Is Pharma Sales Dead?

I know, I know – we’ve seen lots of articles with titles like this in past. For many years, the imminent death of the pharmaceutical salesperson has been forecast.

And, for good reason – taking into account increasing government takeover of healthcare decisions, past shady sales practices, and the unwillingness or inability of many doctors to even see reps anymore, these are not great times for the pharma sales industry. I’ve seen incredible cutbacks in staff over recent years.

But, for now, the role of the sales rep continues. So we come to the question: what does the future hold?

I think the best way to approach this question is to broaden it and link it to the larger movements (I call them trend currents, as opposed to current trends) that are shaping business and culture.

So, let’s consider this question: What is happening to the role of face-to-face information exchange in all of life and business? Especially, what will be the role of person-to-person exchanges of information that can be easily accessed by other means?

If I want to know about a drug, do I have to wait for the right sales rep to drop by? Or can I, with a few clicks on a tablet, find what I need in real-time (without a potentially biased presentation)? How many of us research information on-line now, that we used to discover only through person-to-person interactions?

If I can use a (free) search engine to point out the facets of knowledge I’m seeking, do I need someone to point out those knowledge bits on a glossy piece of paper, or on their company-issued tablet?

If I can get an e-detail whenever I want it, why would I prefer the model of having people interrupt the office flow in the middle of the day to give a pitch?

Take these principles and apply them to every industry outside of pharmaceuticals, and you’ll see that we are undergoing a major change in the way we communicate and do business. It’s called disintermediation (removal of non-value-adding layers between us and what we need). Every time you use Amazon.com, and not a brick-and-mortar store, you are living in this trend current.

It’s not that face-to-face interactions don’t have value (they do), it’s just that the broader trends across the entire landscape of our culture are driving us to real-time connectivity to whatever we need – especially in the realm of knowledge.

Is pharma sales dead? I don’t think so. But I think it’s losing the race of relevance in our current technology and business climate. Which means we’re going to have to re-think the model – fast.

Your two cents?

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Read Full Post »

Create Your Vendor Funnel

During recent Vendor/Project Success workshops for clients, I’ve been describing a process that can help alleviate a constant issue that pops up – not having the right vendors properly categorized and lined up when a specific need arises.

In other words, a project comes up, and the question is raised, “To whom can we send this RFP (request for proposal)?” Then suggestions are hastily sought as to potentially workable vendors.

Unfortunately, that means that some vendors are walking in the door for the first time, in the midst of a high-stakes process, AND they may not already be in your paperwork system as a supplier. This creates headaches getting a project off the ground; or, in some cases, simply disqualifies the best candidate because the time crunch is too short – so the project goes to a sub-optimal incumbent vendor.

Here is how to fix that. I call it the 3P Vendor Funnel.

At one point in time, every department needs to create its pool of potential preferred suppliers (I recommend that this pool be refreshed annually, as new vendors and needs appear, and as current suppliers decline in favor). This can be done through a RFI (Request For Information) process, whereby you seek out possible vendors that you may want to consider for the year ahead, and have them present themselves in a general, non-volatile format (that is, a big project is not on the line). The goal here is to gain familiarity with the vendor, and especially to narrow down to one or two areas of core strength. All vendors in the pool can then be placed in your Vendor Map (see this blog post), according to capability, therapeutic experience, project scope, etc.

Potentially desirable vendors at this point commence the paperwork (Master Services Agreement or equivalent) process so that they are already in the administrative system when it is time to choose vendors and allocate work.

Once the Vendor Map is established/refreshed, and a project needs to be resourced, you have already established a short-list of suitable vendors by core capability, so that the number of RFPs issued can be limited and well-targeted. This saves everyone – especially vendors – a lot of time, trouble, and angst. You really only want proposals from optimal potential providers anyway – it wastes everybody’s time to have a Request for Proposal filled out, to sit through a solution presentation – and then to conclude that the vendor really isn’t even in the ballpark. Or, worse, if time is very short, that a desirable new vendor has to now grind through the entire MSA system.

I recommend that a Decision Grid be used to evaluate vendor presentations (I have a sample – feel free to ask and I’ll forward). This helps make any kind of team evaluation of presentations more systematic and objective.

Finally, the process to Pick a supplier is far more efficiently reached, and the movement to contracting is not delayed because the vendor is already part of the pool.

POOL – PROJECT – PICK.

Make sense? Having been on the vendor side of the fence for many years, and having experienced many….shall we say….sub-optimal RFP processes, I can assure you that an approach like this is better for EVERYone involved. It just takes some proactive planning. I can provide a brief consulting engagement for clients that would like assistance setting up their vendor map and filling their vendor pool with recommended partners. Just call 973-947-7429 and let’s talk….

Read Full Post »

Friday Notes 3_8_13

- I attended a mid-NJ ASTD session this week on Compliance (kindly hosted by the folks at J&J) – interestingly enough, a discussion I’ve had recently with several involves the role of communications/writing training and compliance. How important is it for people to be trained in what to write/say/present (even just internally)? Well, I heard about a massive, multi-million $$ fine that mainly hinged on a very poorly worded e-mail about some study results. We’ve all read the embarrassing revelations of written stuff (all discoverable in a lawsuit) that really puts a company in a bad light. Lesson: you can pay a little now to train – or pay a lot later to implement a consent decree.

- Making a vendor map – this idea was sparked by a couple of my clients, who have more systematically assembled a list of current vendors, and asked for recommendations of new vendors. This made it immensely easy for me to know precisely which new suppliers would be optimal, AND it was a great way for the department to map out an overview of their current suppliers for discussion and evaluation. So I adapted the idea into a new form which is available by free download: Training Vendor Map Impactiviti. Feel free to adapt and use it, and if you’d like to have a visit (live or by phone) to discuss your upcoming needs, just contact me and we’ll set it up (stevew at impactiviti dot com)

- A couple new job postings, in PA (Manager, Sales Training) and NJ (Associate Sales Training Manager).

- What’s the great un-equalizer when it comes to creating success? Initiative.

Read Full Post »

Can You Fix a Bad Hire?

I read a provocative article this week, and it has generated quite an interesting set of reactions* from others with whom I’ve shared it:

Sales Training – Avoiding the Unfixable Fix

What are your thoughts on the points brought up here?

One of our professional colleagues in pharma training even put it this way: “You can always tell a bad hire within the first week of training.” Do you agree?

I’d love to know what steps companies are taking to ensure better “matches” for hiring practices so that trainers are not left trying to fix what cannot be fixed… If you’d like to discuss, but don’t feel comfortable leaving your thoughts in the comments, always feel free to contact me directly (stevew at impactiviti dot com, 973-947-7429).

*A selection of reactions that have come in via e-mail:

I agree training and coaching are linked through the value of manager direction and support. And hiring right is more valuable than training right.

No, you can’t fix a bad or unmotivated sales person (occasionally it happens when you have an excellent manager). But that’s not Training’s job. Training (and sales management) should focus on identifying the skills and behaviors of the top performers (and seek ways to engage and grow this group) as well as spreading those behaviors to the middle 60-70% to raise their game.

In my experience, the best reps (and best trained) have all the attributes mentioned in point #3. It is this breadth of knowledge (and these days, especially the business and financial drivers of medical practices or hospitals), and productivity that justifies the investment, and the time  out of the field to acquire it. In pharma, I’ve had MD’s pull me or the rep aside to thank them for literally saving a patient’s life (oncology drugs) with the information they provided, or created access to. THAT is when the rep is regarded as a partner and ally, NOT a “rep”, and is valued still by MD’s.

I am finding I have to break a lot of habits in new hire training to get our sales teams think and acting differently because of they way they were trained at other pharma companies. Detailing is still alive and well. From there, it becomes a process of time and investment matched with the individual desire to be successful or not. As you know we can’t train passion, but we can hire to it and then nurture it fervently!

While we can argue the merits of what to train, how to train it, etc. I would make the argument that more investment should be made in selecting the right people for the job, as described in the article. The reason there is an 80/20 rule in sales is because 80% of people in sales shouldn’t be!

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors through our unique trusted referral network. Need something? Ask Steve.

Learn more about us here.

Read Full Post »

Digital Platforms – Taking a Deeper Look

I was recently asked by a consulting client to explain the value of making site visits to suppliers of digital platforms. I believe in the value, but until I started spelling it out in more detail, I didn’t realize just how important I know it to be!

While it may be appropriate to make vendor decisions for smaller projects based on a proposal and a client-site presentation, that approach is probably inadequate for larger-scale (and long-term) digital platforms. Over the years, I’ve seen some sub-optimal digital learning/communication platform decisions. The results are not pretty.

I thought I’d share my reasoning with you, in case you’re thinking about adopting a major platform (especially for use with iPad deployment – many are now looking beyond individual apps to multi-functional systems for meetings, comms, training, etc.). Your comments and insights are most welcome in the comments:

—–

Evaluating digital solutions providers can be complex. Generally speaking, for a smaller-scale point solution (say, a specific app), it is not necessary to perform a site visit. However, for a large-scale solution that will be a strategic and growing communications platform, it is often worth a deeper look under the hood at the technology, and the solution provider (who will become a long-term partner).

Site visits: Better solution/company evaluation process

The four aspects of the platform that need to be analyzed more deeply are:

1. Technology framework of the solution – specifically, how the underlying software is designed, and what interface capabilities it has (and will have) at the middleware and database level to work within a larger enterprise structure. This typically involves direct discussion with people in a software engineering role.
2. Roadmap of the platform – it is vital to have a detailed discussion of how and why the solution evolved into its current state, and what the development plan is for the next 3-5 years. A snapshot of a solution at one moment in time is less revealing than a view of its developmental context. Digital provider and platform direction need to align with anticipated client needs.
3. Current functionality – general group presentations often gloss over details of what actually works (and how it works). A more meticulous advance examination can reveal platform strengths and weaknesses. It’s also important to determine what is currently rolled-out to living clients, and what is still in an earlier development phase.
4. User experience – many solutions seem great on static slides, or with brief, scripted demonstrations, but the overall user experience (for end users, administrators, and managers) needs to be carefully examined in-depth. The quality of the interface design will make or break the adoption of any system.

In addition, deeper interaction with multiple personnel at a potential supplier site can give a clearer sense of the corporate culture and talent pool, which often cannot be accurately detected at a client-site presentation with a few representatives. In most cases, this type of decision is just as much about the partner company as it is the specific technology solution.

Site visits: Better decision-making process

A visit on-site by an expert makes the entire platform evaluation process more efficient by allowing in-depth assessment with a range of technical and strategic personnel – many of whom cannot be uprooted to be part of a client sales presentation. Also, potential suppliers that don’t make the cut can be eliminated in advance instead of creating a waste of client (& supplier) time and money going through an entire sales presentation/proposal cycle, only to be found unsuitable later. In addition, client-site presentations can be made much more efficient as a variety of detailed questions can be pre-answered through the prior provider-site visit.

Site visits: Summary

PROs

-More in-depth look at the “guts” of select platforms

-More complete evaluation of user experience

-Deeper assessment of leading potential provider partners

-Potential elimination (or escalation) of particular providers earlier in the process

-More efficient use of client and provider personnel resources during process

CONs

-Up-front time/travel investment (1 person) for site visits

What do you think? Does your company do site visits for these larger-scale platform decisions? And do you employ consulting expertise in the process?

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors through our unique trusted referral network. Need something? Ask Steve.

Learn more about us here.

Read Full Post »

SPBT 2012 – An Impactiviti Recap

Spent.

That’s how I feel after every SPBT (Society of Pharmaceutical and Biotech Trainers) conference, and this year was no exception. It is the most intense networking week of the year for me.

Now, after a weekend to recover and reflect, it’s time to recap. In no particular order, here is what struck me:

1. The venue, Hyatt Regency New Orleans (next to the Superdome downtown), has been beautifully re-done after Katrina. The layout of the three main floors we used was as confusing as could be (one of the employees called it, “our beautiful labyrinth”), but the exhibit areas and workshop/keynote rooms were all close together. That’s a big plus.

2. All three keynotes this year were excellent, each with a different, challenging focus. Michael Gelb was thought-provoking on how to think like Leonardo DaVinci – emphasizing the need for creativity (and attendees were given the opportunity to receive signed books by the author). Michael Abrashoff has a very impressive story about the role of leadership in turning around an under-performing Navy crew – rich lessons that could be immediately applied (and, signed books given away). Daniel Kraft did a NJ-speaking-speed fast-paced overview of where healthcare technology is heading – this fascinating topic should be covered at least once every year, because we all need to know where the puck is going. I would say that Gelb was the most skilled and entertaining presenter; Kraft was trying to cover too much at his lightning pace; and Abrashoff’s pacing and transitions weren’t quite up to the level of the quality of his story. But each session was high-impact and seemed very well-received by the audience.

3. Whoever thought of bringing on song-a-day-guy Jonathan Mann to compose a fresh song each day, performed before the keynotes, is a genius. His nutty songs (and visuals) about compliance and iPads got the audience rollicking. Great use of humor and creativity. Weird red shoes, but hey, that’s part of his shtick!

4. The SPBT organizers are in the midst of a 2-3 year transition bringing the organization and its events into the new era, and I saw significant progress in that regard this year. I loved the fact that the board members had advance-invite breakfast discussion sessions with various stakeholders. The iPhone/iPad conference app was a cool and well-executed addition. The SPBT booth area was spacious and designed for stand-up or sit-down meetings in a relaxed, New Orleans-themed setting. New growth and services ideas are on the table, and having had many discussions with SPBT leaders of the past years, I am confident that things are heading in some very productive directions, which will be even more evident next year. Kudos to Kevin Kruse and the entire team.

5. Exhibit traffic – sigh. This is a perpetual concern, and having been a vendor in the hall for 10 years (and a free-range consultant for six), I know that there are major ROI concerns when traffic seems light, as it did this year. Most (though not all) of the vendors I talked to were lamenting the downtimes, and the less-than-stellar traffic during the breaks. I wish I had an easy answer to this dilemma. I did provide some “guided tours” for clients who wanted targeted introductions to specific vendors and I’ll probably ramp that up more next year.

6. Food – this was New Orleans, where flavor and calories reign supreme! I don’t think anyone was going hungry. I was actually fearful about getting back on the scale when I got home. One small complaint – coffee and snack availability wasn’t as easy as I’ve experienced in past years.

7. Networking, for me, was exceptional this year. I enjoyed rich discussions with: Ceci Zak and her Sanofi colleagues; Paul Silverman; Bonnie Luizza; Mike Capaldi; Bob Holliday and the B-I crew; a number of folks from Genentech (including the engaging Carrie Schaal); Deborah Reid; a slew of friends from Merck (thanks for allowing me to scatter you during the Networking workshop); the Ferring crew (whose office is maybe 10 minutes from where I live); Vicki Colman; Dawn Brehm and Carol Wells; Debi Limones; John Sjovall and all the fine DSI folks; Chuck DeBruyn and Dawn Sidgwick; Dennis Merlo and Jim Trunick (true industry veterans!); and many more. On the vendor side, it was old-home week again, getting updated with so many friends made over the years, and seeing what new offerings are coming into play. I also got to lead a workshop session on Building Your Own Professional Opportunity Network, and that seemed to go rather well. We could have easily used another hour, I bet – especially with the in-room networking we sought to apply immediately!

8. Technology – well, there were iPads. Oh, and iPads. Plus, a lot of talk about iPads. Here’s the thing: just about every pharma sales force seems to be using or heading toward iPads, and hardly ANY companies really had a cohesive and comprehensive strategy (let alone digital infrastructure) in place before starting to roll them out. So, it’s time to backfill all this neat stuff with clearer vision and strategy. That will be an Impactiviti focus over the coming year.

9. There was a broader variety of workshop sessions this year, although I attended fewer of them than usual (preferring to spend additional time in the exhibit hall and in private meetings). The ones that caught my interest demonstrated the use of iPads for transforming live meeting events – essentially, replacing all paper. Some pretty cool stuff out there. A lot of the iPad apps rolling out are still first-generation level, but looking into the future, it’s quite fascinating.

It’s a tough time for pharmaceutical sales forces, and training & development departments. There have been a lot of cuts, both in personnel and in budgets. But this is a resilient group, and it’s good to see that SPBT is evolving into a more nimble and entrepreneurial organization. We’re going to need that mindset as we move further into this decade of change.

Oh, and here’s my blogevator pitch: if you’re bewildered by the plethora of potential vendors (and technology solutions), call Impactiviti (973-947-7429). You have plenty to do for your day job. My job is to find you the resources you need.

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors through trusted referrals.

Learn more about us here.

Read Full Post »

Fresh Pharmaceutical Training Jobs

Welcome back! First, a couple of links of interest to kick off the new year:

:: Are Walnuts now Drugs? Ask the FDA! (Nanny state alert)

:: Made-up Disease (YouTube)

UPDATE: Some more jobs that have been posted in the past week or so, in addition to the original list!

Director, Global Training and Development, Customer Management, J&J (NJ)

Sales Trainer, Stryker, NJ

Manager, Sales Training and Development, Eisai (NJ)

Manager, Sales Training, Aptalis (NJ)

Director/Sr Director, Commercial Training and Development, Regeneron (NY)

Dir, Global Sales Training and Development, Alexion (CT)

Sales Training and Program Mgr – Becton, Dickinson (Baltimore)

Assistant Skills Development, Sales and Marketing Director, Astellas (Chicago)

Dir, Sr Global Quality and Compliance Training, Allergan (CA)

It’s been a rough year for trainers, but it seems like the job opening spigot is beginning to open as we approach the end of 2011.

Here’s a list of some fresh opening for you to explore (Impactiviti has no further information or “inside track” on these listings – they’re posted here as a service to the Impactiviti network):

Training Manager, Specialty Products, Eisai (NJ)

Sales Training Specialist, Otsuka (NJ)

Associate Sales Training Director, Shire (PA)

Associate Director, Managed Markets Training, B-I (CT)

Assistant Director, Oncology Sales Training, Astellas (Chicago)

Corporate Medical Sales Trainer, Recruiter (Chicago)

National Sales Training Manager, Allergan (CA)

Director, Sales Training and Development, Somaxon (CA)

Brand Trainer, Genentech (CA)

Sales Training Consultant, Avanir (CA)

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors for training, eMarketing, social media, and more.

Learn more about us here.

_________

Sign up for the Impactiviti Connection semi-weekly e-newsletter (see sample), chock full of news and resources for pharmaceutical professionals

Read Full Post »

Doc-Driven? Or Rep-Driven?

We all know that the pharmaceutical sales model is being seriously re-thought. Every business model needs periodic review, to see if it continues to be a value-add, or if, in fact, it is losing effectiveness.

The interrupt-driven model of having drug reps come to doctors’ offices for fewer and fewer minutes of discussion, plus dropping off of samples, is rapidly losing market favor. It’s costly and increasingly inefficient for the drug companies, and it fills offices with non-paying people jockeying for time and attention in a marketplace where both are scarce.

So is there a better way? The industry is experimenting – with things like e-detailing and the like. And healthcare professionals are experimenting – for instance, many of them are simply barring reps from the premises.

Hmmm….

One start-up (contract sales) services company that I’ve been talking to has an interesting model – make the process doctor-driven. The (contract) reps are called in by the doctor’s office when needed for drug sample replenishment, and they are not there to sell, but to drop off samples and acquire an e-signature (tablet). The tablet also has software that the doctor pages through to request more information, set up an appointment with a trained sales rep, schedule and e-detail, contact a Medical Affairs person, etc.

I could see this approach having value for drugs that are near the end of their patent cycle, when promotional efforts are going to be scaled back, but a drug manufacturer still wants to have a presence in the marketplace. There may be other places for a contract services approach like this as well. But the major point is, all contact is driven by the healthcare professional. And there is potentially a big gain in efficiency – highly-trained reps are not idling away time hoping and praying to see 8 docs a day for a few milliseconds each.

What do you think? Does this have value? Serious drawbacks? Let me know your thoughts! (stevew at impactiviti.com)

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors for training, eMarketing, social media, and more.

Learn more about us here.

_________

Sign up for the Impactiviti Connection semi-weekly e-newsletter (see sample), chock full of news and resources for pharmaceutical professionals

Read Full Post »

Articulating Training Impact for Success, part 2

Last week, our anonymous ‘inside-the-department’ guest blogger began addressing an all-too-common problem when co-workers want to reduce a training intervention without considering the loss of impact. You can read that set-up post here.

Today, we give some concrete guidance on helping avoid this unfortunate behavior.

—–

Here are seven ways to increase your chances of articulating training impact for success:

1.  Have Solid Learning Objectives. Writing out the learning objectives ahead of time and stating them to your stakeholders helps keep the conversation on track when you feel like it’s being derailed.

2.  Provide Visual Support. A one-page overview or chart with the learning objectives and linked solutions demonstrates you have thought out the plan and have a comprehensive learning solution. For example, the following might help in articulating impact with Sharon:

When Sharon asks you to ‘cut it down’, you can use a visual like this to demonstrate how removing one or more of these learning solutions will compromise the end goal. For example, if you remove part 3, then the representatives may be able to sell using the studies but may not come across to customers as being clinically oriented if they can’t communicate the impact of new treatment guidelines. If you remove part 4, you also remove the additional ‘positive pressure’ of a certification and subsequently some of the accountability of the learners. You also can’t measure the end result at that time.  For even more impact, add a third column with the amount of time it will take each activity to run.

3.  Shift versus cut. Sometimes Sharon agrees with you, but there really is a time constraint during a live meeting. Instead of cutting down the workshop, you could shift the certification to happen in the field post the live meeting. The impact is still positive, because you give the representatives more time to practice and internalize what they learned. The manager can then administer the certification during the next field visit and give personalized feedback in a one-on-one setting. Another way to shift is by moving some of the up-front workshop parts to be conducted via web or teleconference before arrival at the meeting. Then, the live workshop time stays protected while the learners still get what they need.

4.  Provide options. While preparing for the discussion with Sharon, try to anticipate her reaction to the best case solution and prepare one or two alternate options to present. Make a list of the pros and cons to each, considering cost, time to develop, impact on the learner (less vs. more time off territory) because sometimes your best case solution isn’t possible due to time, travel, or money restrictions. By preparing options, you have already thought through how to address the possible shift in resources without compromising the impact. You might choose to present all your options up front, and then recommend one of them. This positions you as a trusted business advisor who is preparing the stakeholder to make an informed choice.

5.  Practice. Communication skills are probably what helped get you to the role you are in now, so hone those skills by doing a few run-throughs for the presentation or discussion. Review your plans, anticipate the questions, and most importantly, practice talking through the pros and cons of each. Get a trusted audience or run by the solutions with other team members who know the person well. Oftentimes they think of additional aspects you may have missed.

6.  Get support and tag team. If you are the new trainer, get your supervisor or an experienced trainer to accompany you for backup. If you are the leader with a team member going to a presentation like this, don’t let them fly solo. Discuss ahead of time how you can collaborate and participate – maybe they would like you to handle communicating the cons to some of the options while they handle the pros.

7.  Project confidence. You can be the most prepared with the knowledge of the plans and the details, but if you exude confidence throughout the conversation, the positive impact can be huge. This may be easier said than done, since some of our stakeholders tend to hold higher level positions than us and can be intimidating. I’m always shocked to learn how trainers seem to believe they don’t have the right to be confident in front of a higher level stakeholder. As long as you have confidence with respect, it doesn’t matter what the title on their business card states. In fact, credibility points can be earned when you clearly state positive or negative impact, because it comes across as believing what you are stating is the right thing to do for the business.

Why is it so important to effectively state the impact of our solutions? On the downside, not doing so can mean a partial solution with inconsistent results, and that’s when training gets blamed. At the end of the day, if we agree to a partial solution we are the ones held accountable for the results. On the upside, stating the impact effectively can mean achieving the desired outcomes and success.

So, the question is – what do you do to articulate impact?

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors for training, eMarketing, social media, and more.

Learn more about our free services here

_________

Sign up for the Impactiviti Connection weekly e-newsletter (see sample), chock full of news and resources for pharmaceutical professionals

Read Full Post »

Articulating Training Impact for Success, part 1

Today’s anonymous ‘inside-the-department’ guest blogger address an all-too-common problem when co-workers want to reduce a training intervention without considering the loss of impact.

Today, part 1 sets up the issue. Next week, part 2 gives some concrete guidance on helping avoid this unfortunate behavior.

—–

Picture this:  ‘Sharon’, a sales leader in your organization, has told you ‘the reps can’t sell clinically. Can you put together some training on this?’ (sound familiar?) Sure you can! You reach out to key stakeholders, conduct a needs assessment and confirm that the representatives do, in fact, need some help in this area. You then work with your learning team to construct a proposal consisting of pre-work and an assessment, a live 1/2 day workshop, concluding with a certification by the managers. You are proud of this proposal because it is thorough and meets the objective to improve the reps’ knowledge and skill in this area.

You are excited to share the proposal with Sharon. After presenting the plan, Sharon is excited too. She says, ‘This is great! Cut it down to a 90 minute workshop and we’ll roll it out at the next sales meeting.’ You cringe when you hear this last part – and you have heard this before, right?

You know that it is not the right thing to do, but in the moment you can’t express all the reasons why. If you could find the words to explain, how do you do it without damaging the relationship with Sharon, or losing credibility as a learning leader? I’ve witnessed both inexperienced trainers and seasoned learning professionals make the mistake of simply replying ‘sure, we can cut it down’, only to regret it later. I cringe when I think about the times when I have also uttered these words.

Why do we sometimes answer this way when we know we shouldn’t? For the inexperienced or new trainer, it is often a lack of understanding about the impact of this response. They don’t necessarily realize that ‘cutting it down’ also means reducing the chance of meeting the learning objectives, which is the reason why you are doing the training in the first place. For the seasoned learning professional, the motivation could be to keep Sharon happy and give her what she wants, because they are looking to secure a spot on Sharon’s team in the future (feel free to insert ‘Mike the marketer’ in place of ‘Sharon the sales leader’). It may simply be an ‘eager to please’ or conflict avoidance mentality that many of us have. After all, we are in the business of helping people to succeed in their roles, so it can be difficult to push back.

The solution to responding is being able to effectively articulate the impact. This means not only articulating the downside of doing it wrong, but communicating the upside of doing it right. Sharon came to you for a solution.  Unless Sharon has spent time in a learning role longer than 2 years, it’s unlikely she realizes the impact of shortening the learning plan.

There are some best practices that can help you to articulate impact for success. First and foremost planning ahead is paramount. In this scenario, planning ahead means in addition to doing an appropriate needs analysis, you need to be able to articulate a clear picture of the outcome desired as well as how to get there. Next week we’ll look at some practical ways to successfully articulate impact.

_________

Impactiviti is the Pharmaceutical Connection Agency. As the eHarmony of sales/training/marketing, we help our pharma/biotech clients find optimal outsource vendors for training, eMarketing, social media, and more.

Learn more about our free services here

_________

Sign up for the Impactiviti Connection weekly e-newsletter (see sample), chock full of news and resources for pharmaceutical professionals

Read Full Post »