By Christine Naegle, RN, M.A., Senior Vice President, West Coast
It used to be that we suppliers – the term used then – met with our pharmaceutical clients, discussed their research needs, determined a solution and sent off a proposal. We sometimes still do the same today, but more often than not we are expected to provide a much higher level of consulting. Back then many marketing researchers in pharmaceutical companies were previously “detail men” who knew their customers and therefore knew how to encourage doctors to write prescriptions for their brands. Competition in the pharmaceutical industry was there but it wasn’t so tough or so strong. There simply weren’t that many brands to choose from and while you needed to be smart and competitive, the process was relatively simple. Drug companies could sell their products based on relationships, giveaways, sample drops or meals.
Then along came more competition, sweeping changes in the insurance industry and more government regulation, and with all of that came the need to market differently. Big pharma companies began running shoulder to shoulder, competing for share with lots of me-toos – antibiotics, allergy medicines, antihypertensives, etc. Most medicines at the time were chemically based.
But in the mid-1950s Crick and Watson discovered the double helix of DNA, the hereditary molecule of the cell, a sequence of nucleotides that runs as a code to direct the synthesis of protein. Understanding more about DNA through further research and discovery, uncovering human genomes and developing advanced diagnostics led to more sophisticated medicines.
The first biotechnology companies founded – Genentech in 1979 and Amgen in 1980 – were on the West Coast. Both pioneered novel and innovative products based on recombinant DNA and molecular biology – molecular biology being the foundation of biotechnology. Other new West Coast-based biotechnology drug companies sprung up later and now there are dozens developing new and novel therapies.
Over the years, GfK Healthcare has conducted an increasing amount of marketing research with West Coast-based biotechs. In fact, to better meet the needs of our growing base of West Coast biotech clients with additional local support, we have recently expanded our presence through the hire of additional West Coast-based staff and the opening of our new San Francisco office. Particularly in the past decade, our work in this niche has increased exponentially, with projects ranging from small qualitative research projects with a few in-depth interviews to large-scale research programs with multiple phases to support a company's portfolio development. Virtually always the therapeutic categories are very complex ranging from obscure blood dyscrasias to complex cardiovascular or oncology conditions.
Looking back over the years we have worked with West Coast biotechs, our research team has noted several key differences in the marketing research needs of these companies vs. the more traditional pharmaceutical manufacturers on the East Coast. Here, we share some of those observations with you. Although many of these traits are also reflective of biotechs located on the East Coast, here we reflect specifically on our experience with West Coast biotech companies.
The attitude and culture of these companies appears to be more casual than traditional pharmaceutical companies. Back in the 1980s, for example, it wasn’t uncommon for biotech companies to throw keg parties on Friday afternoons that were attended by everyone from the CEO on down. Companies are still laid back. Their standard business dress is still jeans and sneakers. Behind that casual appearance, however, these clients are very serious, very smart and very competitive.
Even in training sessions with these clients, it is rare that we lecture to them; it’s much more interactive, similar to a symposium or seminar. One client company recently asked us to come in and spend time with them discussing global research, not training them on the topic.
Researchers at both GfK Healthcare and many West Coast biotech companies agree that a number of drivers, beginning with a strong scientific mind-set, create different needs for West Coast-based companies. It is not at all uncommon for the marketing research analyst to know the mechanism of action (MOA) of a product or products at the cellular level – in detail. According to one biotech client, “We can’t sit in a meeting with the brand team and discuss messaging or positioning without completely understanding the MOA for us and for the competing agent. We expect our research partners to be as well-versed.” This notion was reinforced by one of our GfK Healthcare researchers who said, “I don’t have credibility with the team unless I know as much as they do – and sometimes more than the physicians we’re interviewing – about how a drug works.”
Because of their drive for knowledge and learning, Key Opinion Leader research is a very common request and the companies look to them for guidance. At the same time, they need to be reminded to also market to the rank-and-file physicians who are their main sources of revenue.
Company size comes into play too. Smaller companies can be more nimble but as their portfolios and revenues expand, they begin to resemble big pharma. Just like any other growing business, there’s more need for process. As one client said, “As the company gets bigger, there’s more on the radar screen to Wall Street and that requires more quantitative research.” The downside, according to the same client, is that “marketing teams become almost unable to make decisions because they become more risk-averse as accountability increases.”
On the other hand, smaller companies are sometimes relying on just one or two products to sustain them. They too have their issues with Wall Street. Wall Street analysts or investors “will call with sales data,” as another of our biotech clients said. “And we spend a lot of time and energy justifying why the caller is wrong. It’s not only hard work, it’s draining.”
Small companies have less resources available to them, in terms of people and money. And they often have more complicated agents with little secondary data available to support the research team. The researchers, who wear many hats, need to be expert at data mining and understanding key search terms to find data that’s publicly available over the Internet.
Early on in a product’s development, working with smaller budgets, clients in both large and small companies will search for inexpensive syndicated reports to provide market size and overview. Regardless of their company size, clients will always look for secondary data first before choosing to do primary research.
In our experience, we’ve found that the researchers in both large and small biotech companies are much more data-oriented. As one of our GfK Healthcare researchers said, “Our small biotech clients really need to understand the data. They are much more analytical than big pharma clients.” We find that they know their pivotal clinical studies cold – perhaps because they wear more than one hat. Researchers in smaller biotechs get involved not only in the marketing research but in business development, investor relations, marketing, forecasting, etc. As a result, they are much more visible – for good or bad. It’s not uncommon for senior management, including the CEO, to attend meetings with GfK Healthcare research consultants, even kick-off meetings and almost certainly when results are presented.
Because of their need to really understand the data, biotech clients require a closeness with their research partners. For example, they commonly request and use our personal cell phone numbers to ask questions during non-business hours.
Smaller biotechnology companies have to take more risks. Unless they have investors with deep pockets, they simply can’t afford to do the development that big pharma does. So they will rely on qualitative data where a large pharmaceutical company spends much more money to conduct large quantitative studies. (This may change for big pharma as budgets shrink.) Small biotechs are more willing to be less precise because they need to take risks and don’t have the budgets.
Clients I interviewed almost always said there are just cultural differences between companies, but to me the biotech culture seems pervasive across companies on the West Coast. They are more alike than they are different, independent of size.
While sales representatives still join marketing research teams now and then, marketing researchers on the biotech side are now often fresh business school graduates who are very bright though not necessarily experienced in marketing research. Others are ex-consultants who know methodology and statistics but don’t yet have the hands-on experience of conducting marketing research. Yet others, especially in the larger companies, are career marketing researchers. Regardless of their experience level, they are very involved with the brand teams, clinical research and long-term planning. GfK Healthcare researchers across our company find satisfaction in working with them because the work goes beyond marketing research often involving other departments in the company.
Perhaps as the best indicator of what life is like working in marketing research on the biotech side, all the clients I spoke with said they wouldn’t want to work in another industry. The risk, the visibility and even the resource constraints all yield high levels of job satisfaction.
