Tag Archives: pathway

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

Posted on by
Reply

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     

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.

 

Covid-19 Pushes Pharma To Walk The Talk of ‘Patient-Centricity’

Posted on by
Reply

Echoing many other industries, such as, Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG), pharmaceutical industry leaders, as well, have been talking about putting their customer at the center stage of strategic decision-making processes. In other businesses this grand intent is generally expressed as, ‘customer oriented’ or ‘customer-focused’, or ‘customer-driven’, besides several other similar expressions.

However, in the pharma industry this popular expression is widely talked about as ‘patient-centricity.’ Nonetheless, it is also generally believed that pharma leaders, weren’t hugely inclined to ‘walk this talk’ – until Covid-19 pandemic struck the world – very hard. In this article, I shall delve into this area, focusing on several aspects of it. Let me begin with, what COVID-19 has taught about pharma’s ‘patient-centricity’ efforts.

What COVID-19 has taught about pharma’s patient-centricity efforts:

A recent study, titled, ‘What COVID-19 has taught us about pharma’s patient centricity efforts,’ published by ZS on July 05, 2020, unravels some interesting findings in this area. Some of those points are as follows:

  • ZS’ mid-2019 ‘Patient Centricity Industry Study’ had found nearly universal agreement about the importance and significance of being patient-centric.
  • But the investment for the same did not match the intent, creating an “optimism gap” where senior leaders think more progress than middle the management.
  • At that time, while 73 percent of participants agreed that ‘patient centricity’ is fundamental to their organization, only 16 percent said they understood their individual role in the organization’s ‘patient centricity’ initiatives.
  • Whereas, during the past few months as the industry responds to Covid-19 pandemic, ‘pharma has demonstrated that it can quickly mobilize to surround and support patients, making the workforce focus on the patient priorities.
  • Over the past three months, organizations were found to look at new ways to engage with patients. For example, patient panels to continually check in and monitor the impact on the patient experience, connecting with patient advocacy groups – to get a pulse on critical needs and leveraging the field force to hear from physicians where their patients need the most help.
  • These companies are also investing now to understand the impact of Coronavirus on the patient and partner with others in the ecosystem.

Some interesting industry initiatives during Covid-19 pandemic:

This  ZS study noted, several pharma companies are showing great flexibility and creativity in tapping into their combined expertise and skills to support patients and the healthcare community, in a time of need. Some of the interesting examples cited in the paper include:

  • Pfizer rolled out a five-point plan, including an R&D SWAT team to support vaccine development.
  • Lilly, Merck and others banded together to help employees with relevant skills, volunteer on the front lines of treatment
  • Several other pharma companies have also joined with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to share data.

I hasten to add, according to this study, some industry leaders did agree that COVID-19 has proven that it’s possible to actually be more patient centric in business operations for better outcomes. However, many pharma players would still need to ‘walk this talk’ and put in hard work with adequate resources in getting there – the study noted.

Could ‘patient-centric pathway lead to post Covid-19 business recovery?

Just lip service on ‘patient-centricity’, as witnessed earlier, is unlikely cut any ice in the new normal, as people start living with the new Coronavirus, in everyday life. Making this more touted, but less practiced concept work on ground in pharma, is expected to be one of the effective pathways for early business recovery, as we move on.

The McKinsey article of May 12, 2020, titled ‘Pharma operations: The path to recovery and the next normal’ has also flagged this issue, alongside a few more. Similar to the findings of the above ZS study, this paper also noted that ‘leaders of operations in the pharmaceutical industry have been historically slow to respond to changing times. Interestingly, during COVID-19 pandemic, many of those leaders were found highly responsive to the new demand of time. They ‘rallied to enable the supply of key medicines across borders, manage workforce safety, and handle evolving government restrictions, while beginning to prepare for new vaccines and therapeutics, it noted.

More importantly, several companies have now put in place crisis-response command centers. These hubs play critical roles to appropriately manage and bring stability in an otherwise unstable time. From this experience, in my view, ‘patient-centricity’ could be an effective pathway to follow for post Covid-19 business recovery. Having said that, let me try to tighten some loose knots of understanding in this specific area, as below. To start with, let us together recapitulate a brief background of evolution of ‘patient-centricity’ concept in the drug industry.

“No decision about me, without me”:

Not so long ago, the National Health Service (NHS) of U.K realized that every patient should be as actively involved in making decisions about their health and health care as they wish to be. Accordingly, in 2012 it released the White Paper - ‘Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS,’ setting out the U.K Government’s vision of an NHS that puts patients and the public first, where “no decision about me, without me” is the norm.

The concept of ‘patient centricity’ in the pharma industry is believed to have grown from the above concept. The core idea of the concept, as defined in a BMJ article is, “Putting the patient first in an open and sustained engagement of the patient to respectfully and compassionately achieve the best experience and outcome for that person and their family”.

The authors envisage, effective implementation of the same would provide an opportunity for drug companies to adopt and use its core facets as reference points for patient engagement, throughout a product life cycle. In tandem, this also flags an important point: Why the concept of ‘patient-centricity’ is mostly talked so ‘passionately’ by almost all drug companies, while very few of them seem keen to ‘walk the talk?’

The key barriers to achieving ‘patient-centricity’:

The key puzzle on ‘Patient centricity: everyone wants it; not everyone gets it’, was well-deliberated by Reuters Events (Pharma), published on December 14, 2024. It pointed out – as an aim ‘patient-centricity’ is all too often overlooked, despite the fact that even several top pharma companies often express their desire to be patient centric organizations; such as:

  • “Inspired by patients, driven by science” (UCB);
  • “Science and patients…the heart of everything we do” (AstraZeneca);
  • “A global integrated healthcare leader focused on patients’ needs” (Sanofi).

Analyzing the overall reasons for the same, the paper articulated: ‘Difficulties in communication with patients, skepticism about their input, and unwillingness to relinquish control are some of the barriers to achieving patient centricity.’ Interestingly, this situation remains generally unchanged even today.

Conclusion:

Meanwhile, as recorded in the morning of September 06, 2020, total Coronavirus cases in India have reached a staggering figure of 4,113,811 with 70,679 deaths, despite every effort taken by the Government. As PTI reported on September 05, 2020: At the current pace, India will overtake Brazil early next week to become the country that has seen the second highest number of cases.’ With this perspective, let us now look at the concept of ‘patient-centricity’ for better treatment outcomes.

As deliberated earlier, just as providing affordable care for all – making ‘patent-centricity’ the centerpiece of the core business strategy for pharma, had remained akin to chasing the ‘Holy Grail’. This happened, despite last so many years one could easily spot inclusion ‘patient-centricity’ even in the corporate vision and mission statements of many drug companies.

As it appears today, the term ‘patient centricity’ remained another cliche, till Covid-19 disrupted the status quo of the old normal? But, will it last long? Only another robust study in the future, I reckon, will be able to confirm it. However, this would mostly depend on whether patients continue sending signals of: “No decision about me, without me,” for better health outcomes.

It’s not a terribly disputed fact, either that various stringent norms in the Covid lockdown period, have prompted many health care consumers switching from their good old health care practices, to the digital or online mode to meet with similar needs. Consequently, they are now becoming more digitally empowered than ever before. In this situation, leveraging AI with expert help, would help implement ‘patient-centricity’ more productively to meet challenges of the new normal.

If done with precision, it would help move even beyond ‘patient-centricity’ in the new normal, with better disease prevention or management and ‘connected healthcare,’ leading to better quality of lives for many. Thus, Covid-19 pandemic – pushing pharma to ‘Walk the Talk’ of ‘patient-centricity,’ if lasts long, could usher in a fundamental change in the health care space. It has demonstrated its huge potential during the ongoing pandemic to ensure patient-friendly, high quality, affordable and universal health care value delivery – for patients’ sake.

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.

Time For Predictive Rather Than Reactive Pharma Strategy

Posted on by
Reply

Traditionally, pharmaceutical industry, across the world, is mostly reactive – rather than proactive or predictive in its strategic approach – spanning across all its business domains. A large number of pharma players – both innovators and generic drug makers, formulate their business strategy – generally reacting to competition, changing market dynamics and patient/ doctor /other stakeholder preferences. The same is being witnessed even during Covid-19 pandemic. However, this trend seems to be more prevalent in India – as one looks around.

For example, in R&D – be it a statin drug, proton pump inhibitors and right up to monoclonal antibodies or cancer immunotherapies – after a first-in-class molecule comes, a plethora of ‘me-too’ – but patented molecules soon follow. A comparable trend in the generic drug categories is also all-pervasive, including fixed-dose combinations (FDCs).

Similarly, even in the good old days of sales and marketing, we have seen – after the first product detailing folder was successfully introduced by a leading pharma company in India, how competition lapped the concept up – considering this change as a magic wand for brand demand generation!

In recent days, a similar trend is surfacing for ‘Digitalization’ of pharma business, mostly reacting to the changing practices of key competitors, or involving patients or doctors’ preferences. It gets reflected in other business domains, as well. With this perspective, in this article, I shall deliberate on this area, especially in view of the current situation.

Traditional ‘safe sailing’ is no longer an option:

The Coronavirus pandemic could be a stronger catalytic factor for the drug industry to initiate the much-desired transition from being reactive to predictive in its strategic business approach- faster. Interestingly, way back in June 2007, the PwC Whitepaper titled “Pharma 2020: The vision”, had also articulated: ‘The social, demographic and economic context in which the pharmaceutical industry (Pharma) operates is changing dramatically.’

Some drug players have already opted to transform their organizations in sync with the changes in the operating environment. But, a vast majority of them preferred to stick to the traditional reactive mindset, for a safe sail, as it were. However, this doesn’t seem to be an option, any longer. Be that as it may, there is nothing wrong in being reactive in strategic business practices, although formulating a predictive or proactive growth strategy demands more cerebral prowess and is much different from the reactive ones.

The difference, I reckon, is similar to that of a leader and the followers, with nearly similar impact on overall corporate image and performance, besides a prime-mover advantage of the latter. Nevertheless, there could be a predictive approach even within a reactive approach to competition. To illustrate the point, let me cite an example related to ‘me-too’ – patented-drug development.

Making an overall reactive strategic approach proactive in nature: 

Among several examples of making a reactive strategic approach – proactive in nature with innovative goals, let me quote a very recent one. For decades, drug companies have been selling ‘me too’ but patented drugs, at prices similar to the original and ‘first-in-class’ drugs, which are successful and enjoying a market monopoly.

Moving away from this trend, a startup drug maker, reportedly, wants to disrupt the traditional pharma industry practices by delivering what most patients and healthcare stakeholders want. It has set a novel goal of becoming patient-centric in its offering by making innovative drugs available at affordable prices. The startup wants to achieve this objective ‘by changing long-held industry practices for developing, pricing, and selling slightly different versions of costly brand-name drugs.’

Accordingly, with a proactive or predictive approach within an overall ‘reactive’ trend, it wants to create a unique niche for itself. The entity ‘will focus on developing “me too” drugs, which imitate the biological functions of existing drugs, but use distinct molecular structures so they don’t infringe on existing drug patents.’

Evolving a new demand of value-based health care system:

During disruptive changes and uncertainties in the business environment, such as what is being experienced today, gaining actionable insight on how these changes will call for new strategies to excel, would require a predictive mindset. This is of critical importance, particularly when a new demand for a value-based health care system is fast unfolding. This subject was well deliberated also in the book – ‘Healthcare Disrupted: Next Generation Business Models and Strategies.’

About six years back what the authors of this book predicted, seems to be a reality today. They had said: The concept of “value” rules the day, undoubtedly. The transition from the old ‘fee-for-service’ to ‘fee for value’, is game changing. On the same subject, another article - Focus on Value 1: The “Tsunami of Change”, published in the ‘eye for pharma’ on March 22, 2026, quoted the authors of this book – explaining the scenario lucidly.

They said, today’s health care system is largely reactionary, as the health services react to the persistence of consumers, their phone calls, queuing for services, waiting in the waiting room and calls to healthcare insurers. Whereas, ‘tomorrow’s system would prompt the health care providers to answer a seemingly simple question: how will they become relevant to a customer group?

Even six years down the line, especially in the current global pandemic situation with an evolving demand of a value-based health care system, this concept remains so relevant, possibly more than ever before. That said, an unforeseen and unprecedented situation could also force a pharma player – already moving on a predictive strategic path, to choose a reactive path – mostly for survival and progress of business.

When a company moves into a ‘reactive’ path from a ‘predictive’ one:

Such instances are infrequent. But a major event like Covid -19 may give rise to such a situation. For example, in the Pharma and Biopharma R&D space, it happened and is still happening. As ‘Evaluate Vantage Covid-19 Report’ of April 16, 2020 highlighted, as follows:

‘Anyone thinking that 2020 might travel down a predictable path for the biopharma sector was swiftly disabused of this view in the opening weeks of the year. The Coronavirus pandemic has changed the focus for almost every drug developer, whether they are working on potential treatments or trying to keep their businesses on track – or both.’ Good or bad, this is the reality today.

However, many of these organizations are unlikely to jettison their well-thought out ‘predictive’ pathway and are expected to soon find ways to move back to it. Thus, the question that one may pose, how does a company move into a predictive pathway from a reactive one? And particularly considering, if Covid-19 pandemic has caused some irreversible changes, or even – a long-term change in the business environment.

Getting back to predictive strategic path from a reactive one:

This issue was also covered in the article – ‘Three Proactive Response Strategies to COVID-19 Business Challenges,’ published in the MIT Sloan Management Review, on April 17, 2020. It wrote, as organizations move from a reactive to a proactive approach to dealing with COVID-19, they should ask themselves the following three questions:

  • Can we offer a version of our products and/or services through an online channel? Going online is the closest equivalent to low-hanging fruit in the current environment.
  • Can we use our existing infrastructure to produce products and/or offer services that are in demand?  Many organizations have allocated infrastructure to produce goods and services to support the fight against COVID-19, but some strategic companies would think beyond the crisis to future changes in consumer needs.
  • How can we rapidly increase our capacity to produce and distribute on-demand products and/or services?  Turning to partnerships with other companies can boost capacity in a crunch situation, such as today.

The need for collaboration, in such extraordinary situation, has also been underscored by the European Pharmaceutical Review. It pointed out - how academia, government and the pharmaceutical industry can work together to potentially ‘repurpose drugs’ for the treatment of COVID-19. This is another example of formulating a predictive growth strategy to create a win-win situation, while being in the midst of a reactive one.

Conclusion:

Meanwhile, despite national Lockdowns at a very early stage on March 24, 2020, India has now climbed up to occupy the fourth highest position in terms of the number of Coronavirus infected cases. Continuing the steep ascending trend, as on June 14, 2020 morning, the recorded Coronavirus cases in the country reached 321,616 with 9,199 deaths.

During the current global pandemic of a humongous scale, drug companies are trying to respond to rapid challenges across their business operations, right from planned R&D programs to effectively maintaining supply chain, including manufacturing activities. If the current COVID-19 pandemic lasts for medium/long term, there could also be significant delays in the execution of various other ongoing projects/programs. This was the analysis of Deloitte in a paper, titled, ‘COVID-19 response for Pharma companies – Respond. Recover. Thrive’

While the full impact of the Coronavirus pandemic is still unknown, adopting a predictive strategy in the prevailing overall reactive environment, is expected to yield a significantly better business performance. As I said earlier, the core difference between adopting a ‘predictive’ and a ‘reactive’ business pathway, under the circumstances, is akin to the difference between a leader and a follower.

Unlocking the value innovation in all areas of pharma business is the name of the game, for excellence. Leveraging Artificial Intelligence (AI) based contemporary ‘predictive’ tools will help pharma players break the new ground, even in such trying times. Coming from this perspective, a ‘predictive’ strategy rather than a ‘reactive’ one, apparently, is the demand of time – where we all are in – today.

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.

Restart Pharma Demand Generation Activities With Actionable Insight

Posted on by
Reply

As the ‘Lockdown. 04’ in India passes by, a time comes to press the restart button of all business activities in the country, in a calibrated manner, though, keeping in mind, the Covid-19 cases is yet to find its peak in the country. The process would naturally include all activities of the pharma industry. And more specifically, the prescription demand generation activity, where personal selling has remained pivotal in all these years.

But now, while living with the new Coronavirus, it would require greater cerebral interventions of astute pharma marketers. Creating an innovative pathway for recovery – driven by actionable insights, through an agile and digitally empowered workforce, would be the name of the game for success. In this article, I shall focus on this important area, as the industry moves on.

The bedrock of the new pathway:

The ‘restarting’ process of the prescription demand generation mechanism, I reckon, would no longer be the same ball game. It will now entail gaining cutting-edge actionable insights on the evolving dynamics of the changing business processes. It involves customers’ new preferences for consumption in the healthcare space and ascertaining the most effective demand generation processes or tools in the prevailing new normal.

Therefore, the bedrock of the new pathway, in my view, will necessarily need to be based on:

  • A huge pool of relevant, credible and preferably real-time ‘Data.’
  • ‘Information’ obtained by analyzing the ‘Data’ as desired.
  • ‘Actionable Insight’ gathered from the collected ‘information.’

The encouraging point is, several companies, even in India, have already started testing the water to chart the way forward.

Some fundamental changes in the path to recovery:

The McKinsey article of May 12, 2020 titled, ‘Pharma operations: The path to recovery and the next normal,’ also noted: ‘Given the shifts that have taken place seemingly overnight in response to the immediate crisis, companies are also turning their attention to recovery and the path to the next normal. It will likely bring about fundamental changes in pharma operations.’

Besides, the future of work will become more remote and distributed, and demand may shift to new capabilities and talent. Moreover, ‘the post-COVID-19 workforce and organization will also likely adopt new, more efficient ways of working.’ Thus, pharma organizations should consider adapting quickly in the path to the next normal, the article added.

The change and increasing relevance of ‘Data’, ‘Information’ and ‘Insight’: 

While discussing about ‘Data’, ‘Information’ and ‘Actionable Insight,’ let us first try to understand the differences between each of these three. Voccii, the US based market research firm, captured this difference eloquently, as follows:

  • Data: the raw and unprocessed facts, captured according to some agreed-upon standards. It could be a number, an image, an audio clip, a transcription, or similar.
  • Information: the data that has been processed, aggregated, and organized into a more human-friendly format. Data visualizations, reports and dashboards are common ways to present information.
  • Insight: gained by analyzing data and information to understand the context of a particular situation and draw conclusions. Those conclusions lead to actions that one can apply to business operations.

To facilitate the process of desired changes, translating research data into actionable insights will now be a crucial strategic input. In fact, these are essential while recomposing notes in pharma sales and marketing playbook, more than ever before. Notably, it has now been established in other industries that actionable insights facilitate prompt business process transformation, putting the organization ahead of competition for excellence.

What really are ‘actionable insights?’

Although, these two words are self-explanatory, it’s better to reiterate again – what ‘actionable insights’- based ventures are. It will help all to be on the same page while reading this piece. As I understand, ‘actionable insights’ mean gaining an accurate and deep understanding of someone or something or some situation based on relevant and credible data, that can help generate specific actions for a successful outcome.

However, what generally happens instead, and particularly in the Indian pharma industry, is usually very different. Quite often, many marketers get drowned in a large pool of available data and information, sans the cerebral skill of gaining actionable insights out of those – they start relying more on their ‘gut-feel’. As a result, ‘gut feel’ driven actions try to be in the driver’s seat, rather than data-based ‘actionable insights’ of high value.

Digital insights would be ‘The new currency of business’ in the new normal:

Today, it’s not quite uncommon to find pharma companies, especially in India, having loads of data and information. What they perhaps need to learn is, how to convert those inputs into actionable insights, the lack of which could make even the best of market research initiatives unproductive. That’s why, around the world, many believe that Digital Insights Are The New Currency Of Business. More so, in the new normal of living with Covid-19.

The article – ‘Actionable Insights: The Missing Link Between Data And Business Value,’ published in Forbes on April 26, 2016 also emphasized this point. It said. ‘With many companies struggling to make sense of their data and create value with their big data investments, the promise of actionable insights sounds wonderful. Forrester reports 74% of firms say they want to be “data-driven,” but only 29% are actually successful at connecting analytics to action. Actionable insights appear to be the missing link for companies that want to drive business outcomes from their data.’

Harvesting insights from data can fetch huge financial returns for the company. Which is why, sitting at the apex of the data pyramid, actionable insights help drive strategic action. It prompts rethink the status quo, pushing marketers to move into a new strategic direction. From this perspective, in the new normal of living with Coronavirus, actionable insight based unique brand strategy, content development and the process for reaching out to patients, doctors and other health care consumers, I consider, will decide the degree of business success.

Some focus areas for ‘actionable insights’ in the changing scenario:

Although, ‘actionable insights’ would help strategize a whole new chain of activities for increasing ‘prescription demand generation,’ some of these areas, for example, may include:

  • Capturing changes in patients’ behavior and preferences, specifically during the national ‘Lockdown’ period, besides, ‘compliance to social-distancing’ norms.
  • New ways of regrouping patient population, alongside, effective content creation and choosing right platforms for a sharper focus on them in the new situation. 
  • Doctors’ changing preferences for interacting with drug companies for the same reasons.
  • Making remote prescription demand generating actions highly productive, ensuring a cutting-edge over the competition.
  • Taking a quantum leap in improving the level of engagement for a greater share of mind with doctors, patients and other stakeholders, without bombarding them with ‘me-too’ emails, messages and calls. 

Conclusion:

As the ‘Lockdown. 04’ in India – the second most populous country of the world – ends, as on May 31, 2020 morning, the recorded Coronavirus cases in the country reached 182,490 with 5,186 deaths. Comparing the same with the most populous country of the world – China, where Covid-19 struck first ever – in December 2019, one finds it recording 83,001 cases with 4634 deaths, on the same day.

Be that as it may, after the national ‘Lockdown’ of about two and half months to save lives, it’s about time to restart initiatives for the livelihood of millions of Indians. Accordingly, pharma industry would also hit the restart button of its all business activities in the country – understandably, in a calibrated manner. The restart would include one of its most critical activities – generation of prescription demand, where personal selling has been pivotal in the years passed by. Several research studies have already highlighted a changing pattern in this area.

In the coming days of work while living with Covid-19, all would need to take measures to prevent the Coronavirus infection. Thus, strict compliance with the social distancing guidelines and other norms, as prescribed by the Government, will be ne necessary for all. This would also make the working life of pharma professionals, along with the practices of its stakeholders, significantly different from the traditional past.

From this perspective, while reaching for the restart button in the new normal, pharma sales and marketing leadership would need to create an innovative pathway to recovery. This would call for actionable insights about changes in the behavioral and preference pattern, especially of the healthcare consumers and providers. These will be absolutely critical for commercial success in the ‘new world,’ as it were – more than ever before.

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.

A Tipping Point For Robust Healthcare System In India

Posted on by
Reply

“Given the popular uptake of universal health coverage reforms elsewhere in Asia, the Feb 4 elections may be a tipping point for health in India. For example, in 2012, Joko Widodo was elected Governor of Jakarta. He launched popular UHC reforms in the capital and 2 years later was elected president. In 2016, voters in the USA and UK supported politicians prepared to act on the concerns of the electorate. If health becomes a populist cause in India, rather than a political inconvenience, then the country might finally be liberated to achieve health outcomes commensurate with its economic and technical achievements”, is exactly what appeared in the editorial of The Lancet, titled “Health in India, 2017,” published on January 14, 2017.

The Lancet Editor further reiterated: “Because states have responsibility for health, the elections will raise the importance of access to quality, affordable health care in India, regardless of the electoral outcome. It is a debate that needs to be fostered.”

This is, of course, a ‘top-down’ approach for healthcare, as seen in several countries across the world. However, I have recently deliberated another approach in the same area on – why a ‘bottom-up’ demand is not forthcoming in India, in an article titled ‘Healthcare in India And Hierarchy of Needs’, published in this blog on November 06, 2017.

No one, including any Government, would possibly ever argue – why shouldn’t a robust public healthcare system in a country, including the availability of reasonably affordable drugs, assume as much priority as economic growth and education?

On the contrary, Governments in several other countries, including those with a well-functioning Universal Healthcare (UHC) in place, are trying to ensure even better and greater access to healthcare for all, by various different means. In this article, I shall focus on it, in a holistic way.

Exploring a bottom-up approach:

It is increasingly becoming more evident that a bottom-up approach would help yield greater success in this area, with a win-win outcome. It will involve taking the stakeholders on board in the process of framing and implementing healthcare projects within a given time-frame. The question then arises, why is it still not happening on the ground in India the way it should? Just floating a discussion paper on draft projects and policies, for stakeholders’ inputs, isn’t enough any longer. There is a need to move much beyond that in making these decisions more inclusive.

Various successive Governments may have some justifiable funding related or other pressing issues to offer a robust public healthcare system in India. But, none of these will be an insurmountable barrier, if more number of heads of astute stakeholders are involved in ferreting out an effective and implementable India-specific solution in this area, within a pre-determined timeline.

There are examples of remarkable progress in this direction, by involving stakeholders in charting out a workable pathway, agreed by all, and jointly implemented in a well-calibrated and time bound manner. Equally important is to make this plan known to the public, so that the Government can be held accountable, if it falls short of this promise, or even misses any prescribed timeline.

‘The Accelerated Access Pathway’ initiative:

Let me now draw an interesting example of involving stakeholders by the Government to improve patient access to expensive and innovative drugs. This example comes from a country that is running one of the oldest and most efficient UHC in the world – the United Kingdom.

Despite a robust UHC being in place, the National Health Service (NHS) in England had a perennial problem to make ‘breakthrough’ medicines available early to NHS patients. The British pharma industry reportedly had a long-held complaint that patients in England get a raw deal when it comes to accessing the latest medicines.

According to a reported study by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) and endorsed by the charity Cancer Research UK, average British patients get lower access to leading cancer medicines than their European counterparts.

To resolve this issue effectively, the British Government launched ‘The Accelerated Access Pathway initiative’. Former GSK global CEO Sir Andrew Witty was named as the chairman of this collaborative body. The scheme, launching from April 2018, will see approvals of cutting-edge treatments for conditions like cancer, dementia and diabetes dramatically speeding up. The pathway is expected to get ‘breakthrough’ medicines to NHS patients up to four years earlier, as the report, published in ‘The Telegraph’ on November 3, 2017 indicates.

It is believed that ‘Accelerated Access Collaborative’ initiative would benefit the NHS patients, as well as deliver significant long-term savings for the health service.

Similar initiatives may be effective in India:

Taking collaborative initiatives, such as above, may not be absolutely new in India. However, in a real sense, Indian initiatives are no more than top-down approaches, and not in any way be termed as bottom-up. Moreover, these usually originate in the form of Government discussion papers inviting comments from the stakeholders.

Moreover, in the healthcare policy related arena, there is no subsequent firm resolve by the Government to chart out a clear pathway for its effective implementation, with specific timelines indicated for each step, besides assigning individual accountability for delivering the intended deliverables.

Any such decisive move by the government, keeping all stakeholders engaged is quite rare to come across in our country, as yet. Thus, carefully selected outside expert group suggestions based – the National Health Policies also have met with the same fate, without possibly any exception, thus far.

Two illustrations:

I shall illustrate the above point with two top-of-mind examples. The first one is a report – the ‘High Level Expert Group (HLEG)’ report on ‘Universal Health Coverage (UHC)’ for India, submitted to the erstwhile Planning Commission in November 2011. The other example is of a policy – the National Health Policy (NHP) 2017, which is in place now, based on a report by an expert committee constituted by the Government.

Let me now briefly recapitulate both – one by one, as follows:

The report on ‘Universal Health Coverage (UHC)’ for India

The ‘High Level Expert Group (HLEG)’ on ‘Universal Health Coverage (UHC)’ was constituted by the Planning Commission of India in October 2010, with the mandate of developing a framework for providing easily accessible and affordable health care to all Indians.

While financial protection for healthcare was the principal objective of this initiative, it was recognized that the delivery of UHC also requires the availability of adequate health infrastructure, skilled health workforce, access to affordable drugs and technologies to ensure the entitled level and quality of healthcare is delivered to every citizen.

The report further highlighted, the design and delivery of health programs and services call for efficient management systems as well as active engagement of empowered communities.

The original terms of reference directed the HLEG to address all of these needs of UHC. Since the social determinants of health have a profound influence not only on the health of populations, but also on the ability of individuals to access healthcare, the HLEG decided to include a clear reference to them.

Nevertheless, this report was never acted upon for its effective implementation. Now, with the change in Government, HLEG recommendations for UHC in India seems to have lost its relevance, altogether.

The National Health Policy (NHP) 2017

The new Government that subsequently came to power, decided to start afresh with a brand new and modern National Health Policy in India, replacing the previous one framed 15 years ago in 2002. NHP 2017 promises healthcare in an ‘assured manner’ to all, by addressing the challenges in the changing socioeconomic, epidemiological and technological scenarios. Accordingly, the National Health Policy 2017 was put in place, early this year.

To achieve the objectives, NHP 2017 intends to raise public healthcare expenditure to 2.5 percent of GDP from the current 1.4 percent. Interestingly, no visible signal about the seriousness on implementation of this laudable initiative has reached the public, just yet.

Let’s now wait for the next year’s budget to ascertain whether the policy objective of ‘healthcare in an assured manner to all’ would continue to remain a pipe dream, as happened in earlier budget proposals. It is noteworthy that union budget allocation on health did not go up, at least, in the last 3 years, despite categorical assurances by the ministers on increasing focus on healthcare.

Significant increase in both the union and the state governments budgetary allocation for healthcare is necessary. This is because, besides many other intents, NHP 2017 intends to provide free diagnostics, free drugs and free emergency and essential healthcare services in all public hospitals for healthcare access and financial protection to all.

Universal Healthcare is the core point in both:

The core focus of both – the HLEG report and also the NHP 2017, is UHC in India, but with different approaches. When HLEG report was not translated into reality, the 2014 general election in India was widely expected to be the tipping point for a new public healthcare landscape in the country fulfilling this promise. More so, as the public healthcare system is generally in a shamble throughout the country, except in a handful of states.

Just as in the United States, Europe or Japan, “if health becomes a populist cause in India, rather than a political inconvenience, then the country might finally be liberated to achieve health outcomes commensurate with its economic and technical achievements,” as the above Lancet editorial commented.  Giving yet another perspective, I also wrote in my blog post, titled ‘Healthcare in India And Hierarchy of Needs’ on November 06, 2017, why has it not happened in India, as on date.

Conclusion:

What happens, if the Indian Government too adopts a major collaborative approach, such as ‘The Accelerated Access Pathway’ initiatives, involving all stakeholders – including the pharma and device industry leaders to implement UHC in the country – part by part?

The relevant counter question to this should not be – Will that work? Of course, it will, if the Government wants to. On the contrary, it could be a potential ‘Tipping Point’ to create a robust public healthcare landscape in India. Thus, the real question that we should ask ourselves: Why won’t it work, when all stakeholders are on board to pave the pathway for an efficient Universal Healthcare system in India, in a win-win way?

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.

Biosimilars: Creating new vistas of opportunities for Indian Bio Pharmaceutical players in the global market.

Posted on by
Reply

Biosimilar or follow-on biologic drugs market is fast evolving across the world with varying degree of pace and stages of developments. The global market for Bio-pharmaceuticals was around US$ 120 billion in 2008, as reported by IMS. However, total turnover of Biosimilar drugs in the regulated markets during the same period was just US$ 60 million.

Currently about 25% of New Molecular Entities (NMEs) under development are of biotech origin. Indian pharmaceutical majors like Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories (DRL), Reliance Life Science, Shantha Biotech, Ranbaxy, Biocon, Wockhardt and Glenmark have made good investments in biotech drugs manufacturing facilities keeping an eye on the emerging opportunities with Biosimilar drugs in the developed markets of the world.

International Scenario:

Internationally most known companies in the Biosimilar drugs space are Teva, Stada, Hospira and Sandoz.

The first R&D focused global pharmaceutical company that expressed interest in this space is Merck & Co. In December 2008 Merck announced creation of ‘Merck Bio Venture’ for this purpose with an investment commitment of around US$ 1.5 billion by 2015.

Other large research based global innovator pharmaceutical companies, which so far have expressed interest in the field of Biosimilar drugs are Pfizer, Astra Zeneca and Eli Lilly.

Future market Potential:

IMS Health, July 2009 reports that only in the US from 2009 to 2013 about 8 major biologic products like for example, Enbrel (Amgen/J&J), Lovenox (Sanofi-Aventis), Zoladex (AstraZeneca), Mabthera (Roche), Humalog (Eli Lilly) and Novorapid (Novo Nordisk) are expected to go off patent. The sum total of revenue from these drugs will be over U.S$ 15 billion.

This throws open immense opportunities for the Indian companies working on Biosimilar drug development initiatives.

Regulatory pathway for Biosimilar drugs:

Currently EU is the largest Biosimilar market in the world. Immense healthcare cost containment pressure together with a large number of high value biologics going off patent during next five years, especially in the developed western markets like US and EU, are creating a new vista of opportunities in this field to the potential players.

Regulatory pathway for Biosimilar drugs exists in the European Union (EU) since 2005. In the USA President Barak Obama administration has already expressed its clear intention to have similar pathway established in the country through the US-FDA, which is expected to come by 2010.

Steps taken by the Indian pharmaceutical companies towards this direction:

Biosimilar version of Rituxan (Rituximab) of Roche used in the treatment of Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has already been developed by DRL in India. Last year Rituxan clocked a turnover of over US$ 2 billion. DRL also has developed filgastrim of Amgen, which enhances production of white blood-cell by the body, and markets the product as Grafeel in India. Similarly Ranbaxy has collaborated with Zenotech Laboratories to manufacture G-CSF. Meanwhile Biocon of Bangalore has commenced clinical trial of Insugen for the regulated markets like EU.

On the other hand Glenmark is planning to come out with its first biotech product by 2010 from its biological research establishment located in Switzerland.

Within Biopharmaceuticals the focus is on Oncology:

Within Biopharmaceuticals many of these domestic Indian pharmaceutical companies are targeting Oncology disease area, which is estimated to be the largest segment with a value turnover of over US$ 55 billion by 2010 growing over 17%. As per recent reports about 8 million deaths take place all over the world per year due to cancer. May be for this reason the research pipeline of NMEs is dominated by oncology with global pharmaceutical majors’ sharp R&D focus and research spend on this particular therapy area. About 50 NMEs for the treatment of cancer are expected to be launched in the global markets by 2015.

Indian market for oncology products:

Current size of the Indian oncology market is around US$ 18.6 million, which is expected to be over US$ 50 million by the end of 2010; the main reason being all these are and will be very expensive products. Biocon has just launched its monoclonal antibody based drug BIOMAb-EGFR for treating solid tumours with an eye to introduce this product in the western markets, as soon as they can get regulatory approval from these countries. Similarly, Ranbaxy with its strategic collaboration with Zenotech Laboratories is planning to market oncology products in various markets of the world like Brazil, Mexico, CIS and Russia.

Conclusion:

As the R&D based global innovator companies are now expanding into the Biosimilar space, many Indian domestic pharmaceutical companies are also poised to leverage their R&D initiatives on Biosimilars drugs development to fully encash the emerging global opportunities in this space. It is quite prudent for the Indian players to focus on the Oncology therapy area, as it is now the fastest growing segment in the global pharmaceutical industry.

By Tapan 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.