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

The Potential Perils of Over-Relying on Expert Advice — A Visionary Tale

September 30, 2011

Help! I’m Drowning in Adherence-Enhancing Interventions

Filed under: Marketing Effectiveness,Patient Marketing,What We Think — dreinhardt @ 10:41 am

Leave it to biopharma to over-correct and make improving adherence (compliance+persistency) more of an issue that it needs to be.
Why do I say that?

When I’m doing my second level of evidence appraisal this month that recommends a ‘harmonization’ strategy due to an over-abundance of adherence-enhancing interventions, I know we have an issue in the industry.

I’ll suspend disbelief and assume that you already know the factors (and weighting) that impact adherence for your brand. Once you have the factors, you should then ask yourself the following questions (In this order), before selecting an intervention:

  1. What is the desired behavior change I’m looking for?
  2. What is my company’s ability to influence this behavior directly given my known constraints?
  3. What is the key messaging point that I could deliver?
  4. How likely is that message point to stimulate the desired behavior change?
  5. How would I measure the change (i.e., metric)?
  6. Is there some other party that could more effectively address the desired behavior?

We have worked with our clients to literally line up the answers to these questions against the factors driving non-adherence in an Excel model to quickly identify the optimal set of adherence-enhancing interventions for their brands.

Not sure where to start? I’m happy to help.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

September 23, 2011

Pre-Launch Unbranded Communication Follows Desired Launch Communication Platform

Biopharma has unbranded message development backwards. There I said it! How in the world can you define your unbranded message platform if you don’t know where you’re headed with your brand message platform? Market education or development activities aren’t altruistic. These activities are supposed to educate the market in a way that helps the target audience understand how to appropriately use and differentiate your product quickly after launch.

Communication Platform AnatomyIt has been our experience in applying evidence-based marketing to communication development over the past 5 years that the identification of key educational messaging prescripts is essential for accelerating launch uptake. Educational prescripts are basically the unbranded messages that serve to quicken internalization of a promotional story and can be linked to intensified product adoption at launch. Quantitative evidence supports this.

Recent work that we did related to a Client launch of a forecasted billion-dollar brand demonstrated (with a P value) that internalization of key educational prescripts prior to launch, not only increased onset of prescribing, but depth of prescribing as well. A subsequent study with early adopters provided additional evidence and validation of the criticality of educational prescripts in launch platform development. Uncovering these prescripts and incorporating them into the launch communication platform is essential for success in today’s market.

With educational prescripts in hand, only then are you able to define and invest in appropriate unbranded pre-marketing activities!

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

September 15, 2011

Adherence… A Two-Sided Equation

When you’re thinking about adherence related to your brand, are you solely focused on what you can do to help patients be more compliant and persistent with their therapy? Well, if you are, you could be missing a really significant contributor to non-adherence—prescribers.

I know what you’re thinking… Doctors want their patients to take all of their medication, so how can they be contributing to non-adherence? Well, research shows that doctors can impede adherence through a number of means.

The first, and perhaps one of the more well known of these, is ineffective patient expectation setting. Most of the time, HCPs don’t do a great job of letting patients know what they can expect from their treatment. It’s especially poor when the patient has been treated for the same condition previously. Doctors may not talk about side effects because they fear they will scare the patients away from treatment. They don’t really talk about benefits because they worry about making promises related to efficacy. And, they don’t talk about how the drug works because they think patients don’t care or would not understand. You can see where this is going, right?

Patients are often leaving their doctor with a prescription, but with limited understanding as to why they are taking it. And patients who aren’t able to attach a value proposition to their brand are much less likely to remain adherent. What’s their reason to believe?

A lesser-known contributor to non-adherence by prescribers is that they often don’t reinforce the importance of medication adherence with patients. It turns out that physicians often give patients permission to skip doses when it comes to taking their medicines—noting that if they miss some doses it’s OK and unlikely to have an impact on their outcome. Furthermore, physicians have reported that they do not like to confront their patients about adherence because they feel it undermines the trust in their relationship. If doctors aren’t going to demand full adherence from patients, how can we expect that patients will strive for it themselves?

So when you’re thinking about adherence related to your drug, be sure you put your prescribing docs under the microscope as well. What you find there might surprise you and can drastically impact how you invest dollars to improve your brand’s duration of use.

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

September 11, 2011

Are the Limitations of Print Limiting Brand Differentiation?

Filed under: Marketing Effectiveness,Patient Marketing,What We Think — dreinhardt @ 9:52 pm

A recent DTC Ad unit stuck with me and poignantly illustrated one of the reasons that DTC advertising via print is going to be marginalized. It won’t happen quickly enough for those of us who focus on evidence-based marketing, but it’s still going that way.

Let’s forget for a minute that while Print (magazines + newspapers) makes up just 15% of channel consumption, we spend 32% of our industry dollars in that channel (Source: Forrester Research)—I’ll tackle that one in Part 2 of this blog post. I want to focus on the messages and the ability to quickly differentiate your product when the consumer spends the 2-3 seconds determining whether or not to engage in your ad.

The category that I’m looking at is the ultra-competitive DTC category of diabetes medications. Let me give you the headline and all the sub-heads, which you would expect to have some level of stopping power and differentiation in a crowded category.

  • No Matter How Hard You Try, Your Blood Sugar Numbers Can Still Be Too High
  • Ask Your Doctor if Adding Product X Can Help You
  • May Reduce Spikes After You Eat
  • Important Safety Information

If you’re reading this blog, you’re undoubtedly a steward of the industry. What brand are we talking about here? Have no idea? Well, that’s exactly my point!

Ok, it’s for illustration purposes, but you see where I’m going here—if you can’t communicate the key differentiator for your brand in print, why on earth would you be doing it?

TwitterLinkedInFacebookPinterestGoogle ReaderShare

September 2, 2011

The Potential Perils of Over-Relying on Expert Advice — A Visionary Tale

Filed under: Marketing Effectiveness,Professional Marketing,What We Think — dreinhardt @ 10:55 pm

Today’s brand director launching the next big advance in science too often circulates exclusively among rarified air. What I mean is that their views about the market, prescribers, and patients are almost exclusively shaped by the 4-6 key opinion leaders (KOL) who specialize in their target market. Over reliance on KOL input to shape your clinical and promotional plans is fraught with danger. Let me give you a case study to illustrate.

A company provided unfettered access to leading KOLs in the field for a new product in advance of full-scale roll out. Each KOL was provided a concierge from the home office to ensure the expert was detailed on the product through and through . . . plus each expert had 24-hours access for help in using the product.

Here was the product feedback from experts verbatim:

“An utter disappointment and abysmal failure”
“I’m genuinely baffled by why we might need it”
” . . . great it is not”
“My god, am I underwhelmed”

As it turns out, the problem here was not really the product. It was actually that the “experts” who took part in this controlled test were constrained by their own realities. They were not able to think of what could be possible with this new product, only what currently was possible. Thankfully, the company had the courage and foresight to recognize this limitation and they launched anyway.

The product you ask? Apple iPad2.

*Adpated from David Pogue article appearing in NYTimes on March 9, 2011.

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

Powered by WordPress