August « 2011 « Return On Focus --- http://returnonfocus.com --- Return On Focus

Reactive Market Research During Brand Planning

August 26, 2011

Physicians (And Patients) Are Moved by Stories, Not Statements

I recently received my second report of a ‘failed’ messaging research project from a client that was looking to ROF for some evidence-based diagnostics (or as I call it . . . sanity check).  Both Clients used the term ‘failed’, not I.  In looking at the stimuli and methodologies for both projects, I came back to a simple tenet that I learned long ago from personal selling.  The tenet is that physicians are moved by stories—not statements—and these stories must be written for them, not by them.

Doctors are not marketers, yet traditional messaging validation techniques often ask them to act as if they were, by laying out dozens of discrete messages before them and then asking them to rank which are most compelling.  This democratic approach to message development is comforting yet suboptimal, because it gives the client a false sense of security that the brand messages are being presented in the right order.

There are two fundamental flaws in this approach at the end of the day.  First, physicians are human beings and as such, they base their decisions on reality, not potential reality. It is really just simple human nature.  Opinions are grounded in what is and not what can be, which allows them to quickly discard messages that don’t align with today’s reality.  There is much evidence within communication theory that demonstrates, quite simply, that we don’t know what we want until it’s been shown to us.

Second, is the difference between presenting robust factual evidence and the power of a compelling story based on these facts.  The vogue term now is “storytelling” because it accurately describes how most people process and internalize information – as part of a story with a beginning, middle, and end.  What physicians ultimately remember is a theme or vision, not a series of disconnected bullet point messages.

It’s time to step out of your comfort zone and start telling your Brand story. Not sure how?  Give us a call.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

August 18, 2011

Does an Increase in Treatment Options Directly Correlate to an Increase in Patient Involvement?

A Client recently asked me to weigh-in on a debate the marketing team was having regarding the role of patients in a specialty care category that was becoming more crowded with treatment options. The question was simple:
Does patient involvement in the treatment decision-making process increase or decrease as more therapies come on the market in rapid succession?

It’s a great question, especially for categories like prostate cancer or hepatitis C where multiple new product entrants have been introduced over the last 18 months. My counsel to the Client was to closely examine the potential factors that influence ownership over the treatment decision-making process.

  • MD ‘Involvement’ – to what degree do physicians believe that the category is a high involvement category for them? In other words, does the physician believe his/her consideration is essential to the patient’s outcome? It’s not binary, but scaled. In categories that are low involvement for physicians (allergies), patients have the potential to play a larger ownership role.
  • Patient ‘Involvement’ – to what degree do patients themselves believe that their involvement is essential to the outcome of their treatment? Classic example is breast cancer where even before women are diagnosed, they have been conditioned to believe that they should play a significant role in this disease.
  • Symptomatic vs. Asymptomatic disease – to what extent does the disease itself impact the current QOL of the patient? Less impact, less patient decision-making. Classic example here is hypertension drugs. There are a ton of them, but they’ve never really been able to move the patient needle because it’s hard to secure end user involvement in this class. “I feel good and I don’t fully appreciate the risks of having high blood pressure, so I don’t understand why I should be involved.”
  • Symptomatic vs. Asymptomatic treatment – to what extent does the patient feel the effects of the treatment itself? It starts with side effects, but it could also include efficacy. If multiple products in a category have varying side effects or varying dosing schedules, physicians often allow patients to play a larger role. We see this with treatments for rheumatoid arthritis that have varying toxicity profiles and modes/timing of administration. These treatments often drive increased patient involvement in the decision-making process.

The outcome of this discussion was a more structured analysis of the key questions with a listing of the corresponding hypotheses and support (or lack thereof).

What are your thoughts? What criteria am I missing?

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

August 12, 2011

Five Things You Should Know if You’re in Commercial Product Development

Filed under: Marketing Effectiveness,What We Think — Tags: — dreinhardt @ 10:57 am

Evidence-based marketing, just like evidence-based medicine, works best when it’s practiced from the start. In pharmaceutical and biotech marketing, “the start” is better known as the commercial development process.

At ROF, we have been fortunate to attract a cadre of Clients with molecules in Phase II that have a strong desire to maximize the success of the molecules with evidence-base marketing. Five themes have emerged in our work worth sharing:

  1. Commercial Development Playbook is Outdated – For all the discussions about re-engineering development and fusing it with commercial insights, most companies are still working from a playbook created in the 1990s that is not aligned with today’s market dynamics.

  2. Need to Pre-Position Before You Get Pre-Positioned – Rapid, global transfer of scientific information via the web and now mobile, eliminates the ability to leisurely groom your brand persona and positioning over a series of years.
  3. Marketing Needs a Seat at the Clinical Table – Clinical can’t be solely driven by the minimums set by the FDA for approval and the futuristic insights of thought leaders who have limited insight into the everyday goings on of community physicians that will ultimately treat 95% of the population.
  4. Not All Opinion Leaders Have Medical Degrees – With the speed and democratization of scientific data thanks to the web, consumer opinion leaders are sprouting up. The “influentials” leverage insights and social media platforms to shape opinions of entire communities.
  5. Intensified Scrutiny Requires Intensified Evidence – Given the pressure for pipelines to perform, objective evidence provides the touchstone for the commercial development team to make informed decisions to maximize the success of the molecule.

There is not another time in the brand lifecycle where the need for evidence is as intense as in the commercial development phase. This applies to clinical and commercial. Every dollar spent is an investment. At ROF, we’re financial planners for our clients.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

August 7, 2011

Reactive Market Research During Brand Planning

There’s an important distinction to be made between reactive and proactive market research as it relates to brand planning. It’s August and we’re seeing a number of our clients scrambling to conduct physician and patient research to help answer important questions from the brand team. The plan is to use this information to aid in the development of strategic and tactical recommendations for 2012, but there is very little time left to complete it and even less time to do it with the appropriate rigor. A more proactive approach to market research as it relates to brand planning is warranted.

The harried pace of reactive research could easily be alleviated by implementing a system of quarterly check-in meetings with your team versus the current annual pre-planning review. Start the process of convening your extended team at the end of each quarter and use these meetings to think about the following year. What key issues is your brand facing that will need to be addressed? What are the key unknowns concerning your prescribers and users? What research or analysis needs to be conducted to answer these questions?

At ROF, a central part of our business lies in conducting Level of Evidence Appraisals for our clients. We formulate a set of core hypotheses related to brand strategic / marketing issues or specific brand investments and then review and align the existing evidence against them. This process provides the foundation to then identify the key research needs and proactively formulate an action plan that attains the necessary information.

I realize in the day-to-day craziness of brand marketing, it is often extremely difficult to think about getting out in front of brand planning months in advance. But conducting quarterly issue meetings or performing an LOE early in the year will make it easier for your entire team and will allow for ample time to conduct worthwhile research that yields reliable results.

Think about it.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare
Follow us on
Pinterest Twitter slideshare
Contact Us
XXX
YYY

Powered by WordPress