1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6C20099AAB77D71A96525841F001FD158
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/optimizing-size-improving-impact-field-based-immunology-medical-teams-major-global-markets?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2054.92.148.165
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Optimizing the Size and Improving the Impact of Field-Based Immunology Medical Teams in Major Global Markets

ID: POP-309


Features:

15 Info Graphics

39 Data Graphics

500+ Metrics

13 Narratives


Pages: 60


Published: 2019


Delivery Format: Shipped


 

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

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS
With more drugs approved and many other in the pipeline, the lucrative immunology market has grown more crowded every year.

And as pharma and biotech manufacturers seek to expand their immunology footprint across high-potential global markets (U.S., EU5, JAPAC, etc.), this report will help medical leaders understand how savvy immunology field-based teams address the needs of each major global market.

Best Practices, LLC conducted this benchmarking research to help companies fill knowledge gaps around key immunology field-based medical team operational areas, including: staffing levels, resource allocations, productivity measures, efficiency (time spent on key external and internal activities), frequency of thought leader interactions by tier, effective communication channels, and tactics and tools for leveraging immunology field insights across the organization.


Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Chemical; Health Care; Medical Device


Companies Profiled:
Allergopharma; Amgen; EMD Serono; Genentech; GlaxoSmithKline Janssen; Merck; Pfizer; Roche; Shire; UCB Pharma

Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 16 medical affairs and field-based medical team leaders involved in immunology at 11 leading biopharma companies through a benchmarking survey. Six deep-dive interviews were conducted with medical affairs leaders, whose insights were provided to enrich the data and add real-world context to the metrics and trends established.

To provide clear understanding of immunology field medical trends across major markets, benchmark data is segmented by: Total Benchmark Class (N=16); Global Market Segment, excluding U.S. (N=7); North America Market Segment (N=9); and Europe (EU5) Market Segment (N=4).

Key topics covered in this report include:

  • Optimization of immunology field-based medical team staffing levels
  • Regional differences when building immunology field-based medical teams
  • Number of thought leaders that are supported by MSLs
  • How immunology field teams are staffed depending on stage of product lifecycle
  • Budget allocations and revenue supported per MSL
  • Duration and frequency of MSL and HOL interactions
  • The degree of proactive vs. reactive interactions
  • Time spent on internal and external activities


Key Findings

Sample key insights uncovered from this report are noted below. Detailed findings are available in the full report.


  • Thought Leader Interaction Time & Frequency: Average HOL interaction time with payers is 52 minutes (similar across regions). These interactions happen slightly less frequently, approximately once every 21 weeks.
  • Effective KOL Engagement Channels: Face-to-face meetings constitute 61% of all MSL interactions with thought leaders, with 100% of companies across all regions deeming them a “highly effective” engagement channel.

Table of Contents

I.
Executive Summarypg. 3
Study Objective, Background
Methodology, Segmentation, Topics Covered
Key Findings and Recommendations
II.
Optimal Immunology Field Team Staffing & Resourcespg. 12
Portfolio Size
Immunology Field-Based Medical Team Staffing Levels
Thought Leaders Supported by MSL
Key Accounts and Payers Supported by MSLs and HOLs
MSL Staffing in Product Lifecycle
MSL Professional Background
Budget Allocated, Revenue Supported
III.
Thought Leader Engagementpg. 36
Total Annual Interactions by Thought Leader Type
Duration of MSL and HOL Interactions
Frequency of MSL and HOL Interactions
Proactive vs. Reactive MSL Interactions
Frequency of 2253 Filings
Effective Communication Channels
IV.
Field Activities and Productivity Levelspg. 52
Time Spent on External and Internal Activities
Leveraging Field-Based Insights Across the Organization

List of Charts & Exhibits


I. Optimal Field Team Staffing & Resourcing Benchmarks

  • Total number of in-line and pipeline immunology products supported by an MSL – Total benchmark class
  • Total number of in-line and pipeline immunology products supported by an MSL – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Total number of staff allocated to different field-based medical roles – Total benchmark class
  • Total number of staff allocated to different field-based medical roles – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • MSL to HOL staffing ratio
  • Use of HOLs, HOL managers and MSL effectiveness leaders at benchmark companies
  • Average number of thought leaders supported by each MSL; Mix of thought leaders supported by each MSL – Total benchmark class
  • Average number of thought leaders supported by each MSL – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Voices from the field: Benefits of “Key Communication Maps”
  • Proportion of KOLs and HCPs supported per MSL
  • Voices from the field: Top-level driver of MSL value to the organization
  • Thought leader tiers supported by each MSL
  • Average number of large key accounts (hospitals, care networks or academic institutions) and payers supported by each MSL – Total benchmark class
  • Average number of large key accounts (hospitals, care networks or academic institutions) and payers supported by MSLs and HOLs – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Percentage of the peak MSL team size assigned to support a product at each phase of the typical product lifecycle – Total benchmark class
  • Percentage of the peak MSL team size assigned to support a product at each phase of the typical product lifecycle – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Voices from the field: Role of U.S. MSLs in training fellow field liaisons and preparing global affiliates to help support new treatments
  • Effectiveness of onboarding MSLs at each phase of the product lifecycle
  • Professional background of MSLs
  • Effectiveness of listed types of prior MSL work experience in engaging thought leaders in high quality scientific discussions and building long-term relationships – Total benchmark class
  • Voices from the field: Mix of MSL professional background enables flexible approaches to allied health professionals and other emergent treatment stakeholders
  • Effectiveness of listed types of prior MSL work experience in engaging thought leaders in high quality scientific discussions and building long-term relationships – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Average MSL experience and in-line revenue supported by each MSL

II. Thought Leader Engagement

  • Total yearly MSL interactions with thought leaders
  • Total KOL and HCP interactions per year
  • Total annual interactions with global, national and regional thought leaders
  • Voices from the field: Insights on net promoter score
  • Duration and frequency of MSL /HOL interactions with thought leaders and payers – Total benchmark class
  • Duration of MSL /HOL interactions with thought leaders and payers – Global, North America and EU5 market segments
  • Average frequency of MSL interaction with global, national and regional thought leaders; and average frequency of HOL interactions with payers
  • Percentage of proactive and reactive MSL interactions with thought leaders
  • Frequency of listed proactive activities conducted by MSLs
  • Frequency of listed reactive activities conducted by MSLs
  • Proactive vs. reactive MSL interactions - North America market segment
  • Frequency of 2253 filings in North America market segment
  • Effective channels for communicating with thought leaders – Total benchmark class
  • Effective channels for communicating with thought leaders – Global and North America market segments
  • Voices from the field: KOL engagement

III. Field Activities and Productivity Levels

  • Actual time vs. goal time spent by MSLs on external-facing activities – Total benchmark class
  • Actual time vs. goal time spent by MSLs on external-facing activities – Global and North America market segments
  • Actual time vs. goal time spent by MSLs on internal-facing activities – Total benchmark class
  • Voices from the field: Identifying “super users” within field teams to help efficiently train other MSLs on use of new tools and approaches
  • Actual time vs. goal time spent by MSLs on internal-facing activities – Global and North America market segments
  • Most effective processes for leveraging field-based insights across the organization
  • Most effective tools for leveraging field-based insights across the organization