Cover Image
Market Research Report

Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Targeted Sales Models such as Enhanced Key Account Management (KAM) and Closed-Loop Marketing (CLM) Strategies Drives Sales Force Efficiency

Published by GBI Research Product code 248225
Published Content info 96 Pages
Immediate Delivery Available
Price
Back to Top
Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Targeted Sales Models such as Enhanced Key Account Management (KAM) and Closed-Loop Marketing (CLM) Strategies Drives Sales Force Efficiency
Published: July 31, 2012 Content info: 96 Pages
Description

Summary

Leading business intelligence provider GBI Research has released its latest research report, entitled "Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Targeted Sales Models such as Enhanced Key Account Management (KAM) and Closed-Loop Marketing (CLM) Strategies Drives Sales Force Efficiency". The report provides key data, information and analysis of trends and practices adopted to improve sales force effectiveness in the pharmaceutical industry. The report provides a comprehensive insight into the strategies adopted by pharmaceutical companies to improve their sales force effectiveness. It provides case studies and sales force strategies of pharmaceutical companies and IT solution providers. The report also analyzes the opportunities and challenges that could play a role in shaping the future of sales force effectiveness. The report finishes with a detailed analysis of 12 key pharmaceutical companies, with respect to their sales efficiency.

This report is built using data and information sourced from proprietary databases, primary and secondary research, and in house analysis by GBI Research's team of industry experts.

At present, the pharmaceutical industry is changing due to expensive promotion and research and development (R&D) campaigns, which are crucial to examine opportunities to simplify and streamline operations in order to align businesses towards the needs of customers. In this situation, sales force effectiveness drives the success of pharmaceutical companies. Sales force effectiveness begins with developing an effective sales strategy, sizing and structuring the sales force, designing incentive compensation plans, setting goals, managing sales performance, recruiting sales people, motivating the sales force, building a potent sales force culture, and coordinating sales and marketing.

Pharmaceutical companies should have the best sales force to generate the most sales, and should also know how to integrate strategic business objectives with selection program strategies. Due to the changing pharmaceutical market environment, sales force roles are also changing. Sales representatives in leading companies now have the responsibility of delivering marketing messages and offering information and educational opportunities to physicians to build and change behaviors and relationships. Physician demand for more detailed, comparative and customized information from pharmaceutical sales representatives is also increasing. As a result, new sales representatives should have the right set of skills to play these varying roles.

In recent years, there has been a change in direction in the pharmaceutical industry about methods for effectiveness selling. The industry has recorded a number of sales job cuts, and as a result, sales forces in the US and Europe has reduced drastically. This reduction has forced pharmaceutical companies to change the size, structure and sales strategies of their sales forces. In addition, pharmaceutical companies are now under pressure to generate more profits with smaller sales forces. To achieve this, pharmaceutical companies are adopting strategies to remain competitive in the market.

Scope

  • The need for sales force effectiveness for pharmaceutical companies and the factors that affect it.
  • A study of major strategic sales models with case studies that enhance sales force effectiveness.
  • Sales force sizing, recruitment strategies, and key sale force training and compensation models.
  • An analysis of the competitive landscape, including profiles of major companies such as Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Merck & Co., BMS, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Abbott and Sanofi.

Reasons to buy

  • Develop key strategies to reduce expenditure on sales forces and increase sales force effectiveness
  • Optimize your organization's resource allocation by identifying key models to size, recruit and train sales forces
  • Develop and understand how companies use tools and models to improve sales force effectiveness
  • Make informed decisions with respect to sales force training and compensation
  • Make more informed business decisions from the insightful and in-depth analysis of sales force effectiveness sales models and the factors that shape them.

Executive Summary

Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals.

Knowledge is key for pharmaceutical sales forces, who should be offered training and incentives to increase sales and improve productivity, says a new report by healthcare experts GBI Research.

The new report* states that the importance of internal training cannot be understated, with the significant investments, advanced training techniques, and use of external training consultants by major pharma companies playing testament to this.

In recent years, the sales industry within the US and Europe has recorded sales job reductions as a result of the global economic recession, and this has led to a greater demand for effective selling methods. Companies forced to downsize their sales forces still aim to secure high sales figures, and are therefore pressurized to develop their sales people to continue to deliver profitable sales growth.

The short term motive behind sales force training is to increase sales and improve productivity. However, the long term motive is to motivate the sales force, build better customer relations and effectively improve employee retention rates. Incentive management is a significant tool that encourages sales activities, but also helps to improve longer term sales force effectiveness.

Incentive management has not always been implemented as a high priority, and was not always properly integrated into the sales management process. However, a large number of companies are now implementing incentive management solutions that provide the flexibility to quickly adjust compensation plans in order to improve sales force performance. This solution has the ability to adjust to specific company needs, and allows for the integration of existing processes and systems.

Performance dashboards are an important and powerful agent of organizational change, translating organizations' strategies into objectives that are customized to every individual in the organization. Dashboards contain various performance indicators which are used to monitor business processes through analysing the performance of sales representatives and customer response. This allows sales representatives to compare their benchmarked performance against peer averages, and can help shape training and incentive schemes to improve certain aspects of sales performance.

Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Targeted Sales Models such as Enhanced Key Account Management (KAM) and Closed-Loop Marketing (CLM) Strategies Drives Sales Force Efficiency

This report provides an in-depth analysis of trends and practices adopted to improve sales force effectiveness in the pharmaceutical industry. It provides a comprehensive insight into the strategies adopted by pharmaceutical companies to improve their sales force effectiveness, and gives case studies and sales force strategies of pharmaceutical companies and IT solution providers. The report also analyzes the opportunities and challenges that could play a role in shaping the future of sales force effectiveness. The report finishes with a detailed analysis of 12 key pharmaceutical companies, with respect to their sales efficiency.

This report is built using data and information sourced from proprietary databases, primary and secondary research and in-house analysis by GBI Research's team of industry experts.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

1. Table of Contents

  • 1.1. List of Tables
  • 1.2. List of Figures

2. Introduction

3. Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - An Overview

  • 3.1. Sales Force Effectiveness Required
    • 3.1.1. Declining Return on Investment (ROI) for R&D Expenditure
    • 3.1.2. Pharmaceutical Company Staff Reductions
    • 3.1.3. Changing Product Portfolios
    • 3.1.4. Difficulty Attaining Regulatory Approval
    • 3.1.5. Specialty Care Focus
    • 3.1.6. Industry Consolidation and Changing Competition
    • 3.1.7. IT Increasingly Applied to Sales Models

4. Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Role of New Sales Models and Strategies

  • 4.1. Implementation of Strategies in Pharmaceutical Companies
    • 4.1.1. Implemented Sales Force Effectiveness Strategies
    • 4.1.2. Future Implementation of Sales Force Effectiveness Strategies
  • 4.2. Current Sales Models for Enhancing Sales Force Effectiveness
    • 4.2.1. KAM Process
    • 4.2.2. Types of KAM
    • 4.2.3. Case Studies
  • 4.3. Contract Sales Outsourcing
    • 4.3.1. Contract Sales Representatives
    • 4.3.2. Sales Team Recruitment and Training
    • 4.3.3. Sales Data Analytics and Management
    • 4.3.4. Shared Sales Teams and Telesales
    • 4.3.5. MSLs
    • 4.3.6. Deployment Sales Force Across Product Lifecycle
    • 4.3.7. The Evolving Model
    • 4.3.8. Case Study

5. Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - IT Applications in Sales Models

  • 5.1. Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
  • 5.2. Sales Force Automation (SFA)
    • 5.2.1. Pharmaceutical CRM Vendors
  • 5.3. Closed Loop Marketing (CLM) Systems
    • 5.3.1. Benefits for Sales and Physicians
    • 5.3.2. Benefits for Analytics
    • 5.3.3. Benefits for Legal and Regulatory Departments
    • 5.3.4. Benefits for Marketing
    • 5.3.5. CLM Vendors
    • 5.3.6. Case Studies
  • 5.4. Predictive Modeling in Sales and Marketing
    • 5.4.1. Case Studies
  • 5.5. Examining Strategies
    • 5.5.1. Promotional Response Model
  • 5.6. Sales Force Effectiveness Dashboards

6. Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Sales Force Planning and Strategy

  • 6.1. Sales Force Sizing
    • 6.1.1. Affordability and Breakdown Method
    • 6.1.2. Workload Build-up Technique
    • 6.1.3. Competitive Benchmarking
    • 6.1.4. Promotion Response Modeling
  • 6.2. Sales Force Recruitment
    • 6.2.1. Introduction
    • 6.2.2. Sales Force Recruitment Strategy
    • 6.2.3. Recruitment Process Outsourcing (RPO)
    • 6.2.4. Case Studies
  • 6.3. Sales Force Training and Compensation
    • 6.3.1. Introduction
    • 6.3.2. Behavioral Coaching and the Five Step Model
    • 6.3.3. Specialty Care Training
    • 6.3.4. Continuous Assessments
    • 6.3.5. Incentive Management

7. Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals - Competitive Landscape

  • 7.1. Efficiency Analysis
  • 7.2. Company Profiles
    • 7.2.1. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (Teva)
    • 7.2.2. Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS)
    • 7.2.3. Sanofi
    • 7.2.4. Novartis AG (Novartis)
    • 7.2.5. Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck)
    • 7.2.6. Pfizer Inc. (Pfizer)
    • 7.2.7. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (Takeda)
    • 7.2.8. GlaxoSmithKline plc (GSK)
    • 7.2.9. Johnson & Johnson (J&J)
    • 7.2.10. Eli Lilly and Company (Lilly)
    • 7.2.11. Abbott Laboratories (Abbott)
    • 7.2.12. AstraZeneca Plc (AstraZeneca)

8. Sales Force Effectiveness - Appendix

  • 8.1. Market Definitions
  • 8.2. Abbreviations
  • 8.3. Bibliography
  • 8.4. Research Methodology
    • 8.4.1. Coverage
    • 8.4.2. Secondary Research
    • 8.4.3. Primary Research
    • 8.4.4. Expert Panel Validation
  • 8.5. Contact Us
  • 8.6. Disclaimer

List of Tables

  • Table 1: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Pharmaceutical and Biotech R&D Expenditure ($billion) v/s Number of NME/BLA Approvals, the US, 1995-2009

List of Figures

  • Figure 1: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Pharmaceutical and Biotech R&D Expenditure ($bn) v/s Number of NME/BLA Approvals, The US, 1995-2009
  • Figure 2: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Global, Layoffs by Pharmaceutical Companies, 2010
  • Figure 3: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Global, Implemented Sales Strategies in Pharmaceutical Companies (%), 2011
  • Figure 4: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Global, Sales Strategies to be Implemented in the Future (%), 2011
  • Figure 5: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, KAM Process, 2011
  • Figure 6: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Identification and Prioritization of Key Accounts, Risk vs. Potential
  • Figure 7: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Key Accounts Identification and Prioritization, Skill vs. Will
  • Figure 8: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Key Accounts Primary Selection Criteria
  • Figure 9: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Understanding Needs and Developing Customer Insights
  • Figure 10: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Forming the Account Team
  • Figure 11: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Developing Key Account Strategic Plan
  • Figure 12: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Communicating and Implementing the Key Account Strategic Plan
  • Figure 13: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Reviewing KAM Results
  • Figure 14: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Lundbeck and the KAM Principle, 2010
  • Figure 15: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Abbott's Sales Force Optimization
  • Figure 16: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Abbott's Account Strategy, 2010
  • Figure 17: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Abbott's Segmentation and Targeting Strategy, 2010
  • Figure 18: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Calculating Account Value, 2010
  • Figure 19: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Positioning the Key Accounts
  • Figure 20: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, CSOs, Major Services, 2010
  • Figure 21: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Modern CSO Applications, Deployment of Sales Force Across Product Lifecycle, 2011
  • Figure 22: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, CSOs and Evolving Sales Model
  • Figure 23: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, CLM-enabled Commercial Organization
  • Figure 24: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth's Target Selection Model, 2010
  • Figure 25: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth's Segmentation Model, 2010
  • Figure 26: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Benefits of CLM for Wyeth, 2010
  • Figure 27: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Customer Response Framework for CLM, Wyeth, 2010
  • Figure 28: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Customer Response Success Rate for CLM, Wyeth, 2010
  • Figure 29: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth and its CLM Process, 2010
  • Figure 30: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Predictive Modeling Data Integration
  • Figure 31: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Predictive Modeling
  • Figure 32: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Predictive Modeling Process
  • Figure 33: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Sales Index vs. Sales Strategy
  • Figure 34: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Promotional Response Model on Sales
  • Figure 35: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Workload Build-up Model Case Study, 2011
  • Figure 36: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Competitive Benchmarking Model Case Study, 2011
  • Figure 37: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Promotion Response Model, 2011
  • Figure 38: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Optimal Promotion Response Model, 2011
  • Figure 39: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Advantages of RPO, 2011
  • Figure 40: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Sales Force Strategy, Incentive Compensation Functionality, Global, 2010
  • Figure 41: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Sales Force Strategy, Oracle Incentive Compensation Solution, 2010
  • Figure 42: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Efficiency Analysis, 2011
  • Figure 43: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Efficiency Analysis, 2010
  • Figure 44: Sales Force Effectiveness in Pharmaceuticals, Efficiency Analysis, 2009
  • Figure 45: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 46: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 47: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 48: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 49: Sanofi, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 50: Sanofi, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 51: Novartis, Global,, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 52: Novartis, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 53: Merck, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 54: Merck, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 55: Pfizer, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 56: Pfizer, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 57: Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 58: Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 59: GlaxoSmithKline, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 60: GlaxoSmithKline, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 61: Johnson & Johnson, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 62: Johnson & Johnson, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 63: Eli Lilly, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 64: Eli Lilly, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 65: Abbott, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 66: Abbott, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
  • Figure 67: AstraZeneca, Global, SG&A Expenses (%), 2011
  • Figure 68: AstraZeneca, Global, SG&A Expenses by Year ($m) and Growth Rate (%), 2009-2011
Back to Top