While market research has been the primary means of gathering information of business insights teams, the fact remains that it is squarely focused on the “customers” piece of the equation, giving rise to some blind spots. Where competitive intelligence (CI) teams and vendors exist, they tend to operate in relative isolation from those handling market research for the same product or space. Through this talk, we attempt to explain when and how CI can be interwoven into market research to unlock a unique perspective of the market that is not only more comprehensive but also more forward-looking and actionable.
But what happens when those hypotheses don’t align with the insights actually
uncovered? Join this session to learn how Genentech overcame these obstacles and merged
insights from two independent qualitative research projects with two separate partners across two
different audiences—patients and physicians—to overcome a divergent emotional hook and
reframe their position and approach in a highly emotive and high-stakes disease.
At the same time, research has shown that the industry has been seeing HCP push-back due to over-communication
and in some cases, “spamming.” Based upon recent voice of customer research funded and conducted by ThinkGen
researchers, Audrey Wu (VP) and Muhammad Asim (SVP) will provide some insights into the drive towards more personalized, individualized and customized modes of HCP communication, with a focus on messaging. This talk is aimed at helping marketing researchers understand today’s current HCP engagement landscape, and to leverage Dynamic Messaging to tailor the message to HCP’s unique habits and communication profile preferences to help drive the success of the brand.
It’s no wonder why there’s so little trust in demand study outcomes among biopharma executives and brand leads. But what is driving the need to apply such large discounts? Is there a better way to design demand studies to control for sources of error that contribute to the need to discount? In this presentation, we will compare two common approaches to demand studies – global allocations and patient scenarios – and the potential sources of error that methodology selection can introduce. We will also discuss the benefits (and relatively limited drawbacks) of patient scenarios over global allocations.
Clinical environments and the limitations of human psychology as well as the power of subtle social and systemic influences necessitates decision-making that relies on more intuitive,
System 1 decision-making more than ever before.
In other words, healthcare professionals are human too, and just as susceptible to the same errors in judgment and decision-making as the rest of us. As business professionals seeking to influence HCP behavior, it’s important that we come to terms with these realities and their impact. In this talk, we will focus on these forces and what you can do about them, including:
– The under-appreciated and little known factors that limit HCPs capacity to be objective
– The predominant influences that nudge physicians to prioritize certain options over others
– Ways you can foster more empathy and understanding for the complexity under which HCPs are making decisions
– Methods and approaches that can help you change ingrained HCP behavior