1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6DB22C421F2E86CD485257558004FD3DB
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/psm-234a-report-summary-medical-liaisons!OpenDocument
18
19OpenDocument
203.233.242.204
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Report Summary: Roles, Resourcing and Management of Medical Science Liaisons

ID: PSM-234A


Pages: 12


Published: Pre-2016


Delivery Format: Online


 

License Options:


Download FREE Excerpt

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS

To download summary, click
Download FREE Excerpt.
STUDY OVERVIEW

As the medical science liaison (MSL) function continues to gain importance in building and strengthening KOL relationships, medical affairs leaders are continually re-assessing their MSL management practices to be successful in the competitive environment.
Best Practices, LLC undertook this research to examine the growing roles and responsibilities of Medical Science Liaisons within leading healthcare organizations. The study captures critical insights across MSL operational, performance, and management fronts which includes the headcount, span of control, deployment factors, volume and mode of thought leader interactions, and medical science liaison performance measurement.
Medical Affairs leaders can use this study as a benchmark for future strategic and resource planning and best-practice implementation for the medical science liaison function.

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


Companies Profiled:
Abbott Labs; Jazz Pharmaceuticals; Kadmon Pharmaceuticals; Covidien; Medtronic; BARD; Sanofi; Gilead Sciences; Abbvie; Bayer Healthcare; Vertex Pharmaceuticals; Biogen Idec; Amgen; Astellas; AstraZeneca; Baxter Healthcare; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene; Cubist Pharmaceuticals; Eisai; Genentech; GlaxoSmithKline; Ipsen; Laboratories Esteve; Merz Pharma; Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma America; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Novartis; Shire; Takeda; Teva (branded); ViroPharma Inc; ViiV Healthcare

Study Snapshot

Nineteen participants from 15 leading pharmaceutical, biotech, and medical device companies contributed benchmark survey data and qualitative insights to this research. This study also provides longitudinal data comparisons with a similar benchmark study conducted in 2011.

Sample Key Findings

Factors for Right-Sizing MSL Field Force Size & Distribution: MSLs are an expensive and limited resource; it is critical to right-size MSL headcount and field distribution to support education and therapy growth. Thought leader concentration and product lifecycle plan are the two most effective factors in determining the MSL field force size. Interestingly, while revenue potential seems to have shrunk in importance as a driver for MSL deployment, distribution of sales force as a factor has increased in importance. Other important factors reported by benchmark companies include ratio of MSLs to product/franchise revenue and corporate commitment to an over-arching franchise.


Table of Contents

Executive Summary pp. 3-8
Research Overview pp. 3-4

Participating Companies pp. 5

High-level Findings & Insights pp. 6-8

Universe of Learning pp. 9-12

Specialist Role and Service Scope pp. 13-20

KOL Relationship Management pp. 21-25

Resource Management: MSL Investment Levels pp. 26-35

Value Associated with MSL & Measuring Effectiveness pp. 36-47

Budget Allocated to MSL Teams pp. 48-53

Top Challenges pp. 54-58

Lessons Learned pp. 59-65

About Best Practices, LLC pp. 66