avoca award decision program overview

Avoca Award Decision Programs

Service Offering Overview

2

The Avoca Group

The Avoca Group helps pharmaceutical and biotech companies and service providers build, measure, and manage critical business

relationships. Why Avoca?

●  Avoca works exclusively in the pharmaceutical industry, focusing on clinical outsourcing, strategic alliances and alliance/relationship management.

●  Avoca has a deep understanding of sponsor preferences, leading practices and the health of relationships gained through nearly 15 years of collecting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data on behalf of both sponsors and CROs.

●  Avoca’s Senior Consultants possess both process improvement and change management expertise as well as significant industry experience.

●  Avoca has unique perspectives of competing organizations’ practices and approaches for alliance management. We understand areas that competitors struggle with and can provide guidance to support effective differentiation.

3

Best Practice Approach to Alliance Management

Client List

Pha

rma

ce

utic

al/

Bio

tec

h

AstraZeneca Ferring Pharmaceuticals

BioMarin Grünenthal

Boehringer-Ingelheim Johnson & Johnson

Bristol-Myers Squibb J&J Pharmaceutical Research Development Cadence

Celtic Pharma Millennium

Centocor Novo Nordisk

Cerexa Ortho Biotech

CJPCUS Ortho Clinical

Cordis Pfizer

CR Bard Purdue Pharma

Cubist Regeneron

Eisai Roche

Endo Pharmaceuticals Terumo

Ethicon The Medicines

Company

Serv

ice

Pro

vid

ers

Acurian Marken

Aptiv Solutions Medical Research Consultants Beardsworth

BioClinica Metropolitan Research Associates Cardinal Health

Clinical Financial Services

PAREXEL

PPD

CRF Health PRA International

ERT Premier Research

ExecuPharm Quest Diagnostics Clinical Trials Greenphire

ICON Clinical Research Quintiles

Idis REGISTRAT-MAPI

INC Research ResearchPoint

Indegene Synarc

inVentiv Health Clinical Theorem

LabCorp TKL Research

4

Objective of Award Decision Studies

●  Improved customer loyalty ●  Increased repeat business

●  Greater profitability

Award Decision Study

An Award Decision Study identifies specific drivers for your wins and losses and determines what it takes to win new business

Resulting in…

Capturing data through in-depth interviews using industry professionals provides valuable insights into what your clients are thinking.

Interviewers uncover client perceptions, issues and needs via detailed discussions about their satisfaction with all aspects of interaction during the bid process

5

What’s measured?

●  Overall business development process

●  Proposal quality and timeliness

●  Extent to which bid is tailored to address specific client needs

●  Interaction with key stakeholders during bid process

●  Quality of Bid Defense meeting

●  Contracting process (for awarded projects)

●  Cost/Value



Sample Survey Data

7

Award Decision Surveys: Sample Data

28%

20% 15%

10%

8%

8% 5% 3%

3%

Main Reason Project was Awarded to CRO

Therapeu-c Area exper-se

Global reach / experience

Reasonable cost

Specific staff assigned to project

Demonstrated ability to accomplish the work

Qualified staff

Delivery within Dmelines

Past relaDonship with CRO Personal compaDbility between sponsor and staff

N=40

8


Sample Verbatim Comments: Reasons for not awarding work to a CRO

●  “The main reason was that we had a very specific need that we were looking for, which was help in a process for developing key messages for the actual filing we were going to do. I believe we made that clear in the early discussions and in the RFP, but when {CRO} came in and gave us a presentation, it didn't focus on that particular aspect. They came to the U.K., and their presentation was terrific, but it didn’t address our main need. They focused on the strengths of the company and of their people. We had a wonderful discussion with them about another need, which is for medical writing, but their presentation was not on target for what our biggest need was.”

●  “They responded to the RFP adequately but offered no strategy…the proposal seemed like a template with minimal customization.”

●  “The other CRO really emphasized their differentiators…and that is what my team liked and why they won the bid.”

●  “The BD rep seemed like an order taker… no understanding of my needs or what was important to a Phase II Oncology trial that is competing with many other similar trials.”

●  “It would have been good to meet some of their senior team…it may have shown us the commitment we need from a preferred provider.”

9


Proposal Statement Ratings

The costs for each component were cleary defined

The proposal adhered to the specs outlined in the RFP

[CRO] proposed soluDons to meet our study needs

The turnaround Dme for the proposal was acceptable to me

The project assumpDons and tasks were clearly defined in the proposal

The proposal was concise and easy to read

The cost esDmates were consistent with my expectaDons

[CRO's] value proposiDon was clearly arDculated

33%

43%

48%

60%

40%

53%

12%

25%

44%

36%

40%

34%

33%

43%

60%

50%

20%

18%

12%

6%

20%

4%

14%

18%

3%

3%

7%

14%

7%

Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Neither Agree Nor Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree

5.0 1.0

4.0

4.3

4.6

4.4

4.6

4.5

4.3

4.2

Mean

N=32

10


Sample Verbatim Comments: Feedback on the Bid Defense Meeting for a lost project

●  “Team leadership was not established.”

●  “Insufficient preparation, presentation was too general and not specific to our RFP.”

●  “They did not bring the actual team we would work with and did not outline a solid project plan.”

●  “They did not anticipate our questions…so they did not have the right answers.”

●  “They did not listen well – they talked too much without engaging our team or targeting the discussion to meet our needs.”

●  “Some of their team members were not good presenters…and it made some of our team wonder about their ability to manage.”

11


WON LOST ∆ Presented as Cohesive Team 4.7 3.2 -1.5

Cost EsDmates Consistent with ExpectaDons 3.8 2.4 -1.4

Team Raised Important Issues at Defense 4.4 3.1 -1.3

Proposal Defense 4.2 3.0 -1.2

Appropriate Team at Defense 4.5 3.4 -1.1

Responded Appropriately to Issues at Defense 4.5 3.4 -1.1

Demonstrated Project Knowledge at Defense 4.5 3.6 -0.9

Proposal SaDsfactory 4.0 3.4 -0.6

BD Rep Met Needs Overall 4.4 3.9 -0.5

Unique SoluDons in Proposal 3.5 3.0 -0.5

Clearly Defined AssumpDons/Tasks 4.3 3.8 -0.5

CosDng Procedures Straigh_orward 3.7 3.2 -0.5

Overall BD Approach 4.3 3.9 -0.4

Proposal Adhered to RFP 3.9 3.7 -0.2

Proposal Concise/Easy to Read 4.0 3.9 -0.1

BD Rep Open and Fair 4.3 4.4 0.1

Proposal Turnaround Time 4.0 4.1 0.1

Time EsDmates Consistent with ExpectaDons 4.0 4.1 0.1

BD Rep Responsiveness 4.2 4.4 0.2

N= 30 36

Comparison of Win vs. Loss Ratings for Award Decision Criteria [Mean Scores, 5-point scale]

This display allows you to look at all rating items in the survey, focusing on the ones for which the mean scores differ most between wins and losses.

12


Comparison of Won vs. Lost Projects for “Proposal addressed strategy”

A collection of boxplots helps the viewer determine at a glance which rating items vary the most between won and lost proposals and helps elucidate the nature of the difference. The boxplots and accompanying tables display not only mean scores (green lines in the boxplots) but also medians, 25th and 75th percentiles, minima and maxima. The latter are very useful in demonstrating that even when the means are not very far apart, “won” proposals generally have consistently good scores (narrow range of scores) whereas “lost” proposals generally have more variable scores.

13

Award Decision Surveys

Key Deliverables

●  Descriptive and summary statistics with in-depth verbatim reports

●  Executive summary focusing on key strengths and issues

●  In-depth analyses and reports, including:

╸ Longitudinal analyses

╸ Relational analyses

╸ Comparisons across functional/geographic/therapeutic areas

╸ Response to initiative reporting

╸ Index development

╸ Business intelligence reporting (for use in future proposals)

●  Just-in-Time reporting for lessons learned meetings, executive meetings or business development meetings

●  Facilitated follow-up meetings to discuss results and develop action plans

Other Avoca Client Feedback Programs

15

Client Feedback Programs

Overall Objectives for Avoca Feedback Programs

●  To identify the specific drivers for the service provider’s wins and losses and what it takes to win new business

●  To help service providers understand clients’ perceptions and their positioning in the marketplace

●  To enable a service provider to learn what concerns or issues a sponsor may have with the company overall, its staff or its processes

●  To identify areas of strength and weakness that require attention within an ongoing project so they can be addressed in real time, and to identify overall trends and areas that require improvement across projects

●  To gather relationship metrics that link to overall corporate strategy execution

16

Avoca Relationship Management

Avoca’s Consulting Practice: Feedback Programs

●  Strategy & consulting to develop comprehensive client feedback programs

●  Implementation and support

╸ Gathering of data using AvocaView™ Survey Research tools and Avoca’s methodology

╸ Flagging of critical issues and communication regarding these issues

o  Issue tracking and action documentation

o  Interaction with project teams to brainstorm approaches for responding to specific issues

o  Support for ensuring that critical issues are addressed in a timely manner

╸ Analysis and reporting

o  In-depth analysis based on an understanding of the drivers of customer loyalty and satisfaction

╸ Process improvement initiatives based on trend analysis

Contact Avoca at: (609) 252-9020

www.theavocagroup.com

[email protected]

179 Nassau Street Suite 3A

Princeton, NJ 08542

Improving the Health of Critical Business Relationships