Cover Image
Market Research Report

Elevate Key Opinion Leader Relationships

Published by Cutting Edge Information Product code 527422
Published Content info 3 chapters + an Executive Summary, 60+ graphics
Delivery time: 1-2 business days
Price
Back to Top
Elevate Key Opinion Leader Relationships
Published: July 13, 2017 Content info: 3 chapters + an Executive Summary, 60+ graphics
Description

Interacting with thought leaders is a crucial activity for the life sciences industry. Medical science liaisons (MSLs) are one of the major communication channels between life science companies and thought leaders. With this relationship being so important to both the companies and the physicians, determining how to optimize these interactions can drastically impact the success of individual products and companies overall. The goal of MSLs is to offer the most value possible to thought leaders.

This report examines best practices for MSLs' interactions with key opinion leaders (KOLs). It also explores desired qualities for MSLs and changes that thought leaders would like to see to help increase the value of these interactions. This study is broken down into three chapters:

  • The first chapter focuses on company rankings and how to improve them. Surveyed KOLs rate their MSL interactions with specific companies that they worked with on a scale from 1 to 5. These ratings are then broken down by company size, therapeutic area and geographic region. This chapter delves into the changes that thought leaders would like MSLs and their teams to make to improve their interactions overall.
  • The second chapter discusses characteristics and traits that MSLs should have when interacting with KOLs, such as being educated in the specific therapeutic area, and other qualities that allow for a valuable exchange of information. Increasing the value that the MSL provides to the thought leader will encourage the physician to establish a relationship with the MSL, allowing for open communication between the two parties.
  • The third chapter breaks down specific metrics of MSL interactions. These metrics include the length and frequency of meetings and the method of interaction. KOL opinions on new engagement platforms such as video chats are discussed, along with the benefits and drawbacks of using this technology.

ABOUT THIS REPORT

Cutting Edge Information conducted this research to explore KOL feedback and to uncover best practices and benchmarks associated with improving KOL-MSL interactions. In developing this report, analysts collected surveys from and consulted with hundreds of thought leaders around the world. See Figure E.1.i for a summary of Cutting Edge Information's research methodology.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

  • About This Report
  • KOL Feedback: Key Recommendations for Success

KOL Ratings of Companies' MSL Teams and Strategies for Cultivating a Valuable Relationship

  • Thought Leader Rankings of Companies' MSL Teams
  • Increasing MSL Team Rankings to Improve Thought Leader Opinions and Relationships
  • KOLs' Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions
  • Changes Thought Leaders Want in Interactions with MSLs
  • Challenges for MSL Teams

Building the Ideal MSL

  • Information MSLs Can Provide to Best Serve HCPs
  • MSL Characteristics Crucial For Establishing and Strengthening Thought
  • Leader Relationships

Guidelines for Maximizing KOL-MSL Interactions

  • KOL-MSL Interaction Methods
  • Determining MSL-KOL Interaction Frequency
  • Deciding the Length of Time Spent in KOL-MSL Meetings

Executive Summary

About This Report

  • Figure E.1.i: Cutting Edge Information Research Methodology
  • Figure E.1.ii: Study Definitions: Key Opinion Leader Feedback
  • Figure E.1.iii: Study Definitions: Team Region
  • Figure E.1.iv: Study Definitions: Company Size
  • Figure E.1.v: Additional Study Information

KOL Feedback: Key Recommendations for Success

  • Figure E.2: Information KOLs Want from MSL to Improve Support: All Surveyed Thought Leaders

KOL Ratings of Companies' MSL Teams and Strategies for Cultivating a Valuable Relationship

Thought Leader Rankings of Companies' MSL Teams

  • Figure 1.1: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Top 20
  • Figure 1.2: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Top 50
  • Figure 1.3: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Cardiology
  • Figure 1.4: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Oncology
  • Figure 1.5: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Genetics
  • Figure 1.6: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Ophthalmology
  • Figure 1.7: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Year 1
  • Figure 1.8: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Year 2
  • Figure 1.9: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Year 3
  • Figure 1.10: Average KOL Ratings of MSL Teams from Specific Companies: Year 4

Increasing MSL Team Rankings to Improve Thought Leader Opinions and Relationships

KOLs' Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions

  • Figure 1.11: Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 1.12: Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 1.13: Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions, by Region
  • Figure 1.14: Perceived Benefits of MSL Interactions, by Year

Changes Thought Leaders Want in Interactions with MSLs

  • Figure 1.15: Desired Changes for MSL Interactions: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 1.16: Desired Changes for MSL Interactions, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 1.17: Desired Changes for MSL Interactions, by Region
  • Figure 1.18: Desired Changes for MSL Interactions, by Year

Challenges for MSL Teams

Building the Ideal MSL

Information MSLs Can Provide to Best Serve HCPs

  • Figure 2.1: Information KOLs Want from MSLs to Improve Support: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 2.2: Information KOLs Want from MSLs to Improve Support, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 2.3: Information KOLs Want from MSLs to Improve Support, by Region
  • Figure 2.4: Information KOLs Want from MSLs to Improve Support, by Year

MSL Characteristics Crucial For Establishing and Strengthening Thought Leader Relationships

  • Figure 2.5: Average Thought Leader Ratings for MSL Characteristics: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 2.6: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Cardiology
  • Figure 2.7: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Oncology
  • Figure 2.8: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Ophthalmology
  • Figure 2.9: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Genetics
  • Figure 2.10: Average Rating of Top 6 Overall MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships, by Region
  • Figure 2.11: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Year 1
  • Figure 2.12: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Year 2
  • Figure 2.13: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Year 3
  • Figure 2.14: Average KOL Ratings of Top 6 MSL Characteristics to Establish Relationships: Year 4
  • Figure 2.15: MSL Characteristics KOLs Believe Will Improve Their Relationships: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 2.16: MSL Characteristics KOLs Believe Will Improve Their Relationships, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 2.17: MSL Characteristics KOLs Believe Will Improve Their Relationships, by Region

Guidelines for Maximizing KOL-MSL Interactions

  • Figure 3.1: Types of MSL Interactions Preferred by KOLs: All Surveyed Thought Leaders

KOL-MSL Interaction Methods

  • Figure 3.2: Types of MSL Interactions Preferred by KOLs, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.3: Types of MSL Interactions Preferred by KOLs, by Region
  • Figure 3.4: Types of MSL Interactions Preferred by KOLs, by Year
  • Figure 3.5: KOL Impressions of New Engagement Platforms: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 3.6: KOL Impressions of New Engagement Platforms, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.7: KOL Impressions of New Engagement Platforms, by Region
  • Figure 3.8: Percentage of KOLs Who Believe New Engagement Platforms Will Replace Face-to-Face Interactions
  • Figure 3.9: Percentage of KOLs Who Believe New Engagement Platforms Will Not Replace Face-to- Face Interactions
  • Figure 3.10: Percentage of KOLs Who Believe New Engagement Platforms Will Replace Face-to- Face Meetings, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.11: Percentage of KOLs Who Believe New Engagement Platforms Will Replace Face-to- Face Meetings, by Region
  • Figure 3.12: Percentage of KOLs Who Believe New Engagement Platforms Will Replace Face-to- Face Meetings, by Year

Determining MSL-KOL Interaction Frequency

  • Figure 3.13: KOLs' Actual and Preferred MSL Interaction Frequency: All Surveyed Thought Leaders
  • Figure 3.14: Comparing KOLs' Actual and Preferred Interaction Frequency
  • Figure 3.15: KOLs' Preference on MSL Interaction Frequency, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.16: KOLs' Preference on MSL Interaction Frequency, by Region
  • Figure 3.17: KOLs' Preference on MSL Interaction Frequency, by Year
  • Figure 3.18: KOLs' Preferred and Actual MSL Interaction Length: All Surveyed Thought Leaders

Deciding the Length of Time Spent in KOL-MSL Meetings

  • Figure 3.19: KOLs' Preference on MSL Interaction Length, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.20: KOLs' Preference of MSL Interaction Length, by Region
  • Figure 3.21: KOLs' Preference on MSL Interaction Length, by Year
  • Figure 3.22: Average Time Difference Between Preferred and Actual Interaction Time, by Therapeutic Area
  • Figure 3.23: Average Time Difference Between Preferred and Actual MSL Interaction Time, by Region
  • Figure 3.24: Average Time Difference Between Preferred and Actual MSL Interaction Time, by Year
Back to Top