Pharmaceutical firms need to make some drastic changes to the way they do business if they are to regain the public's trust and must be seen to be more interested in medicines than market share to avoid even more damage to their image, a leading industry observer has told PharmaTimes World News.
Peter Claude, a USA-based partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers pharmaceutical and life sciences advisory services group, was speaking as the firm published a report, Recapturing the Vision which highlights the significant differences between the public's view of pharmaceutical companies and the industry's self perception.
The study is based on a survey of 500 consumers and 150 members of US industry stakeholder groups (such as doctors, researchers, former health policy makers and executives from hospitals, managed care organisations and employers) and interviews with 20 pharmaceutical and biotechnology company executives and the findings make for disturbing reading for the industry.
Mr Claude said that "it is difficult to comprehend how an industry that has saved so many lives should be held in such low public esteem," noting that "in the current climate of distrust, the public is questioning the industry's motives and practices from sales and marketing to pricing to drug development."
At present, he told PharmaTimes WorldNews, "no-one is listening to them (the drugmakers) and no-one wants to listen to them," which means that the industry has to change the dynamic of its communication, especially at a time when the sector is under such pressure from governments and a fairly hostile media.
This needs to be done by companies facing up to its problems of presentation and actual practice which have been characterised by a lack of transparency.
DTC advertising needs to be more serious and scientificA change needs to be made in the way sales and marketing practices are carried out and the industry has focused for too long on the doctor rather than the patient.
This change can be achieved in a number of ways, Mr Claude explained, one of which is to improve the quality of direct-to-consumer advertising on TV and focusing on the serious scientific benefits of the drug.
He added that much drug promotion in the past has been based on the doctor-sales rep relationship and this needs to change.
Doctors are too busy to have relationships like those nowadays and it is time to refocus the sales strategy and put it on a more sophisticated and medically-relevant level, he added, noting that concentrating on pharmacovigilance and keeping the public informed more in terms of drug safety "drives the level of trust" higher between industry and patients.
When asked by PharmaTimes World News if there was a political, or rather corporate, will within the industry to do something about the problem of image, Mr Claude said that changes in the way sales forces are going to be restructured in the future, especially in the wake of Pfizer's recent announcement of major cuts to its field force, shows that pharmaceutical firms are taking steps in the right direction.
Source: PharmaTimes
Peter Claude, a USA-based partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers pharmaceutical and life sciences advisory services group, was speaking as the firm published a report, Recapturing the Vision which highlights the significant differences between the public's view of pharmaceutical companies and the industry's self perception.
The study is based on a survey of 500 consumers and 150 members of US industry stakeholder groups (such as doctors, researchers, former health policy makers and executives from hospitals, managed care organisations and employers) and interviews with 20 pharmaceutical and biotechnology company executives and the findings make for disturbing reading for the industry.
Mr Claude said that "it is difficult to comprehend how an industry that has saved so many lives should be held in such low public esteem," noting that "in the current climate of distrust, the public is questioning the industry's motives and practices from sales and marketing to pricing to drug development."
At present, he told PharmaTimes WorldNews, "no-one is listening to them (the drugmakers) and no-one wants to listen to them," which means that the industry has to change the dynamic of its communication, especially at a time when the sector is under such pressure from governments and a fairly hostile media.
This needs to be done by companies facing up to its problems of presentation and actual practice which have been characterised by a lack of transparency.
DTC advertising needs to be more serious and scientificA change needs to be made in the way sales and marketing practices are carried out and the industry has focused for too long on the doctor rather than the patient.
This change can be achieved in a number of ways, Mr Claude explained, one of which is to improve the quality of direct-to-consumer advertising on TV and focusing on the serious scientific benefits of the drug.
He added that much drug promotion in the past has been based on the doctor-sales rep relationship and this needs to change.
Doctors are too busy to have relationships like those nowadays and it is time to refocus the sales strategy and put it on a more sophisticated and medically-relevant level, he added, noting that concentrating on pharmacovigilance and keeping the public informed more in terms of drug safety "drives the level of trust" higher between industry and patients.
When asked by PharmaTimes World News if there was a political, or rather corporate, will within the industry to do something about the problem of image, Mr Claude said that changes in the way sales forces are going to be restructured in the future, especially in the wake of Pfizer's recent announcement of major cuts to its field force, shows that pharmaceutical firms are taking steps in the right direction.
Source: PharmaTimes
1 comment:
Yes big pharma has as big a problem as they are. Their reputaiona is there with big oil, banks, insurance and other nasty big business. Not without reason, obviously.
Yes they do wonderful things in saving lives, improving the health of population etc. but nowdays they do it primarily for thier profits and shareholders' value. If it were not for regulations that require the safety and efficacy of drugs, we would see them sell even placebo as "life saving" drug. They would find a way to promote it with their enormous marketing machine. This writer has spent over 30 years in pharma industry and has seen the change to the worse.
While until about 20 years ago, the management was saying something like this to their reps to improve thier motivation:"You should be proud to be working in this industry that is dedicated to saving people's lives, and simlar jadajadajad" and they ment it.
Today they say something like this, as wittnissed many times:"It is our job to improve the productivity and profitability of out Co so that our shareholders (and the management) would benefit from the an increased shares holders' value". No mention of patients, saving lives and other noble goals that were primary objective of the past pharma industry. In those days they were proud to be called "ethical" business. Today they say the same thing about them but just for the PR value and they know it is not true, either.
Mr. Claude, says their communication has to be more dynamic etc. No they have to restore the ethical values they were supposed to have for ever as industry dealing in people's helth and lives.
Further he says they have to focus on patients rather than doctors. He is right there, but the docs are their CUSTOMERS not the patients the way they promote their products. It is the doctor that they kiss and love in many ways including corrupting them beyond repair, at least a large percentage of them.
If they want the public to change their perception of them, the Big pharma has to change to the better first, not use some clever PR campaign immplemented by some sleezy PR firm.
At this time they are what they are and the prception is what they are and many good people are trying to force the change and stop the madness of making SJUKA PENGAR as in Crazy Money in Swedish.
Perhaps the emergency of Dr. Peter Rost and the whole movement that he has triggered may speed up change.
When Big pharma proves that they are here for us not the other way around, the perception will change. Not until then even if they use the best Pr talikng heads in USA and elsewhere.
(ps:appology for misspelling)
Post a Comment