medical science liaison-aligning the activities and goals of medical science liaison teams for...

Aligning the Activities and Goals of Medical Science Liaison Teams for

Strengthened Corporate Sustainability

Dr. Samuel DyerCEO and Founder

The Medical Science Liaison Corporationwww.MSLWORLD.com

Agenda

• About me, The Medical Science Liaison Corporation, MSL World.com• Demonstrating value of the expensive MSL and advisor roles to the

company• Examining the disconnect between field based medical and corporate

initiatives• Acquiring and synthesizing field insights to drive clinical and corporate

decision-making

The data slides represent findings collected from 11 European-based companies’ MSL management teams.

Key DefinitionsMSL Activities

Performance MetricsTeam Structure and Staffing

• 10 years experience within International Medical Affairs• Led MSL / Medical Teams in multiple TA’s in over 60 countries

throughout the U.S., Canada, Europe, Africa, Middle East, New Zealand and Australia.

• Been hired as a consultant by McKinsey, Bain & Co. consulting companies and Philips Healthcare to work on MSL projects

• Sit on the management team /board of advisors for the start up Biotech company-Biognosys

• Wrote a first of its kind book on the MSL/MA role that is expected to be published in the fall of this year

• Formed the Medical Science Liaison Corporation along with a team of professionals that operates among other functions www.MSLWORLD.com

About Me

http://www.MSLWORLD.com/

About Medical Science Liaison Corporation & ww.MSLWORLD.com

• After numerous discussions with hiring managers, recruiters and HR personnel around the world it was decided that there was a need to have a source of career related resources for the MSL/MA role

• MSL Corp. is completely focused on the MSL/MA Career. Our goal is the bring the best resources around the world together for MSL/MA professionals

• Provide original articles, publications, books etc. focused on MSL

• MSL WORLD is the industry’s first and only comprehensive niche career management site 100% dedicated, focused and built to serve the Medical Science Liaison (MSL) career.

MSL Activities

Data Slides uses the following abbreviations:

• MSL: Medical Science Liaison

• KOL: Key Opinion Leader

• HCP: Healthcare Provider

• IITs: Investigator-Initiated Trials

• PCP: Primary Care Provider

• FTEs: Full-Time Equivalents

Key Definitions: Abbreviations

Measuring MSL/MA Activities

• There are no distinct standards in place that define the MSL Activity/function and how the programs should be run

• The industry is in dire need for standardized practices and performance measures for MSL Activity/Function

• To retain top talent, companies must establish a fair and clear method of assessment. This method typically will consist of both qualitative and quantitative metrics. There must be concrete, reachable goals that apply to each MSL’s activities.

Initial Phase of MSL Support for a Drug: Europe

9%9%

9%

36%

36%

Pre-Clinical

Phase I

Phase II

Phase III

Registration and Launch

First 12-18 Months on the Market

n=11

Latest Stage of MSL Support for a Drug: Europe

n=11

9%

9%

9%

18%

18%

36%

Phase III

Registration and Launch

First 12 to 18 Months on the market

Two years after Launch

Three years after Launch

Four years after Launch

Five years after Launch

More than five years after Launch

MSLs’ Time per Activity for a Pre-Launch Product: Europe

n=11

5% 7%1%

9%0%

8%

6%

9%7%

25%

14%

4% 4%

Developing clinical protocols

Assisting clinical trial inves-tigators

Developing product labels

Developing scientific collateral

Developing promotional col-lateral

Collecting competitive intel-ligence

Training sales field forces

Training speakers

Training new MSLs

Identifying and building KOL relationships

Delivering presentations/speeches

Coordinating/facilitating IIT processes

Other

MSLs’ Time per Activity for a Post-Launch Product: Europe

n=10

4% 7%

14%3%

4%

5%6%

6%7%4%

9%

6%

12%

9%5%

Coordinating new sponsored research

Coordinating new IITs

Educating thought leaders and HCPs

Participating in managed care ac-tivities

Planning medical publications

Identifying/coordinating speaker opportunities

Supporting field sales activities

Training field sales force

Participating in advisory boards

Supporting medical congresses

Attending conferences/symposia

Collecting competitive intelligence

Identifying and building new KOL relationships

Training speakers

Other

Percentage of MSL Teams That Conduct the Following Activities for Pre-Launch Products: Europe

n=11

Developing promotional collateral




Assisting clinical trial investigators


Training speakers

Training new MSLs





0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

9%

18%

36%

36%

73%

82%

82%

82%

91%

91%

91%

100%

Percentage of Companies

Ac

tiv

itie

s

Percentage of MSL Teams That Conduct the Following Activities for Post-Launch Products: Europe

n=10

Participating in managed care activities


Supporting field sales force







Training sales force




Training speakers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

30%

50%

50%

60%

60%

70%

80%

80%

90%

90%

90%

100%

100%

100%

Percentage of MSL Teams

Ac

tiv

itie

s

Percentage of MSLs’ Time Spent per Activity for a Pre-Launch Product: Europe

n=11

Developing promotional collateral



Training new MSLs


Assisting clinical trial investigators


Training speakers





0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

5%

7%

8%

8%

10%

10%

10%

11%

12%

14%

16%

25%

Percentage of MSLs’ Time

Ac

tiv

itie

s

Percentage of MSLs’ Time Spent per Activity for a Post-Launch Product: Europe

n=10




Training field sales force





Participating in managed care activities

Training speakers


Supporting field sales force



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

6%

6%

7%

7%

7%

7%

8%

8%

8%

9%

9%

10%

12%

21%

Percentage of MSLs’ Time

Ac

tiv

itie

s

Performance Metrics

Measuring MSL/MA Value

• There is little to no data or studies that have looked at ROI metrics with hard numbers for the return on investment for an MSL/MA

• There is no industry standard or definitive measure at this point

• MSL team managers and companies are still trying to figure out how to measure ROI on MSL, they all know the value is there but the hard metrics are really not indicative of the quality of the MSL-KOL relationships

• Each company measures a MSL team contributions a little different by establish various performance metrics to demonstrate the value that a MSL/MA team brings to the company.

Type and Number of Interactions per Thought Leader, Annually: Europe

n=10

Face-to-face visits Telephone conversations Email exchanges0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

4.4

7.8

14.6

Type of Interaction

Nu

mb

er

of

Inte

rac

tio

ns

pe

r T

ho

ug

ht

Le

ad

er

Number of Performance Metrics Used by Companies in Europe

45 18 21 26 17 38 44 49 14 25 11 Average0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

4

5 5 5

6

7 7 7

8 8

9

6.45454545454544

Responding Companies

Nu

mb

er o

f M

etri

cs

Percentage of European Companies Using Specific Performance Metrics

n=11

Age of relationships with thought leaders

Attrition of thought leader relationships

Number of promo speeches by thought leaders

Direct contribution to company research

Number of scientific speeches delivered by MSL

Internal Customer Feedback

Rx sales for TA or geographic area

Average time spent per visit with thought leader

Number of publications authored

Number of MSL promotional speeches

Number of IIT proposals submitted

Depth of relationships with thought leaders

Thought leader satisfaction survey

Number of new thought leader relationships

Number of scientific speeches by thought leaders

Activities per product per MSL

Number of maintained thought leader relationships

Number of interactions with thought leaders

0%10%

20%30%

40%50%

60%70%

80%90%

100%

9%

9%

9%

9%

9%

9%

18%

18%

27%

27%

36%

45%

55%

64%

64%

64%

82%

91%

Percentage of Companies Using Each Metric

Me

tric

s

“External Value” Performance Metrics: Europe

n=11

Number of new thought leader relationships

Depth of relationships with thought leaders

Age of relationships with thought leaders

Attrition of thought leader relationships


Number of maintained thought leader relationships

Average time spent per visit with thought leader


Thought leader satisfaction survey

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

60%

40%

0%

0%

80%

60%

40%

40%

20%

67%

50%

17%

17%

100%

100%

0%

83%

83%

Above Averge Number of Metrics Utilized Below Average Number of Metrics Utilized


Ex

tern

al

Me

tric

s

“Internal Value” Performance Metrics: Europe

n=11


Direct contribution to company research

Number of scientific speeches delivered by MSL

Internal Customer Feedback

Activities per product per MSL

Rx sales for TA or geographic area


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

20%

0%

0%

0%

80%

0%

0%

33%

17%

17%

17%

50%

33%

67%

Above Averge Number of Metrics Utilized Below Average Number of Metrics Utilized


Inte

rna

l M

etr

ics

Team Structure and Staffing

Criteria Used to Establish MSL Staffing Level (US and Europe)

n=50

Number of promo speeches by thought leaders




Total sales/Rx deciles

Number of sales reps

Number of teams


Allocated yearly budget

Number of territories

Number of thought leader relationships

Number of brands/products to support

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2%

4%

8%

10%

10%

14%

18%

40%

48%

48%

72%

74%

Cri

teri

a

Percentage of Companies Using Each Criterion

Ratio of Thought Leader Relationships to MSLs in Europe

n=11

18 11 49 45 17 25 Average0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2.54.3

11.0

16.7

20.0

30.0

14.1


Re

lati

on

sh

ips

/MS

L

Ratio of Sales Reps to MSLs in Europe

n=11

25 26 21 11 14 18 Average0

2

4

6

8

10

12

5.05.3

5.6

7.1

8.0

10.0

6.8


Sa

les

Re

ps

/MS

L

Level of Executive with Oversight over MSL Teams at European Companies

n=10

30%

10%

40%

20%Manager

Senior Manager

Director

Senior/Executive Director

Vice President

President

Acquiring and synthesizing field insights to drive clinical and corporate decision-making

Best Practices Shared: 12 companies-28 MSL Directors/MSL’s across Europe, Asia, U.S.

• Industry study-reports that KOL development as the second most important product-launch expenditure• Centralized database needed for the sharing of information across multiple cross functional areas

(Medical, Sales, Marketing)-this can be FREE and SIMPLE-Not much $ needed• Complete alignment of internal activities and planning• Dissemination of information/sharing of KOL interactions • Calendar of KOL activities that is shared between Medical and Sales for better alignment • Write up summary of KOL field visit-Sales and Marketing have access to information• Have a clear specific plan for each KOL (i.e. Ad Boards, speaking engagements etc.) for the Quarter, 1

year and 2 year timeframes etc.• Set up marketing/medical bi-weekly meetings to discuss tactical and strategic items including: KOL

lectures, workshops, planned visits, training territory/KOL issues etc. • Create monthly team teleconferences• Create and present to all sales colleagues (NSM)-updates, challenges and wins at sales training, cycle

meeting and teleconferences etc.• Create internal multiple TA/Product Medical Meetings to share best practices, approaches, and

opportunities• Identify further opportunities for cross functional collaboration• TALK and COMMUNICATE! NO SILOS!

Examining the disconnect between field based medical and corporate initiatives

The Problem #1 complaint given by MSL teams across the U.S./Europe/Asia

• There is a strong disconnect of the communication between field based MSL/MA team and corporate Medical Affairs

• A problem occurs when decisions are made at the corporate level or initiatives have begun (like working with KOL’s) and there has not been direct communication with field MSL/MA teams and/or there is a poor/slow communication channel

• Most common problem occurs when there is a change, delay or not clear communication on corporate clinical strategy. – MSL/MA working with a KOL may generate a IIT lead/idea. – MSL may work with a KOL on IIT to write/submit a proposal though the IIT is no

longer aligned with corporate strategy. – Result: valuable opportunities are lost, expensive resources are wasted and KOL’s

lose confidence in the company due to lack of direct and/or timely communication. Company credibility can be damaged.

Examining the disconnect between field based medical and corporate initiatives

To prevent a disconnect:

• Corporate Medical Affairs and field based MSL/MA teams should have ongoing dialog concerning goals, initiatives, KOL activities and successes

• Establish communication processes between home office, field Medical AND also marketing and sales

• Communicate strategy and needs as changes occur WITH KOL’s!

• Revisit strategies regularly to make sure they are still aligned with the goals of the company

• A good relationship between departments where channels of communication are open is critical to a company's success. When the Medical, sales and marketing departments have regular communication.

• Get all departments involved with KOL/MSL/MA activities. Prevent communication silos!

Contact

Dr. Samuel Dyer

CEO/Founder www.MSLWORLD.com

[email protected]

___________________________________________________________________Acknowledgements:

Thanks to Cutting Edge Information & Yanis Saradjian for providing slides and

information throughout this presentation.

Yanis Saradjian Director of Consulting-Cutting Edge Info.

Durham +1 919-433-0206Boston +1 781-530-3785

[email protected]

http://www.MSLWORLD.com/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

THANK YOU

ANY QUESTIONS

medical science liaison-aligning the activities and goals of medical science liaison teams for...

Business

europen11surveyed

synthesizing

medical science

field based

corporate

msls time

corporate

specific measures