1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6E93A6017109CB5DB85258087006DDE2A
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/db-developing-strong-field-based-medical-teams-activity-types-frequency-value?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2054.205.211.87
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Developing Strong Field-Based Medical Teams: Activity Types, Frequency, and Value

ID: 5443


Features:

15 Info Graphics

16 Data Graphics

230 Metrics

4 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 40


Published: 2016


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 "Developing Strong Field-Based Medical Teams: Activity Types, Frequency and Value"

STUDY OVERVIEW

Field-based medical teams have risen in importance for pharmaceutical companies as the influence of payers has increased and the access to providers has decreased. Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) and Health Outcomes Liaisons (HOLs) are two of the principal functions that make up field medical teams, although field roles that serve the payer community have a variety of titles. While these two roles typically serve different external customers, both are seen as vital ways of educating providers and payers about an organization's products.

Best Practices, LLC conducted this benchmarking study to produce industry metrics on key aspects of activities for field-based medical teams, including time spent on key activities, value associated with activities, metrics that are seen as valuable for measuring effectiveness and how often field members visit external stakeholders. Leaders of field medical teams can use this study to compare their activities and performance measurement approaches with peer organizations.

This study provides segment perspectives on MSLs vs. HOLs, large and small companies as well as global vs. U.S.-only companies.


KEY TOPICS

  • Actual vs. Expected Time Allocation
  • Showing the Value to Key Stakeholders
  • Key Performance Indicators
  • Visit Frequency

SAMPLE KEY METRICS
  • MSL hours spent per week on nine key activities
  • HOL hours spent per week on nine key activities
  • Value of listed field medical team responsibilities for MSLs
  • Value of listed field medical team responsibilities for HOLs
  • Effectiveness of six qualitative metrics for evaluating field medical team members
  • Effectiveness of seven quantitative metrics for evaluating field medical team members
  • Frequency of thought leader visits per year for MSLs
  • Frequency of thought leader visits per year for HOLs
SAMPLE KEY FINDINGS

Value vs. Time Spent on Activities: There are areas that MSL and HOL teams should consider spending more time on because of the associated high value.

  • MSL teams have the opportunity to support two areas more:

    -- Assisting with sales force / commercial team training: 57% of participants find this activity very valuable. However, MSLs spend only 2hrs. / week on sales force / commercial team training.

    -- Congress support: 59% of participants find this activity very valuable. However, MSLs spend 3hrs. / week on congress support.
  • HOL teams have the opportunity to increase time allocation on KOL management: While 56% of participants find this activity very valuable, HOLs spend 6.3 hrs / week on KOL management.

METHODOLOGY

Best Practices, LLC engaged 23 leaders from 19 biopharmaceutical companies through a benchmarking survey.


Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Manufacturing; Consumer Products; Diagnostic; Medical Device; Chemical; Biopharmaceutical; Health Care; Clinical Research; Laboratories


Companies Profiled:
Abbvie; Tocagen; AstraZeneca; Bayer; EMD Serono; Genentech; Incyte; Kyowa Hakko Kirin; Medivation; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Pierre Fabre Medicament; Sanofi; Genzyme; Santen; Shire; ViiV Healthcare; ZS Pharma


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.