Chris Thomas from Oxford PharmaGenesis – UK.
Chris’ Second Guest Blog
Appearing at the Thinking Pharma Blog in the last week of every month!
“Carrying the bag” 30 years ago was relatively easy.
Most doctors would see you.
The more primary care physicians (or GPs as they are called in the UK) you saw, the more prescriptions for your product would increase.
All you had to do was to make sure that the local pharmacy stocked your brand and you were laughing all the way to the squash court by late afternoon.
If you could get the local hospital consultant referring out your brand as well, you were in clover.
The first black cloud on the horizon was the introduction of hospital formularies and prescribing lists.
Suddenly your product may not be selected or even worse be deselected.
That’s OK-----you spend more time in hospitals and start to see the gatekeepers as well as the prescribers.
Pharmacists, Pharmacologists and Drug Committees now feature on your radar and perhaps a later squash court is booked.
Just when you think you have got it nailed, product supply also becomes an issue.
Generics initially, then parallel imports and even counterfeit products can all ruin your day and your sales figures.
But that was yester-year, where are we today?
The GP is increasingly the functionary who still physically writes the prescription but has little or no choice in choosing your brand.
But then who does?
And, how do we influence them and via what sort of sales interaction?
The Pharmaceutical Market today has evolved beyond all recognition.
The traditional Pharma selling model as we knew it is now no longer fit for purpose.
Market access is the buzz phrase as the key customers have changed from being the GPs to being the payers and influencers.
New decision-makers and their requirements demand a customized approach.
Can the customized approach be delivered by one multi-skilled representative?
It is more likely that each of the purple boxes on the right of the table will demand different skill sets.
They will certainly necessitate different materials and differentiated expert content.
The traditional detail driven sales call with the GP can no longer be the focus of the sales interaction.
Pharma companies now need help in identifying and operating within the payer-influencer network.
Perhaps new communication channels can be used with real-time access to expert resources, enabling ongoing dialogue with all relevant influencers.
Certainly a team selling approach will be needed, probably within a key account framework, to ensure that all the bases are covered within the influencer network.
Market access alone is not the new answer.
The traditional sales call may still have a role in driving usage and uptake following a successful market access campaign.
But what of the future?
Will the sales interaction shift from a push to a pull?
Imagine a Pharma market where the information on company products was stored on a centrally controlled or government run database.
GPs and decision makers would get their information from the database rather than from company representatives wearing one hat or another.
Big Pharma would supply information only to the central database.
Typically a top 10 Pharma company would spend up to 18% on R&D but up to 36% on marketing.
In this brave new world, the cost of sales would be significantly driven down but would the total cost of marketing change dramatically?
Maybe the marketing spend would stay the same but with a significant shift in emphasis towards spending more on advocacy and educational campaigns.
Given the current shrinkage in traditional sales forces, maybe the marketing mix is already changing in this direction anyway?
Good job I no longer carry the bag but now I’m too old to play squash as well!
(Tomorrow’s Post: Healthcare and Cures for the Poor World)
Comments