this area. It acknowledged that in the digital space: “You’ve got the efficacy, the safety information, all that.” The discussion then pointed out: “But for a consumer, it’s a different type of journey. It’s, how do I learn more about the disease I’m dealing with? What is it I want to know, not only either for me, or if I’m a caregiver for somebody in my family, even, how do I help support them?”

Thus, it comes out clearly that patients’ or care givers’ quest for information isn’t just about the disease, it’s also about the quality of information that will help the person, as a whole. The drug companies, I reckon, should now accept it as one of their responsibilities. As one of the participants in this discussion said, ‘finding ways to reach everybody in the whole continuum so that they’re educated and informed, so that they can make better decisions for themselves,’ are imperatives for the marketers.

Personal detailing or other personal engagements don’t become irrelevant:

Omnichannel approach doesn’t make traditional in-person detailing or other personal engagements irrelevant or obsolete. However, those alone, will no longer help a pharma player to achieve performance excellence. The new challenge is how does a company get to the right audience, get the right product to the right patient, or caregivers, amongst this vast ocean of digital noise.

Moreover, the ongoing digital push – beyond several essential personal outreach, will only accelerate in different ways. Omnichannel customer engagement, based on their own terms of engagement, including time, speed, and quality of information, will be the name of the new the game for success.

Many pharma companies aren’t sure where to start, But…

McKinsey & Company in a paper, published on January 05, 2022, also said so. It observed: ‘An analytics-enabled omnichannel commercial model can elevate HCP engagement, but many pharma companies are not sure where to start.’ However, it reiterated: ‘An analytics-enabled omnichannel commercial model can create value; Companies should start now.’

Thus, many pharma marketers may require hand-holding by domain experts, at least, to begin with. However, selection of experts being the key, should go through a structured validation process, including their previous success record in this initiative. As I articulated above, the challenge remains, how does a company use Omnichannel platform to engage the right customers with the right products and associated details, navigating through the noisy cyberspace.

That said, it won’t be unfair to acknowledge that many pharma companies are moving in the right direction.

But many pharma companies are moving in the right direction:

As I mentioned in my article of May 31, 2021: COVID-19 is driving lasting changes in what HCPs need and value,’ found the Accenture Healthcare Provider Survey May 2020, named – ‘Reinventing Relevance.’ Several physicians from the US, Europe and Asia were found to have experienced a significant change taking place in many pharma companies’ communication with them – going much beyond just product information.

Accenture’s follow-up study in August 2020 also reiterated, ‘pharma companies have improved how they engage with healthcare providers during Covid-19.’ It, therefore, appears that the new value expectations of many physicians are being met with a newer value delivery model, significantly deviating from pre-Covid practices.

However, in the above article, I discussed about value delivery through content – not about the channels used.

Conclusion:

The paper by McKinsey & Company, as mentioned above, also indicates another important point. While channels to engage HCPs and other customers are proliferating, the line between online and offline engagement is rapidly blurring. It further adds, managing this imperative has become more and more overwhelming for sales reps. The reason being, they “have traditionally relied on their ‘instincts’ to build relationships with HCPs.

It is now becoming challenging even for many experienced reps to tailor and optimize today’s complex mix of channels, content, and frequency of interactions for individual HCPs, the paper underscores. Which is why, today, transforming the existing commercial model is considered both inevitable and urgent, and:

“Pioneers that have adopted analytics and omnichannel approaches as part of their commercial model have garnered significant rewards.” the paper concluded.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Tame Physicians’ Digital Fatigue With Brand Message Overdose

Posted on April 11, 2022 by Tapan Ray

“The COVID-19 pandemic forced pharmaceutical companies adopt digital-first marketing models when in-person strategies were inaccessible, but health care practitioners report they’re becoming increasingly inundated with information and the shift to virtual marketing isn’t meeting their needs.” This was the finding of a new research of Indegene, published on March 02, 2022. The survey covers around 1,000 physicians from the U.S., Europe, China, and India.

Currently, many HCPs construe that pharma’s increasing frequency of digital outreach – involving several digital channels and various touch points, primarily to push product-related promotional information, is excessive. Continuity of such feelings could be counterproductive to the desired intent of drug companies.

Therefore, the point that surfaces: Is the digital marketing drive of many pharma marketers, even when the Covid pandemic is in a waning phase, ‘overwhelming’ some Key Opinion Leaders (KOL)? More important is to fathom, how to address it? Today’s article will focus on this emerging issue. Let me begin with a few other key findings of this paper.

Some other key findings of the survey:

Some of the major findings of the above survey include:

Digital marketing channels for HCPs most commonly include webinars, social media outreach, emails and text messaging from reps and self-directed web and remote detailing.

While HCPs are becoming more familiar with digital technologies, 62% of them feel ‘overwhelmed’ by product-related promotional content they receive from pharma companies through various virtual channels.

70% feel that drug companies are out of touch with their information needs and expectations from new drugs, besides other products and services.

63% HCPs expect pharma companies to share only relevant content with them – over channels of their preferences, and at a time of their convenience, to make the interactions more insightful.

At this point, let us also have a glance at the findings of other recent surveys, as well, in this space.

Other surveys also point in the same direction:

Yes, other surveys also vindicate this point. For example,

A. Just prior to the above study, on December 07, 2021, Accenture published the findings of their own study in this regard, which includes the following:

65% of HCPs feel that several pharma companies have “spammed” them with digital content as the COVID-19 pandemic went through several waves.

The firms need to do more to better understand and meet HCP expectations (56%) and their patients (60%) due to COVID-19.

When pharma companies do more, 80% of HCPs would be twice as likely to meet the pharma reps with more time and attention.

Almost half of the HCPs surveyed (46%) prefer a mix of in-person and virtual meetings focused on the needs of their patients, as the COVID-19 pandemic ends.

B. Another study on this subject was published in PLOS ONE, on April 16, 2021. This study focused on pharma Webinars. As many will be aware, Webinars comprised a major avenue for customer engagement during COVID-19 – creating initial general satisfaction among physicians.

This, in turn, led to an increase in webinar usage in 2020 compared to the same period in 2019, with more than 300% in one study and up to 3250% in another. Which is why, despite the initial satisfaction – over a period, most physicians ‘felt overwhelmed with the number and frequency of webinars.’

Hence, customer satisfaction being crucial in any engagement process, Webinars may now be used with a purpose to complement traditional in-person methods, rather than replacement, study concluded.

What exactly doctors want to know in the new normal?

Against the above new backdrop – the issue is, how can pharma marketers engage the HCPs without overwhelming them, mostly with continuous, too frequent and wave after wave digital contents. This point was addressed in a Fierce Pharma article, published on February 16, 2022. It quoted some doctors saying, such as:

“If I’m a [high prescriber], great, remind me about efficacy.”
“But I also want to know who’s the right patient for this drug.”
“I want to know what access is like.”
“What types of patient savings programs are available?”
How can I support my patient, so they stay on the drug—because I believe in it.”
“If I’m a non-writer, I want to know how the mechanism of action is different?” “How does this drug show up in the guidelines?”
“Is there head-to-head data versus another drug?”

Reps digital training demands a fresh focus:

Educating or updating doctors through Continuing Medical Education (CME) programs is an ongoing process for drugmakers. It remained so with remote digital channels during the pandemic, as well. Whereas, selecting digitally savvy reps, training and helping them to be “flexible and efficient” in using digital channels and content, based on HCP preferences – demands a fresh focus.

As some of the above studies also emphasized that significantly reducing the number of reps because of wider use of remote digital platforms, may not be advisable at this juncture. This is despite some companies are now doing it – both globally and locally. For example, on January 12, 2022, Reuters reported: ‘Pfizer to cut U.S. sales staff, as meetings with healthcare providers move to virtual.’

On the contrary, I reckon, most reps will need fresh training to ‘go beyond the product script, particularly if a given doctor has seen plenty of digital product info already.’ The same paper further suggests: “Reps should focus on conversations that make the interactions insightful – and avoid driving product information fatigue.”

Conclusion:

With the intensity of Covid-19 pandemic subsiding, many HCPs feel that they’re getting too much digital content from pharma companies. While they aren’t totally averse to digital communication, several of them expressed by being increasingly “spammed” as the time progressed.

For making pharma companies’ engagement with their customers in the changing times, this issue needs to be effectively addressed, soon. The companies will need to select and deploy marketers with a deeper understanding of what HCPs are looking for, to make new digitally focused marketing more meaningful to them – fetching greater business return.

Some studies also signaled that significantly reducing the number of reps – as less staff is required for digital engagement with doctors, may not be prudent at this stage. Instead, the companies need to upskill their digitally savvy reps ‘to integrate remote and digital touchpoints successfully with their in-person touchpoints.’

All these new initiatives when taken in tandem and well-integrated manner, will help meet doctors’ engagement preferences. In that process, pharma players will succeed in taming physicians’ digital fatigue with product-communication overdose, especially, in today’s time – making their marketing efforts more productive and meaningful to HCPs.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Disclaimer: The views/opinions expressed in this article are entirely my own, written in my individual and personal capacity. I do not represent any other person or organization for this opinion.

Shape of Future Pharma Operations – Emerging A Pragmatic Outlook?

Posted on April 12, 2021 by Tapan Ray

Just as newer reports come almost every day on safety, efficacy, dosage interval or span of immunity of Covid vaccines, similar reports are also reaching us about the possible future shape of pharma sales and marketing operations. Some hardcore optimists, apparently more from India, still believe that current changes in pharma customer behavior are mostly transient. All business processes will eventually fall in their traditional grooves, as the Covid menace disappears from our lives soon.

No doubt, several studies are also bringing out a number of respondent doctors’ preferences on reverting to F2F engagements, programs and events. Nonetheless, most other experts, including several large global pharma majors, believe that the future shape of business operations won’t be quite the same as the past. There are better ways to be more effective, leveraging the changing environment. Accordingly, they have initiated actions, reimagining the pathway of new operational frontiers. In this article, I shall explore the evolving pragmatic outlook in just two of these action areas:

The new and unique role of medical representatives
Digital health care solutions as a new growth opportunity

New role of medical representatives:

A recent survey published by Reuters Events Pharma on December 18, 2020, revealed that 30% of the respondents still expect that Medical Reps’ (MR) face-to-face access to HCPs would return to the status quo ante of Covid pandemic restrictions. However, a majority of 70% felt that the old normal is unlikely return as such. The study also brought out that the size and disposition of sales teams are under review by many of pharma players and smaller field forces look likely, as the industry moves on.

My personal experience with the Indian Pharma Industry sources suggests, when a Covid pandemic wave starts finding its peak, the feeling of the above 70% prevails. However, when the same wave climbs down from its peak to a transient trough, a large number of Indian companies and experts tend to feel somewhat akin to what the above 30% expressed in the Reuters Events Pharma survey. The process gets repeated with the emergence of the next wave.

Alongside, as the above survey also finds out, most physicians are no longer expecting – brand-driven high sales pitches, during any MR-Doctor interaction or the engagement process. Instead, they are increasingly looking for insights – in an integrated, personalized and value-driven interactions with the Reps.

Considering this as a trend of over last one year or so, it is likely that MR-doctor interactions will now need to be on digital and omnichannel platforms to deliver a personalized and value driven an experience to the customers. In this environment, the field force may be smaller in size than what it used to be in early 2020 but will have a unique new role to play. This process will come with a new challenge, especially to those inbred companies, who are still undecided about the road ahead for business excellence, in the new normal.

Three new pharma leadership challenges:

Apparently, a large number of domestic drug companies, irrespective of size and scale of operations still feel comfortable to be in the old comfort zone that had propelled the business in a growth trajectory. Most pharma sales and marketing staff members, at several levels, have grown within the industry, consistently delivering high performance.

This situation by itself, as the above research paper revealed, poses three fresh challenges for many companies to make their field-staff ready to play a unique and fresh role in e-marketing. Thus, the three new knots to untie in the virtual world, are the following:

Currently, most MRs are not proficient in selling in virtually,
They are being led by people who have also never sold virtually,
They are being trained by people who also have never sold virtually.

MRs will continue to have a role to play even in the digital world:

To overcome the above challenges, today’s reality prompts new L&D needs of pharma’s new e-environment. And from this perspective, I think, they would need professional domain experts’ hand-holding, at least, in the transition phase of digital marketing. Some companies have initiated this process for greater sales force effectiveness, since 2019. A recent example in this area may be quoted from a report on October 01, 2019.

The article highlights, ‘AstraZeneca sales reps have some new help in the coaching department, resulting improved interactions and better development of sales reps’ strengths. While leaders still manage reps, artificial intelligence—in the form of data generated from thousands of field-coaching forms—now adds machine-learned analysis and advice.’

Thus, it is worth noting that MRs will continue to play an important role, alongside remote digital marketing using omnichannel or multi-channel engagement platforms. The same also came out clearly in the latest study from healthcare consultancy ZoomRx, reported on April 08, 2021, where its findings raised an important question - ‘Did pharma overshoot digital sales rep calls?’ This dilemma was prompted by the study charts reflecting a decline in its effectiveness, during this specific survey period.

Thus, in my opinion, a hybrid business model for better performance will be more effective in the new normal. However, ascertaining the right mix of digital and MR’s in-person interactions, may pose a challenge for many pharma marketers.

Entry into digital health solutions – an opportunity for growth:

Before Covid pandemic, digital therapeutics or digital health solutions were not an unknown area for several pharma companies, as a growth booster in the modern world. But, it wasn’t explored so intensively as it is being discussed today, for the same. A recent paper titled, ‘Digital health during COVID-19: lessons from operationalizing new models of care in ophthalmology,’ published in The Lancet on February 01, 2021, vindicates this point.

The paper emphasized, due to Covid pandemic ‘the traditional face-to-face patient–physician care model has had to be re-examined in many countries, with digital technology and new models of care being rapidly deployed to meet the various challenges of the pandemic.’ It further highlighted, these new models incorporate digital health solutions such as telehealth, AI based decision support for triaging, besides clinical care, and home monitoring.

Global pharma majors, such as Novartis, have publicly acknowledged on January 21, 202 that ‘digital innovation looks set to dominate the 2021 healthcare agenda.’ The statement said, COVID-19 was a catalyst for change in healthcare during 2020 and an accelerator for digital health. Similarly, 2021 looks set to continue the revolution – exploiting ‘an explosion of interest, traction and scale’ in the potential for digital solutions. These would not only support remote working, but also keep the very fabric of business, healthcare, education, and essential services in operation.

Other important and recent examples of digital health care solutions:

Witnessing the COVID-19 pandemic pushing more people toward virtual doctor visits over the last one year, AstraZeneca, as reported on April 06, 2021, is preparing for it in the new normal, through a novel project with Massachusetts General Hospital. The Company is now in the process of establishing and validating its ‘recently launched digital health platform, designed to help patients with chronic illnesses manage their conditions without stepping foot into the academic medical center’s clinic.’

Similarly, several other companies, are also investing to be early entrants with user friendly state of the art technology in this space. Interestingly, many of these ventures were reported during March and April 2021.

Conclusion:

Arthur Miller’s play ‘Death of a Salesman,’ broadly addressed the loss of identity and a man’s inability to accept change within himself and society. Although, the book depicts a larger philosophical perspective of life – many pointed out similar issues in the drug industry perspective, as well.

Nonetheless, many studies have established, pharma MRs have been effectively delivering, since long, the endpoint deliverables, as expected of them – sales. However, the question that still haunts many – can this core process be re-imagined for greater efficiency and effectiveness at a lesser cost, harnessing modern technology. An article, published in the Pharmaphorum on March 11, 2011, has also suggested – ‘in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is an even greater need to re-examine the rep’s role. How can a field force evolve to deal with current challenges and be future-fit for the way we will be working in the post-pandemic world?’

There is no confusion today that MRs’ will have a key role to play in pharma’s digital endeavor. However, the key purpose of having them has evolved during the pandemic. Such as, from being an efficient way to achieve personal communication objectives – to be an orchestrator for physicians to navigate the difficult landscape, providing them a differentiated service. For this purpose, I reckon, a hybrid business model for better performance, will be more effective in the new normal, while quickly adapting to digital transformation. However, arriving at the right mix of digital and MR’s in-person interactions, may pose a challenge for many pharma marketers, as it will be a company-specific need.

Similarly, the criticality of leveraging opportunities to provide remote delivery of digital health care solutions to patients, has also come onto the radar of many pharma players, during this difficult time. Several players have already added this area as a lucrative business expansion platform – many more are expected to follow. Thus, in my view, the fast-evolving data-based trends are now giving a pragmatic shape to future pharma operations – especially on the new and unique role of medical representatives and the relevance of digital health care solutions, as a growth opportunity.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Still Evolving: Pharma’s New Pathway For Digital And F2F Customer Engagement

Posted on February 15, 2021 by Tapan Ray

Last year – probably left with no better choice – the pharma industry, in general, had to take an unprecedented interest in digitalization of business processes. It happened faster than ever, especially in the marketing domain, along with a few others. Large research studies, across the world have vindicated this point. However, such digital transformation initiatives of last one year, is far from getting over. These are still like a work in progress. Primarily because, the extent of sudden changes in healthcare customer behavior, overall business environment and market dynamics, are still unfolding – slowly and gradually, though.

Consequently, the future drug marketing roadmap for the ongoing journey isn’t clear, just yet, especially in the area of striking a critical balance between virtual F2F (Face to Face) and in-person F2F customer engagements. Which is why, ascertaining the extent of personalization of customer contacts, customer-centric content development and their preference-based channel selection, may take more time. Accordingly, the framework of a strategic blueprint will need to be continuously updated during 2021, based on robust data.

Charting and analyzing the trend for each critical interface related to customer contacts – based on credible data, has already been initiated by renowned professional agencies. The findings of the same are also started trickling in. Some of which are on the expected line thinking, whereas a few others aren’t so expected, by many.

In this article, I shall dwell on some of these critical trends related to striking a right balance between virtual F2F and in-person F2F customer engagements for commercial excellence in 2021 and beyond. The purpose is to encourage marketers for keeping eyes on the ball, always. This is critical while formulating robust digital marketing strategies – charting a new pathway for reps’ digital empowerment – from here on. Let me start by quoting an important research study.

Digital initiatives helped staying relevant in uncertain times:

Several other research studies, including the Veeva study on ‘Industry-wide digital acceleration’, published on September 23, 2020, highlighted pharma’s digital efforts to stay relevant during a year-long uncertain times, like the last year. Even today, the industry’s digital channels, mostly related to customer engagement, like doctors and patients, are drawing similar importance of the top management.

The research underscored, healthcare sectors in emerging countries, such as India, Vietnam, Indonesia and China are increasingly relying on digital return in a post-pandemic world. Interestingly, digital engagement has now unlocked access even to those healthcare professionals who were declining F2F access to many pharma companies.

‘Slow return of in-person interactions’ – what does it mean?

While the increasing use of digital channels in customer engagement was true during last year, the recent APAC Veeva Pulse Data also shows signs of a slow return of in-person interactions. The top 5 therapeutic areas that have started to reopen include:

Respiratory,
Cancer,
Infection,
Diabetes and
Cardiovascular.

The study shows that F2F interactions dropped dramatically between February and April 2020 but increased back to pre-COVID numbers by July 2020. Curiously, at the same time, virtual engagements and meetings also continued to increase significantly. Thus, the question to ponder and address properly is – If in-person F2F interaction is increasing alongside digital, what would it mean for healthcare engagement while moving forward?’

Is it a signal for the hybrid customer engagement model in the future?

While doctors are realizing the benefits and ease of user-friendly digital engagement, this may not mean that virtual visits, meeting and engagements are replacing F2F in-person interactions, lock-stock and barrel.

Thus, it now needs to be established by more and larger studies, whether a customer engagement model with an optimal mix of digital and F2F in-person engagements can be more effective for better commercial outcomes, now and in the days ahead. The point that needs to be ascertained first is – what will this optimal mix be – between digital and F2F, which I reckon, will differ from company to company – mostly based on therapy areas they represent.

F2F engagements may increase from the past year, but not as old normal:

Except initial turbulence, with incredible resilience the pharma industry navigated through the choppy environment during the pandemic, with the skillful application of digital technology. The most recent Veeva article, published on January 07, 2021 captures this point.

It articulated, with companies continue expanding digitalization to accelerate cost-efficient commercial operations and yielding greater productivity, the new operating models will reshape the industry and drive powerful transformation for years to come. It is, therefore, unlikely that the traditional ways of in-person F2F engagement with doctors, patients and other stakeholders will come back soon in its old avatar, if at all.

Increasing scope for a two-way digital engagement with pharma customers:

Veeva Pulse data also observed the initiation of pharma’s two-way digital engagement with health care customers last year and an expanded potential of the same in the current year and thereafter.

Although, virtual meetings increased more than eightfold and rep-sent digital communication by sevenfold since January 2020, these channels have primarily been used for outbound customer engagement.

This leaves some untapped opportunities to explore, by creating new inbound digital customer-engagement channels. The aim is to make it easier for doctors and patients have greater access to companies, its reps or designated individuals, for information and services that they may want. Most importantly, this has to be – as they need it – when they need it – and the way they would prefer having it. Inbound digital engagement channels will also demonstrate a greater company focus on ‘customer-centricity’.

Expanding towards inbound digital engagement for customers has started:

This shift prompts a change in the traditional mindset of pharma marketing leadership. The process will be gradual, ongoing and having a bias on contemporary customer needs. The steps to follow should preferably be initiate – evaluate – expand, while taking every significant step.

For example, as reported by Fierce Pharma on February 08, 2021, global pharma major Novartis is aiming to personalize its interactions with healthcare professionals and deliver “what they need in real time” to support their decision-making process. Novartis, reportedly, is also setting out to change the way that they are “interacting with not only physicians, but healthcare systems, and how they think about the patient journey.”

F2F shifts from ‘in-person interaction for all’ to ‘as per customer preference’:

Be that as it may, pharma’s digital strategy requires to be craftily woven with the company’s field-strategy. Thus, the reps must be digitally well trained in delivering brand values consistently, across digital channels and platforms, as recent studies indicate.

Far from traditional F2F field sales models of in-person meetings for all doctors, the hybrid F2F model requires personalized engagement, based on customer preferences. Some customers may prefer reps to engage only through digital channels, whereas many others may like a mix of virtual and in-person engagements. With the expanding reach of digital technology for all, these preferences will keep changing with time.

Conclusion:

In 2021 and thereafter, accelerating digitization of critical pharma domains, such as marketing, is expected to reduce operational costs and boost operational efficiencies. In tandem, it will help gain deeper insight into customer behavior and market dynamics, fueled by newly acquired digital capabilities. These include, faster generation of customized data or collation of relevant and credible information collected from multiple sources, and their error-free prompt analysis. In addition, prudent application of digital technology in all selected areas by astute pharma professionals, will help reduce, if not totally eliminate, currently practiced and human error-prone, mostly repetitive manual processes.

The pan industry shift toward digital channels is here to stay and is expected to accelerate further for other strategic reasons too, such as, to add more flexibility in attaining greater efficiency and effectiveness for customer engagement. It goes without saying that factoring-in all such key success factors, companies will draw their respective current and future digital marketing strategies. That said, recent data indicate, customer engagement may call for a mix of virtual and in-person F2F engagements. The same report highlights that going back to the old normal of in-person F2F engagements for all doctors could probably be a far cry. Similarly, the initial success of e-customer engagement is unlikely to replace in-person and in-clinic F2F engagements of sales reps completely.

However, the point to note is that the industry scenario in this area is still evolving. Currently published trends indicate, different customers, like doctors, patients and hospitals, will have different preferences of engagement with drug companies, in different communication platforms. Thus, pharma’s new marketing pathway, as discussed above, will entail striking an optimal balance between digital and F2F customer engagement, which will vary from company to company based on several critical factors.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Changing – The Key Differentiator To Boost Pharma Market Share

Posted on July 8, 2019 by Tapan Ray

Health problems, affecting populations of any country, are many. So are the issues related to the delivery of effective health care solution, that most patients would consider satisfying and meaningful. From this perspective, prevention, treatment and effectively managing any disease is basically a problem-solving situation, for all, as we see around.

Interestingly, an ailment, per se, may not necessarily be the only problem that needs to be solved by a doctor, hospital or a pharma company with its drugs. Other associated factors, playing a key role in the process of patients’ search for a meaningful solution – could often post to be tougher barriers in finding the solution. Therefore, patients’ problem during any disease treatment process, is much more than the disease or availability of required drugs.

Consequently, it is very important for all, especially the pharma marketers, to properly understand what these specific influencing factors are, for each patient-groups or types, if not each patient. Obviously, it would call for generation of relevant data to precisely define the problem, or a set of problems, as the patients feel and envisage. Conversely, these problems should not be defined by the company, based mostly on gut feel, just as it’s so difficult to fathom how another person would feel in a distressing situation. Thus, the need to chart a strategic roadmap to provide a solution to those problems will arise only thereafter.

In pharma context, there are several critical elements in this problem-solving process. However, in this article, I shall focus only on two areas. As these could provide a cutting edge, if used in creative ways by drug manufacturers in arresting patients’ and other stakeholders’ attention on this crucial process.

Three critical elements to the problem-solving process:

Among several others, I reckon, the following three elements would play critical roles in the problem-solving process that is specific to the pharma industry:

The mindset to follow the problem-solving approach with all sincerity.
Communicate the problem-solving process in a creative way to patients and others.
Walk the talk, earning patients’ delight and enhancing the corporate reputation.

Since, the third element, although very important, is involved with the strategic roadmap of the organization, let me discuss here the first two elements to justify the need for this stratagem.

The key differentiators are changing:

A clear shift is underway that will influence what drug will be prescribed and the treatment process that individual patients would prefer.

Not so long ago, and to a large extent even today, one of the key differentiators to sell high price patented products used to be the narrative of ‘billions of dollars’ of investments that go behind time-intensive and high-risk R&D. Nevertheless, this age-old recital now finds lesser and lesser number of takers, largely within patient groups.

Alongside, run several other product-centric differentiators, such as claims and counterclaims on technological and clinical superiority, or how a new drug prolongs life of some cancer patients by a few months over other drugs. These are the old workhorse of differentiators, which are just not enough to increase brand market share, in today’s fast-changing environment.

Brand differentiating factors should reach much beyond the product:

As more patients are getting increasingly interested in their personal health interests and rights, the differentiating factors should reach much beyond products. Some drug companies are already sensing that more patients have started looking for a desired and effective solution, whenever they face a health-related problem. Accordingly, the ability of a pharma player to provide a custom-made solution, as it were, to patients, is emerging as a crucial differentiating factor. This has immense potential to boost the brand market share faster.

Let me underscore, yet again, that this change is surfacing due to changing demands of patients in this area. Thus, soon pharma companies would require shifting their focus from product-centric brand differentiation to patient-centric ones, with problem-solving offerings for patients in creative ways.

Communicate the problem-solving offerings in creative ways to patients:

That the core purpose of pharma business is to prevent, cure or effectively manage illness, is known to many. However, that doesn’t explain one critical parameter that patients now value most. This is, how a drug company provides effective solution to specific health problems of individuals – making the company’s product and services most meaningful to him or her.

Encouragingly, some top pharma advertising companies dealing with pharma, healthcare and wellness products, have started advising so, to their respective clients, as reported by Fierce Pharma on June 17, 2019.

One such ad agency honcho said: “The reality is that pharma and health are closer to doing good anyway, that’s just part of what they do. Looking for opportunities to serve the patient in a creative way is what we need to do in pharma as well, not just, ‘let’s go and sell this drug.’ Admitting the current issues with most pharma players, he further articulated: “But there’s a huge trust gap because people think pharma companies are just out to make money. The more they can do that supports their customer base, which is patients, the more quickly we’ll erode that.”

As reported in the same article, this advice was given to the pharma industry at the Cannes Pharma Lions Awards function on June 17, 2019. It is one of those top award functions, where one gets to know about the best creative communications of pharma and health care companies, designed to facilitate understanding and awareness on various health problem-solving processes for patients.

An interesting platform to know about pharma’s problem-solving offerings:

One of the well-respected platforms where one can witness creative and innovative communications in the pharma industry, is during Cannes Pharma Lions Awards. This ‘is considered the largest gathering of the advertising and thecreative communications industry. The five-day festival, incorporating the awarding of the Lions awards, is held yearly at the Palais des Festivals et des Congrès in Cannes, France.’

New age creative pharma communication, bringing science and innovation to life, compete in the Pharma Lions award functions. These facilitate not only disease awareness – both mitigation or management, diagnosis and patient’s-need-based prescriptions, but also add value while engaging with healthcare professional and patients, more effectively.

Some of the entries vindicate that creativity in pharma communications has started moving ahead and faster than expected, with special focus on patients’ problem-solving. As an illustration, let me cite the example of top Pharma Lions Winner at Cannes 2019.

GlaxoSmithKline GSK) and its ad agency McCann Health picked up this coveted award in pharma advertising with a mobile application called Breath of Life. This is a diagnostic tool for COPD developed for GSKand is aimed at raising awareness and increasing diagnoses of the disease in China. COPD affects an estimated 100m adults in China, but only around 7 percent is properly diagnosed, as the report highlights.

Now, an example from the wellness area:

This specific approach for a Vitamin D fortified dairy product, is also equally innovative, as quoted in the above Fierce Pharma article. Many may be aware that Vitamin D deficiency is not uncommon in India – 80 percent of children in Delhi, reportedly, suffer from this deficiency. The manufacturing company launched its campaign in schools to move the traditional, outdoor morning assembly to noon, when brief sun exposure could have a big effect on vitamin D levels. The campaign invited schools to a launch event, providing a solution to the problem of Vitamin D deficiency in children. The idea clicked with excellent media coverage.

As the ad agency said: “We didn’t make a TV commercial or run print ads. We looked at a problem and how we could solve it and showed that the brand cares about kids.” Nevertheless, he added, make no mistake, it was also an ad, which made parents want to buy the brand.

India and Cannes Lions Awards in health and pharma categories:

The good news is, Indian companies are also participating to showcase their creative communication skills, in problem-solving areas of health, wellness and pharma domain. Although, one doesn’t find the names of any large domestic pharma players in the list, India had put up a good show by bagging a total of four awards, including a gold, two silvers and a bronze in the health and pharma categories on Day 1 of the Cannes International Festival of Creativity, in 2018.

In the years ahead, one hopes that Indian drug manufacturers will show greater interest in this area, to sharpen their critical differentiating tool in disease awareness, brand marketing focused on problem-solving for patients, who search for an appropriate solution while addressing a disease condition.

Is pharma in search of a different approach?

Instances, such as, Cannes Pharma Lions Award, indicate that an increasing number of pharma players have, at least, started recognizing that old ways of differentiating brands, would no longer fetch desired outcomes, as patients’ mindsets are changing – fast. Patients’ outlook for prevention, treatment and managing chronic ailments are also changing – empowered by a plethora of unlimited free information – as and when they require.

Accordingly, drug companies who are partnering with creative pharma ad agencies are being persuaded more to look for a radically different approach to be on the same page with their customers. It also requires the top management mindset to be in sync with this fundamental change, inviting full commitment from all. The new communication package, then becomes a fine blend of top-class creative inputs and modern technology platforms for delivery. The core purpose is to effectively connect with patients, doctors, hospitals and governments, being an integral part of their problem-solving process in health care.

Conclusion:

The article titled, ‘Solving Problems Is More Important Than Selling Your Differentiators,’ published in Forbes on June 14, 2018, highlighted a very important point. It wrote, if a company keeps zeroing in on its traditional brand differentiator, as discussed above, the business is likely to miss out on potential new customers and the revenue they could bring with them.It then elaborated: ‘The real trick to getting noticed comes down to shifting your focus. It’s not about you. And it’s definitely not about you versus them. It’s all about solving problems and evoking the right emotions.’

The short list of Cannes Pharma Lions Awards, signals that this process has just begun, but yet to gain a critical mass within the industry. In this area, as yet another head honcho puts it: “Given the shortlist for the Innovation Lions, you can already see a trend where agencies have focused on making work that impacts patient lives on a day-to-day basis, through more meaningful use of technology for practical and life-changing purposes.”

Thus, it is important for new age pharma marketers to note that their business environment is changing – faster than ever before. The traditional brand differentiators, however much honed, may not fetch desired increase in the market share, in the future.

The new crucial differentiator in this area, isthe ability of a pharma player to conceive, design, provide and effectively communicate, virtually a custom-made disease treatment solution to patients. Equally important is the skill to communicate this ‘problem-solving process’ to the target audience in creative ways, for top of mind recall, at least, the company’s name. In turn, it would also facilitate the prescriber choosing a company’s brand, that rings a bell to the patient. And that’s the new way for pharma marketers to boost their brand market share, faster.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Is Pharma Communication In Sync With Doctors’ Expectations?

Posted on May 13, 2019 by Tapan Ray

Not many pharma companies, especially in India, undertake any ongoing data-based analysis to gain insight on expectations and change in behavioral pattern of their customers, particularly doctors and patients. Many developments are taken as obvious, such as, when busy practitioners don’t want to give much time to a medical rep for brand detailing, if not any time, common spontaneous inference remains – ‘they are too busy.’ These responses are mostly without any data backup. Thus, meaningful efforts in finding ‘productive alternatives’ continue to remain elusive.

As making personal calls to some top medical practitioners becoming increasingly difficult, non-personal outreach for them tend to significantly go up. It often happens without any quantifiable assessment of how each of these targeted doctors is responding to even the non-personal outreach of the company.

That this is happening, was captured in a world-wide survey by ZS Associates in 2016. It highlighted: ‘The number of digital and non-personal contacts that the pharmaceutical industry now has with physicians exceeded its number of sales rep visits to doctor offices.’ It is worth repeating, this finding comes from a global survey.

Lack of insight in this area, could give rise to an avoidable disconnect between many pharma company’s core communication strategy, and what individual doctors would like to hear from them and in what way. Unless this issue is addressed sooner, it could be a strong invisible barrier to brands’ success, if not the image, too. Thus, in this article, I shall explore its implication, the key factors driving this trend, and most importantly, how to bridge this gap. Let me start with the well-established trend of increasing volume of non-personal contacts and hasten to add, by ‘non-personal’ I mean situations where a person is not physically present.

Increasing volume of non- personal outreach:

In these days, personal interaction of medical reps with doctors, despite being traditionally important, is just one of the many channels for delivering requisite content to them. With increasing difficulty in getting top prescribers’ time, for effective brand detailing, many more non-personal channels are fast opening up.

Today, even in the Indian context, more than half of the total outreach volume of many drug companies, especially to such prescribers, are taking place through non-personal promotions. These include activities, such as:

Both, general and personalized e-mails
Mobile alerts to achieve various different objectives
E-detailing
Continuing Medical Education (CME)
Speaker program with associated arrangements and fees
Sponsoring medical events, seminars, symposia
Advertising in medical journals

Whereas, a little less than 50 percent of the total outreach by volume, still take place through in-person interactions with medical reps for brand detailing, as studies indicate. Interestingly, for known products, such contacts are often no more than just brand reminders.

The productivity of such calls needs to be measured and quantified, just as what is required for various non-personal channels, including digital – the contact volume of which is fast increasing for several companies. Curiously, despite this prevailing scenario and in some cases, a declining performance trend notwithstanding, higher promotional budgets continue to be available, based on hope and supported by optimistic forecasts.

The key reason attributed to this trend:

The article titled ‘What healthcare professionals want from pharma’, published in Pharma IQ on April 23, 2019 wrote about a key research finding on this subject. It emphasized, ‘only 46 percent of physicians worldwide are “accessible”- defined as meeting with a pharma sales rep in 70 percent of requests in the past year – a figure that has declined from 78 percent in 2008.’

On the same issue, the survey brought out two other important points:

38 percent of physicians restricted MR access, and
18 percent of physicians “severely’’ restricted MR access

The question that follows is, how much doctors’ time is taken by non-personal communication?

Doctors’ time taken by non-personal communication:

The above article also found: ‘These doctors estimate they receive more than 2,800 contacts from pharma reps each year via digital and non-personal marketing channel – contacts that consume an estimated 84 hours per year, or two full work weeks of their time.’ This level of “white noise” makes it imperative to rethink strategies for reaching prescribers, the article added.

What do doctors do with non-personal communication?

In this situation, understanding when doctors open doors to MRs, read promotional emails, commit to speaker events, and engage with other sales and marketing channels could be the difference between gaining market share by delivering a strong customer experience and failing to keep pace with a competitor. This was one of the key findings of ZS Associate’s 2017 Access Monitor study.

Thus, gaining insight on individual customer behavior for personalized customer engagement, would help create a cutting-edge competitive advantage for pharma players. With this acuity, astute pharma marketers would require prioritizing their focus on communication channels and platforms – alongside resource allocation for each.

Current resource allocation:

As reported in the above survey by ZS Associates, while marketing executives and doctors notice the increase in non-personal communications, pharma players, in general continue to allocate around 88 percent of their total sales and marketing budget to the sales force. This is despite non-personal communications – including digital, now comprising 53 percent of the total marketing outreach, as captured in this worldwide survey.

The survey findings do raise a point of caution as it says: ‘If pharma companies continue to increase investment in less expensive digital communications without considering customer preferences, physicians may feel overwhelmed and eventually ignore them.’ Thus, it will be important for drug companies understand doctors’ expectations in this area.

Pharma – doctor communication: Expectations and gaps:

On the doctors’ front, there are two important developments that pharma marketers should take note of:

Core expectation of doctors is much clearer now: As one of the above studies clearly indicate, the core expectation of all practicing doctors, from both personal and non-personal contacts with the drug companies, is to get the ‘news that they can use’, in their respective medical practices.

Availability of multiple expert sources/channels to fetch relevant medical information: The reality today is, medical representatives are no longer the only credible source for many busy practitioners to get useful medical information, not just for the molecule, but also for specific brands. ‘And with more choices, physicians increasingly prefer to learn about products on their own terms,’ as the above worldwide survey points out.

Hence, there exists a gap between how and what type of content busy practitioners expect from pharma companies and how and what the drug companies actually deliver to them. There isn’t an iota of doubt that this gap has to be bridged for making sales and marketing efforts more productive.

It demandsa deep insight into the way doctors gather medical information – based on real-time data analysis. This is critical, considering the role it plays for success in generating increased brand prescription support.

Acquiring insight into the way doctors gather medical information:

There are four key elements, I reckon, to acquiring insight into the way doctors gather medical information:

What each high-value medical practitioner considers as ‘the news that he/she can use’ in their practice, which would also help a company to generate increasing brand prescription support? Its answer should be the key driver for targeted content development.

How a doctor would prefer to receive it – as a personal or non-personal communication?

What would be each such doctor’s most preferred channel or platform to receive this message?

How to create an effective and measurable synergy between personal and non-personal communication for each important prescriber?

As too-much, too-frequent and too-many types of communication may often be counterproductive, delivering the right content, on the right platform, through the right channel for each top prescribers, would likely to pave the way for success in this effort.

Real-time monitoring to increase the strike rate is important:

This is relevant for both personal and non-personal communication and would include several areas, such as, after getting appointment of a top specialist, with great difficulty, what results follow after the interview concludes. Or after sending important and even personalized emails, how to monitor whether doctors are opening those, reading and acting upon, as intended.

This is no rocket science. There are ample mechanisms to make it happen. However, it is important to decide first, which of these means would suit a particular company the most, for effective implementation. That said, leveraging modern technology and constantly updating it, is the only way forward, for sure. While the task is difficult, but is certainly achievable – with the optimal mix of right resources and perseverance.

Conclusion:

When the expectation is, to build a strong pharma brand with a long-term success record, the only tool is effective communication of brand-value to target customers – in the right way, leading to tangible value creation for all. The source of communication being respective drug companies, one can be sure that it will be relayed to targeted receivers, such as doctors, patients and other stakeholders. However, none can be too sure whether the receiver will be willing to receive it the way it was planned by the source – and through the same channels.

Like many other industries, pharma customers are also becoming more selective in receiving, accepting and acting on medical communications, according to individual expectations and preferences. Several research studies have confirmed this emerging trend. Simultaneously, it is also getting revealed that most communication of a large number of drug companies are not quite in sync with doctors’ expectations. As a result, return per dollar/rupee spent on such communication is fast declining.

Thus, it’s time for a significant course correction – with a sense of urgency, as discussed above. No doubt, all pharma players have a strategy in place to make their brand communication effective. Nevertheless, what they should also focus on, is to align their communication with doctors’ expectations.

It is, therefore, imperative that pharma communication is made in sync with doctors’ expectations – not based on a couple of interviews with them, as it were, but by analyzing a massive pool of credible data, leveraging modern technology. Otherwise, high value prescribers may keep considering reps visit as ‘noise’ and remain indifferent to such outreach.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Should Pharma-Doctor Communication Be Also Gender-Specific?

Posted on November 26, 2018 by Tapan Ray

Regardless of situations, while selecting a suitable doctor for patients, or for that matter, pharma companies engage with them for commercial reasons, their gender doesn’t matter much to many.

What one generally looks for is, whether they are General Practitioners (GPs), General Surgeons (GSs) or Specialists in various disease areas, such as cardiac, metabolic, bones and joints, cancer and so on. This has been happening, despite several research studies pointing out a number of important gender-based behavioral differences between most male and female doctors, often leading to a significant difference in patient outcomes.

Before proceeding further, let me admit up front that there may be some exceptions to this general scenario. For example, certain female patients may prefer being examined by the female doctors only. Similarly, a few drug companies may be tailoring the content and the process of their communication based on the target doctors’ age.

In this article, I shall try to focus on this area based on a number of important research findings. The objective being whether medical communications of pharma players should also factor-in the gender-specific nuances among male and female doctors. This is because, such differences impact clinical outcomes and happens irrespective of whether they are GPs or specialists. Let me kick-start the discussion with the following question:

“Does gender matter when choosing a doctor?”

This interesting point was raised in an article, titled “Should You Choose a Female Doctor?”, appeared in ‘The New York Times (NYT)’ on August 14, 2018. Let me put across the essence of it, quoting from some large research findings.

The August 21, 2018 study, titled “Patient–physician gender concordance and increased mortality among female heart attack patients,” published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS). This study covered more than 580,000 heart patients admitted to emergency rooms in Florida between 1991 and 2010. After a thorough scrutiny, the researchers noted that:

The mortality rates for both women and men were lower when the treating physician was female.

Consequently, it appears, gender does matter, while choosing a doctor for better treatment outcomes. Nevertheless, just one illustration in this regard may not possibly be enough to drive home this point. Thus, let me quote from another important study. This one is a Harvard study that included more than 1.5 million hospitalized Medicare patients and arrived at similar conclusions, with the finding as stated hereunder.

Lower 30-day mortality under female internists than male counterparts:

This large study, published in JAMA Internal Medicine on February 2017 also concludes:Hospitalized patients who receive care from female general internists have lower 30-day mortality and readmission rates than those patients cared for by male internists.

“The difference in mortality was slight – about half a percentage point – but when applied to the entire Medicare population, it translates to 32,000 fewer deaths,” reported the above NYT article while commenting on this subject. I shall come to this finding in just a bit.

Why patient outcomes are different under the care of male and female doctors?

To get an answer to this question, just as several other previous studies, the findings of the above issue of JAMA Internal Medicine also suggest more studies in this area. The aim is to zero-in on the key differences in practice patterns between male and female physicians, which may have important clinical implications for patient outcomes.

The researchers observed, understanding exactly why these differences in care quality and practice patterns exist may provide valuable insights into improving quality of care for all patients, irrespective of who provides their care.

Curiously, this question was answered in a 2002 study published in the JAMA that found female doctors spend more times with patients.

Female doctors spend more times with patients:

The paper, titled “Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review” wanted to find out why patient outcomes are different under the care of male and female doctors?This study was published in the August 14, 2002 issue of JAMA. It found, “Female primary care physicians engage in more communication that can be considered patient centered and have longer visits than their male colleagues.”The average difference in time spent with patients between male and female physicians is about 2 minutes, or 10 percent, per visit.

The researchers also found that female physicians engage in communication that mostly relates to the larger life context of patient conditions. It includes addressing psychosocial issues through related questions and counseling, greater use of emotional talk, more positive talk, and more active enlistment of patient input. From this perspective, they commented: When taken together, these elements comprise a pattern that can be broadly considered ‘patient-centered’ interviewing.

Would tailoring pharma communication accordingly fetch better dividend?

Such highly similar findings, as evidenced by many reports, over a considerable period of time, add much credence to an important fact. These vindicate the concept that ‘patient-outcomes are better when cared by female doctors as compared to their male counterparts.’ In the pharma context, the subsequent question that surfaces: Can this finding be put to use while developing a tailor-made communication strategy with appropriate content for female doctors, harvesting a rich commercial dividend?

No doubt, before doing so, more data need to be generated and analyzed to corroborate the utility of the same in the pharma business. That said, the good news is, the work has already started in this area.

Some interesting recent findings on pharma-doctor interactions:

As reported by Fierce Pharma on October 26, 2018, moving towards this direction, CMI/Compas ventured into testing the water. It planned to find out whether drug companies should develop male and female doctor-specific communication strategy and content for more productive engagement with them. After an elaborate data analysis, CMI/Compas found the following:

As the most important source of new product information 59 percent of older-male-doctors rank pharma sales reps much higher. Whereas, only 46 percent of older-female-doctors’ think so.

47 percent of older-male-doctors were most likely to see sales reps without any restrictions. Whereas, less than 40 percent of the other group saw reps without placing any hurdles to their visits.

Female physicians of all generations were found more likely to rank medical websites and online drug reference guides as more important tools than their male counterparts.

Women doctors are also likely to encourage patients using websites, electronic medical records and patient support programs more frequently than their male counterparts.

After receiving requisite information from pharma source, especially younger women doctors, are more likely:

- To change a patient’s treatment (20 percent).

- Try a new product (22 percent).

- Conduct more research using other sources (40 percent).

Conclusion:

These research findings do provide a fresh food for thought for the pharma strategists to ascertain whether a new ground exists to further hone the conversation between drug companies and the doctors. More specific point to ponder is, whether an avant-garde, as it were, customer-segmentation strategy be put to use, while devising a sharply focused communication and content for the male and female doctors, separately for each.

Coming back to where I started from: Should pharma-doctor communication be gender-specific? In my view, enough credible evidences, as captured in several large studies, send a clear signal towards an affirmative answer. Nevertheless, individual company would still be required to meticulously vet it out internally, for the best possible results.

By: Tapan J. Ray

Multi-channel Engagement: A New Normal In Pharma Marketing

Posted on December 26, 2016 by Tapan Ray

The 2015 Report of AffinityMonitor reconfirms that access to important doctors for pharma Medical Representatives (MRs) continues to decline. Now, fewer than half of all doctors are truly accessible to the MRs, down from nearly 80 percent in 2008. In other words, though MRs continue to be the best way to engage the average physician, this “best way” is steadily getting worse.

However, for physician engagement, all digital channels put together to rank the second highest. These include both digital “push”, such as, email or alerts sent to a physician’s smart phone – followed by telemarketing, direct mail; and digital “pull”, such as content that doctors can access on their own from the Internet, and peer interactions, like webinars.

With the new digital channels emerging, pharma companies will have a wider range of promotional and engagement channels to reach out to not just the doctors, but also other important stakeholders. Additionally, various non-personal marketing channels could also help pharma companies overcome the declining trend of restricted access to physicians for MR.

No single channel works for all physicians:

Although, no single channel works for all physicians, as each doctor has a unique preference for how he or she wants to receive information across various channels, most doctors will engage with pharma players in some way. The findings of this report are based on data compiled from more than 100 pharma brands, including engagements with 632,000 physicians across a wide range of specialty areas, and more than 123 million individual physician interactions.

The report suggests that by understanding those channels on a physician level, and targeting their marketing and promotion accordingly, pharma companies can hone the effectiveness of each physician engagement, and thereby improve sales and marketing productivity considerably, for excellence in business.

Similar trend in India with varying degree of difficulty:

Similar trend, though with varying degree of difficulty, can be noticed in India, as well. Over the past several years, many top pharma companies have been already experiencing the steadily declining quality of access of pharma MRs to many important doctors.

This is primarily due to the number of patients coming to these busy practitioners is fast increasing, and as the doctors are trying to see all these patients within the same limited time that was available to them, as in the earlier days. In tandem, their other obligations of various kinds, personal or otherwise, are also overcrowding the same highly squeezed time space.

Thus, an increasing number of MRs, which has more than doubled in the past decade, is now fiercely competing to get a share of lesser and lesser available time of the busy medical practitioners. Added to this, a gross mismatch between the inflow of doctors with similar prescription potential and ever increasing inflow of patients, is making the situation worse.

Reevaluating traditional marketing and sales communication models:

In this complex scenario, the key challenge before the pharma players is how to make sales communication with the busy medical practitioners more productive?

Consequently, many pharma companies, across the globe, have started reevaluating their traditional sales communication models, which are becoming increasingly expensive with diminishing returns from the MR calls.

As I discussed in some other article, a few drug companies have commenced using various interesting multi-channel digital platforms, though mostly fall under the traditional pharma sales communication process.

I shall now briefly glance over the trend of responses of the Indian pharma companies over a couple decades, to meet these challenges of change.

MR based Experimentations:

With a strong intent to squarely overcome this challenge, many Indian pharma players initially tried to experiment with several different MR based approaches, in various permutations and combinations. It was initially directed to make the prescription generation process more productive, by equipping the MR with a wide range of soft skills.

Some pharma players also tried to push up the overall sales productivity through additional rural market coverage to Tier IV cities and below. Quite a few of them succeeded in their endeavor to create profitable business models around the needs of hinterland and rural geographies.

These pharma players, though quickly realized that extra-urban geographies require different tactical approaches, broadly remained stuck to the traditional marketing and sales communication models. These approaches include, differentiated product portfolio, distribution-mix, pricing/packaging and promotional tools, considering most the doctors are not as busy as their counterparts in the metro cities and large towns.

Strategic marketing based experimentations:

Several changes were also made in the strategic marketing areas of pharma business, though most of these, if not all, were imbibed from the global marketing practices of that time. These were well captured in an IMS report of 2012. Some of these strategic marketing shifts were as follows:

Strategic Business Unit Structure (SBU): To bring more accountability, manage evolving business needs and use the equity of organization for reaching to the middle of the accessible pyramid.

Therapy Focus Promotion: Generally seen where a portfolio is specialized, therapy focused, and scripts are driven through chosen few doctors; generally, in chronic segment.

Channel Management: Mostly adopted in OTC /OTX business; mature products with wider portfolio width.

Hospital Task Force: Exclusively to manage the hospital business.

Specialty Driven Sales Model: Applicable in scenarios where portfolio is built around 2 or 3 specialties.

Special Task Force: Generally adopted for niche products in urban areas, such as fertility clinics or for new launches where the focus is on select top rung physicians only.

Outsourced Sales Force: Generally used for expansion in extra-urban geographies or with companies for whom medico marketing is secondary (such as OTC or Consumer Healthcare companies).

Pharma MNCs did more:

In addition, to increase sales revenue further, many pharma MNCs engaged themselves in co-promotion of their patented products with large local or global pharma companies operating in India, besides out-licensing. A few of them pushed further ahead by adopting newer innovative promotional models like, Patient Activation Teams, Therapy Specialists, or creating patient awareness through mass media.

Realizing quickly that patients are increasingly becoming important stakeholders in the business, some of the pharma MNCs started engaging them by extending disease management services, along with a clever mix of well-differentiated tangible and intangible product related value offerings, such as, Counseling, Starter kits, Diagnostic tests, Medical insurance, Emergency help, Physiotherapy sessions, and Call centers for chronic disease management, to name a few. Concerned doctors used to be reported about the status of the patients, who were not required to pay anything extra for availing these services from the MNC pharma companies.

Nevertheless, despite all these, declining productivity of the traditional pharma sales communication models continued, predominantly from the extremely busy and very high value medical practitioners/experts/specialists, as mentioned above.

The critical point that remained unaddressed:

At that time, pharma sales communication kept focusing on customer/market types and characteristics. Most companies missed the emerging order of unique customer preferences towards the medium of sales communication, and differentiated message requirements for each doctor. Not many pharma players could probably realize that MR’s quality of access to doctors for productive sales communication would emerge as one of the most critical issues, and become increasingly complex.

Leveraging technology for an effective response:

Amid all these experimentations with pharma sales and marketing models, a few companies did ponder over leveraging technology to chart a novel pathway for effectively addressing this emerging challenge. They tried to ascertain:

Whether the traditional sales approach would continue to be as relevant as opposed to digitally customized sales applications?
Whether MRs would continue to remain as relevant in all areas of pharma prescription generation process, in the years ahead?

First major venture in e-marketing:

Towards this direction, in 2013, Pfizer reportedly started using digital drug representatives to market medicines, leaving the decision in doctors’ hands as to whether they would want to see them.

Prior to that, in 2011, a paper published in the WSJ titled, “Drug Makers Replace Reps With Digital Tools” stated that pharmaceutical companies in the United States are downsizing their sales force with increasing usage of iPad applications and other digital tools for interacting with doctors.

Lot many other fascinating experimentations with pharma e-marketing have now commenced in several places of the world, many with considerable initial success. However, most of these efforts seem to be swinging from one end of ‘face-to-face’ sales communication with doctors, to the other end of ‘cyber space driven’ need-based product value sharing with customers through digital tool kits.

Blending the right communication-mix is critical:

Coming back to the AffinityMonitor 2015 Research Report, today pharmaceutical and biotech companies have at their disposal more than a dozen of promotional channels to include in their strategy, spanning across, from traditional methods to digital ones.

Some physicians still want to interact with MRs, others restrict MR detailing, as they prefer to get the required information from various credible websites, directly, and from their peers. One doctor may prefer to regularly use a mobile application for product information, while another similar physician may rarely wish to surf the Web for information to achieve the same purpose. Some others may simply not engage with any sales communication no matter what the channels are. Although overall accessibility to MRs is getting more restricted, some doctors are still more accessible than others, the report finds.

Segmenting doctors by their accessibility to personal promotion, such as, MRs and by non-personal promotion like other channels, including digital, allows pharma companies to identify potential gaps in their marketing approach.

For example, of the 54 percent of doctors who are less accessible to MRs, 15 percent show good accessibility to other channels. In other words, those doctors haven’t closed the door for good, just yet. Pharma companies can still reach them, provided they use the right approach, the report suggests. Drug companies would, therefore, require gathering specific information doctor-wise, and customizing both the medium and the message for effective brand value delivery, accordingly.

Sales and marketing avalanche too isn’t working:

This study revealed that a pharma company’s top 100 doctors receive as high as 423 contacts a year, and the top 10 doctors receive more than 600 each year. Given such volume, it’s easy to imagine how doctors can start to get buried under an avalanche of sales and marketing. It’s also easy to see how even the right message, in the right channel, to the right doctor, could get lost in all the noise, and may even create a bad customer experience for many physicians, the report concludes.

Conclusion:

The decline in pharma MR’s quality of access to physicians for brand communication is now well documented. Moreover, ‘one size fits all’ type of message, delivered even by the best of MRs, is unlikely to be productive in the changing macro environment.

Therefore, the right knowledge of whether a doctor would prefer to engage through traditional marketing and sales communication methods by meeting with an MR, or would just prefer to get his/her required information through any digital medium, is critical for success in the new ball game. This in turn will help generate the desired level of prescription support for any pharma brand.

Still, a majority the doctors’ choices in India would, possibly, involve MRs, while a good number of other important doctors’ choices may probably be independent of them. Nevertheless, from this emerging trend, it’s clear now that multi-channel engagement would be a new normal in pharma sales and marketing, sooner than later.

By: Tapan J. Ray

PILMAN

A Tapan Ray Website

Tag Archives: communication

This New Engagement Model Garners Significant Rewards For Pharma

Tame Physicians’ Digital Fatigue With Brand Message Overdose

Shape of Future Pharma Operations – Emerging A Pragmatic Outlook?

Still Evolving: Pharma’s New Pathway For Digital And F2F Customer Engagement

Is Pharma Communication In Sync With Doctors’ Expectations?

Should Pharma-Doctor Communication Be Also Gender-Specific?

Multi-channel Engagement: A New Normal In Pharma Marketing