The future of biology will hinge on employing analogous approaches and tools to solve complex problems of living systems. What will this transition look like, who will lead it, and how fast will it occur? Will these disruptions come from within or from outside the life science business ecosystem? What are the determinants for success in this new emerging tech-bio landscape?
We will review a case study that highlights how product benefits can be leveraged as well as the impact of new entrants and indications on this product.
In this discussion we give the low down on what differing stakeholders in the process truly think about communications research (including respondents, marketing and their advertising agencies) and take a look at ways we can build upon the tried and true approaches to maximize its value.
Instead of asking respondents for their perceptions (ratings) of agents on traditional attributes such as “efficacy,” we ask respondents to indicate what they believe to be the agents’ objective performance on endpoint attributes such as “overall survival (in months).” In the data analysis, differences between perceived reality and objective reality can be highlighted for purposes of actionable recommendations. We also show how to estimate the stated and derived importance of endpoint attributes.
What is the best way to do this? We say by understanding basic brain science and using methodologies and designing research that follows brain processes. Over 15 years we have studied and researched this in the healthcare space and invite you to see some of our latest findings and learn how to make research more insightful and effective.
Addresses a target’s need
• Be credible in the eyes of customers
• Is motivating – creates new behaviors (e.g., changes prescribing behaviors), changes perception
• Is differentiated from the competition
• Is future-forward, not pigeon-holed in the present
• Works across current and future indications and markets
• Is sustainable over time, as markets and categories change
• However, pharma marketers often fall into pitfalls when developing brand positioning. We’ll highlight 3-4 pitfalls and provide real world examples of what this looks like;
1. Positioning is too product-focused
2. Positioning that does not go high enough up the Brand Ladder
3. Positioning that’s not single-minded
4. Positioning work that’s done too late
At Human Branding, we have a four-step approach to avoid these pitfalls and ensure a solid brand positioning that meets strategic criteria.
1. Mapping the competitive set
2. Building the brand benefits ladder
3. Decoding the brand essence
4. Honing in on optimal brand positioning territories & positioning statement
As patients become increasingly involved in their own health and healthcare systems demand more evidence of outcomes, pharmaceutical organisations have been moving towards a business model that puts patients at the heart of everything they do. In this paper we will deliberate the meaning of patient centricity and why it is so important, the impact of patient centricity on pharma/biotech, discuss relevant case studies on supporting patient centricity through research and finally considerations for the future for patient centricity.
What if we applied the uncanny power of storytelling to the actual design of qualitative research studies? This case study shows how narrative study design yielded rich insight into the motivation and behavior of people at-risk for developing diabetes.
• What do respondents think of the online experience?
• The client’s prospective
• A case study with both physicians and payers