1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
680F271A8A3C2D31A852577B20042ACF9
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/patient-advocacy-groups-relationship-management-tools-tactics?opendocument
18
19opendocument
203.88.220.93
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25DB




Products & Services Medical Affairs Patient Advocacy

Working with Patient Advocacy Groups: Tools & Tactics for Managing Advocacy Relationships

ID: 5105


Features:

11 Info Graphics

13 Data Graphics

100 Metrics

16 Narratives


Pages/Slides: 28


Published: Pre-2014


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 "Working with Patient Advocacy Groups: Tools & Tactics for Managing Advocacy Relationships"

STUDY OVERVIEW

Patient advocacy groups play a crucial role in educating consumers on new medicines and treatments. Collaboration between biopharmaceutical organizations and advocacy groups offers the opportunity for a win-win partnership. These partnerships are predicated on starting and maintaining positive relationships with patient advocacy groups.

This study explores the tools and tactics that have proven effective in creating and managing relationships with patient advocacy groups. Further, this study reviews the use of new technologies to reach patient advocacy groups as well as patients, and the role of advocacy group collaborations during the product lifecycle. Companies can use the key benchmark metrics, executive insights, recommendations, best practices, lessons learned and pitfalls to avoid to more effectively create and maintain relationships with patient advocacy groups.

KEY TOPICS

  • Tools and tactics that help manage advocacy relationships
  • Using new technologies to improve reach to patients and patient advocacy groups
  • Advocacy and product launch
  • Current Trends and Future Directions in Patient Advocacy
  • Lessons Learned, Pitfalls and Successes

SAMPLE METRICS
  • Effectiveness of various approaches used to coordinate collaborations with patient advocacy groups.
  • Effectiveness of different approaches used for setting objectives with advocacy groups
  • Forms of education, program support, and grant/sponsorship considered most important during each of the four lifecycle stages
  • Most effective approaches used for seeding early stage advocacy relationships
  • Most effective technology platforms for reaching patient groups
  • Challenges affecting the advocacy market
  • Issues and challenges forecast to be most important in the near future
  • Types of lessons learned, pitfalls and success stories about relationships in patient advocacy


SAMPLE KEY FINDING
  • Assessing the Best Tools To Manage Advocacy Relationships:

Clear roles, responsibilities and relationship owners are key to effectively coordinating with patient advocacy groups. Relationship management with advocacy groups benefits from relationship ownership clarity, role and responsibility clarity, and process standardization. More than half of the benchmark class gave “relationship ownership” the highest effectiveness ranking. “Role clarity” also was deemed very important.

Centralized pharmaceutical advocacy leadership and regular priority setting are the most effective approaches for setting shared objectives with advocacy groups. A variety of approaches are useful for prioritizing which patient advocacy group relationships to pursue. “Periodic priority setting” and “centralized leadership” rank most highly effective, followed by “committee arbitration” and “clear roles and responsibilities.”

METHODOLOGY

Insights are drawn from survey responses from a total of 58 research participants at 43 pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device companies. More than a dozen in-depth interviews were conducted to gather more detailed information pertinent to this study. Approximately half of the benchmark class (28 participants) consisted of executives representing top 50 bio-pharmaceutical companies.


Industries Profiled:
Diagnostic; Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Medical Device; Chemical; Manufacturing; Consumer Products; Health Care; Media; Service; Technology; Research


Companies Profiled:
Abaxis; Abbott Laboratories; Allos Therapeutics; Amgen; Anesiva; ANS; Astellas; Baxter; Bayer; Becton Dickinson; Boston Scientific; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Covidien; Daiichi Sankyo; Discovery Chicago; Eisai; Genentech; Genzyme; GlaxoSmithKline; IDS Canada; Infosys BPO; Johnson & Johnson; King Pharmaceuticals; Medrad; Novartis; Nupathe; Ocimum Biosolutions; Onyx Pharmaceuticals; Philips Home Healthcare; Purdue Pharma; Savient Pharmaceuticals; Solvay Pharmaceuticals; Synapse Biomedical; Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Talecris; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd; Theratechnologies; Thoratec Corporation; Tibotec; Triple-S Inc; United Therapeutics; Vital Therapies


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.