I’m a Rep, Trust me!

“Hey Man, What Happened To The Trust?”

It was the salad days of our industry.  I was a sales representative for Pharma Corp and life was great.  It was 1995 and Pharma Corp had a strong lineup of products in the infectious disease, cardiovascular and pain management areas.  The salary and the bonuses were terrific.  The docs I called on really welcomed me, as well as other reps into their offices because they wanted to learn more about our products, how they were best used and what to expect. 

Pharma Corp, like a lot of other industry companies, understood that doctors needed real and solid clinical information to help their decision process as well as services that helped them and their patients.  They looked to me, their Pharma Corp sales rep, to give them the straight story as well as important colleague insights about how to best use my products.

Of course I really knew my stuff.  I knew my products, the competition and the disease states inside out.  I also spent at least 2 hours per week reviewing the top clinical publications in each of my therapeutic categories.  That helped me bring important insight and information to my docs which they truly appreciated.  But the big thing that helped was that I was a straight shooter.  I didn’t speak with a “forked tongue”, I was always realistic in how and where my products should be used, I did what I promised.  In the end those things helped me bring good value and establish strong TRUST – you know, the cornerstone things that make for a good relationship. 

Here I am today, 24 years into this business and I am really stunned by what is happening.  The trust is no longer their.  Even though I still have good relationships with my docs, Pharma Corp and others in my industry have a huge problem.  Docs just don’t trust what I have to say anymore because they feel as though they have been misled or misinformed by the pharma industry.

God when the product messes hit, it was like a slap in the face to me.  Data were with withheld and/or misrepresented.  Patients died, doctors got sued and I got restricted from many of my office and hospital accounts because they believed that my industry broke the most important covenant – the “trust pact”.

Now I am scared to death.  I don’t know if I have a job much longer. The home office continues to bury their head in the sand and keeps sending out non-sensical sales and promotional materials.  And some of the newer reps that are coming on-board don’t have the background, understanding and knowledge to bring sound information and value to their customers.  Does anyone know how to help my company re-create the trust?  Is  there a different way in which we need to communicate with and engage our physicians? Hello, anyone out their listening and willing to help?  Is this the end of my industry?

– Nostalgic Rep

The Physician Communication Age Gap

Over my career as a pharma sales rep, it has become very apparent that there is a growing gap among the physicians in my territory. It’s not the type of gap that is pitting one physician against the other. Rather, it is an age gap in which the older physicians, say 50+, are hearing and learning information in a much different way than the younger (30- and 40-somethings). I have tried to understand this phenomenon not only because I think it is interesting but also because if my company and I don’t figure out the subtleties of these differences I will have little success in reaching and selling to all my target docs.

Let me try to briefly summarize what I see as the communication differences between these two groups. The docs 30 to 40 tend to value evidence-based medicine. The younger guys are very savvy and tend to demand the clinical information first and foremost. They want it clear and concise, and there is no fooling around. They will tell you right up-front if they suspect any issues or concerns, and you better have third-party evidence that supports what you say.

The younger docs also tend to be less emotional in their dealings with patients. In fact, some patients have a major problem with this as they want empathy and understanding. They want their physician to see them as a real person rather than a disease. On the other hand, the younger docs don’t mind the “empowered patient”  —that is, the patient who has done his/her homework, asks questions, and challenges the physician.

These younger docs also like to use and see technology in how they get their information. They are very computer literate. They do their medical education and reading online; they Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and don’t mind getting their information in those types of mediums—as long as it is credible.

The 50+ guys are not willing to settle for any less when it comes to credible, clinical data, but there is a difference. They typically have 20+ years of clinical experience and are more than willing to incorporate their own and collegial experience along with the clinical data to arrive at patient management decisions. While they will certainly “go electronic” when they are trying to find information, I find that they will look at a clinical reprint, discuss it, “touch and feel it”, and interpret it. They are the guys that still like to read the morning paper, hold a book in their hands, and consider others’ experiences.

With patients, they tend to have empathy and emotional interaction. They sometimes don’t closely listen to their patients, and this can cause real management problems when it comes to a suspected diagnosis and a course of treatment. They will set a course for their patient, and many don’t like to be challenged or questioned. They are the masters!

So, with these communication/information gathering differences in mind, I have asked my marketing guys at the home office to think about the following things when they start putting the next great effort together.

Are we thinking about age differences when we choose a method to communicate with physician groups?

What are we doing to transmit our product data in a transparent, clear manner?

What KOLs and “regional gurus” are we consulting with to make sure our data, product uses, and others clinical experience is taken into account?

Do we ask the correct questions when doing market research and testing for our promotional items? That is, do the panel physicians get a limited choice of what they are asked to accept or do they really get to say that they like none of the tested options?

What electronic and “paper” mediums work best and can bring the right story to the right physicians? Not all of them are wowed with technology and electronic wiz-bang.

Finally, do we, as a company, pledge to bring the “whole truth and nothing but the truth” to everything we say and do for them?