1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
62EAAA37DF86BEADC85257E810056BA38
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/db-2015-pharmaceutical-library-benchmarks-cost-staffing
18
19
2034.229.126.29
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




» Products & Services » » Business Operations » Corporate Libraries

2015 Pharmaceutical Library Benchmarks: Cost and Staffing

ID: 5367


Features:

7 Info Graphics

17 Data Graphics

150+ Metrics


Pages/Slides: 34


Published: 2015


Delivery Format: Online PDF Document


 

License Options:
close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.




Buy Now

 


  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • SPECIAL OFFER
Non-members: Click here to review a complimentary excerpt from "2015 Pharmaceutical Library Benchmarks: Cost and Staffing”

STUDY OVERVIEW

Shrinking budgets and increasing responsibilities add to the complexities of handling corporate library operations. Best Practices, LLC undertook this study to understand how benchmarked libraries balance budget, resource and service levels in their organization. Metrics and insights in the document will help corporate library managers in allocating the cost and staff hours to various activities.

Corporate libraries can use this study to compare the financial resources, cost recovery practices and penetration of potential user base at their companies with those at leading organizations within the biopharmaceutical and medical device industries.

KEY TOPICS

· Financial resources
· Cost recovery practices
· Distribution of FTE hours by service category
· Penetration of potential user base
· Penetration of potential user base

SAMPLE KEY METRICS

· Total library organization cost of benchmarked companies
· Cost per potential & actual user
· Cost recovery methods used
· Percentage of total FTE hours allocated by process
· Key service strategy areas

SAMPLE KEY FINDING

Cost Recovery: One third of participating libraries do not recover costs for the services and resources they provide, while others used more than one method. The most common cost recovery method is asking heavy user groups to chip in to pay for specialized resources.

METHODOLOGY

Best Practices, LLC engaged twenty-nine companies in this benchmarking study. Among the participants, 17 represented pharmaceutical companies, five were medical devices libraries, and seven represented health science libraries in other industries. Data is presented for the total benchmark class and for the pharma segment.


Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Health Care; Consulting; Medical Device; Biotech; Chemical; Market Research; Laboratories; Communications; Science; Diversified; Orthopaedics


Companies Profiled:
Abbvie; William Osler Health System; Astellas; Bain and Company; Baxter Healthcare; Boehringer Ingelheim; Boston Scientific; Celgene; Daiichi Sankyo; Eisai; Evidera; Ferring Pharmaceuticals; Gilead Sciences; Ipsen; Johnson & Johnson; Lilly; Lubrizol; Novo Nordisk; OTSUKA; Pacific Northwest; Prescott Medical Communications Group; Purdue Pharma; Sanofi Pasteur; Shire; Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Thermo Fisher Scientific; US Pharmacopeial Convention; W.L. Gore and Associates; Zimmer


If you purchase Best Practice Database document(s), you will have 30 days from the date of purchase to apply some or all of the cost of the document(s) toward the cost of a Full Access Individual, Pharma, Group or University Membership. Write us at DatabaseTeam@bestpracticesllc.com or call David Guinn at 919-767-9179 if you have any questions.