1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6125B0CCD9B3CD83D6525835300462A0A
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/db-improving-impact-field-based-medical-teams-major-global-markets-thought-leader-engagement-managing-field-activities-productivity-levels?OpenDocument
18
19OpenDocument
2054.196.208.187
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Improving the Impact of Field-Based Medical Teams in Major Global Markets: Thought Leader Engagement, Managing Field Activities & Productivity Levels

ID: 5536


Features:

9 Info Graphics

27 Data Graphics

390+ Metrics

6 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 42


Published: 2018


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 “Improving the Impact of Field-Based Medical Teams in Major Global Markets: Thought Leader Engagement, Managing Field Activities & Productivity Levels”

STUDY OVERVIEW

Field-based medical teams play an important role in meeting the growing information needs of various external stakeholders and developing effective thought leader relationships. To maximize the impact of field-based medical teams in high-potential global markets, it is important to increase their productivity levels by optimizing the time allocation on key activities, and the frequency and effectiveness of thought leader interactions.

Best Practices, LLC conducted this study to help inform field-based medical and other leadership teams about the region-specific strategies and tactics employed by other organizations. This study delivers benchmarks around key MSL/field-based medical team operational areas such as: productivity measures, efficiency (time spent on key external and internal activities), frequency of thought leader interactions by tier, effective communication channels, and the tactics and tools for leveraging field insights across the organization.

This research provides data in several segments: All Participants (Total Benchmark Class); Global (Outside US); North America Responses; Europe Responses; and JAPAC Responses.

KEY TOPICS

  • Duration and frequency of MSL and HOL interactions
  • The degree of proactive vs. reactive interactions
  • Time spent on internal and external activities
  • Processes and tools used to leverage local field knowledge globally

KEY METRICS
  • What is your MSLs / HOLs average time spent in each face-to-face thought leader interaction / payer interaction?
  • How frequently do your MSLs interact with each kind of thought leader on average?
  • How frequently do your HOLs interact with payers on average?
  • What percentage of your MSLs’ thought leader interactions are proactive and what percentage are reactive?
  • How often do your field MSLs conduct the listed proactive and reactive activities?
  • How often do you file 2253 and send materials to OPDP (FDA) before starting to use a scientific piece?
  • Approximately how much time do your MSLs spend on average on the listed external and internal activities each week – and what is the ideal amount of time to be spent on each activity per week?
  • Which of the listed processes and tools are most effective for leveraging insights across the organization?

SAMPLE KEY FINDINGS
  • Effective KOL Engagement Channels:
    • Face-to-face meetings constitute 65% of all MSL interactions with thought leaders, with 100% of companies across all regions deeming them a “highly effective” engagement channel.
    • Email accounts for 17% of all interactions, followed by another 13% via phone. But each channel is rated “highly effective” by fewer than 10% of all respondents.
    • Webex and skype-like engagement is used for only 5% of interactions, but nearly 25% of respondents found them to be highly effective for communicating with thought leaders – representing a potential opportunity area for companies to both efficiently and effectively engage certain field targets
METHODOLOGY

Best Practices, LLC engaged 55 medical affairs and field-based medical team leaders from a total of 36 top pharma and biotech organizations through a benchmarking survey. Six deep-dive interviews were also conducted. To offer clear understanding of field medical trends across major markets, benchmark data is segmented by: Total Benchmark Class (N=69); Global Market Segment, excluding U.S. (N=38); North America Market Segment (N=31); Europe (EU5) Market Segment (N=24); and JAPAC Market Segment (N=5).


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


Companies Profiled:
AbbVie; AcelRx; Alkermes; Allergan; Allergopharma; Amgen; Astellas; AstraZeneca; Bayer; Biogen; Chiesi; Cooper Surgical; Daiichi Sankyo; Eisai; EMD Serono; Ferring Pharmaceuticals; Gedeon Richter ; Genentech; GlaxoSmithKline ; Ipsen; Janssen; Kyowa Kirin; Merck; Merck KGaA; Novartis; Novelion Therapeutics; Novo Nordisk; Pfizer; Roche; Shire; Sunovion; UCB Pharma; Vertex Pharmaceuticals; Vifor Pharma; 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.