Catalysts driving
successful decisions
in life sciences.
Se
Wea e our bra
rable
nd n
e
on p s infogra w
age
phic
65!
Market Research
The Essential Compendium
Vol 1
2015
www.kantarhealth.com
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
2
Transforming Data into Insights
Marketing research is changing at lightning fast speeds. As we move from a PC-centric to mobilecentric world, tremendous opportunities are emerging in mobile market research. Wearable
devices are giving consumers a new way to connect and generating mountains of data. Those
mountains of data are generating privacy concerns that market researchers must address.
This supplement brings together a series of articles, insights and discussions Kantar Health
has produced to stimulate debate and fresh thinking about the future of pharmaceutical market
research.
Richard Goosey
Chief Methodologist
Kantar Health
In the pieces that follow, our thought leaders explore cutting-edge market research techniques
such as gamified surveys; take a closer look at the insights that can be gleaned from the wearable
tech craze; identify ways to maximize return on investment for new product launches; and analyze
the privacy issues inherent within Big Data.
I hope you find this collection useful and thought provoking, and I welcome your thoughts on how
we can continue our evolution of the market research sector.
Richard Goosey
Chief Methodologist
Kantar Health
[email protected]
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
Content:
3
White Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Fact Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Infographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
White Papers:
4
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
Patient Community through a combination of traditional
data research and mixed digital methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical
Stakeholder Insights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity? . . . . . . . . . 29
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Patient Community
5
White Paper
Catalysts driving successful decisions in life sciences.
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple
Sclerosis (MS) Patient Community
through a combination of traditional data
research and mixed digital methodologies
by Brian Mondry, Vice President,
Integrated Strategy & Digital Solutions
March 2012
www.kantarhealth.com
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Patient Community
MROCs provide a
unique approach to
getting qualitative
insight from a
patient universe.
6
Oral Therapies and MS: Revolution or Evolution
One of the major complaints that MS patients make about available
therapies is that the only method of administration is via injection. As
such, making oral therapies available could amount to a revolution on a
similar scale to that seen when oral therapies began to change the face
of the oncology market 10 years ago. But without gathering more insight
into whether most patients would adopt oral therapies, it has not been
clear whether we are facing an evolution or revolution. We therefore
recently took up the challenge of answering this question around the
potential for oral MS therapies to be game changers. We employed digital
methodologies alongside traditional research techniques with the aim of
gaining deeper insight into patient needs.
Our Approach
We employed two distinct online qualitative
methodologies: Marketing Research Online
Community (MROCs), and Social Media
Listening (SML), as well as traditional
research techniques.
The MROC was conducted over a six week
period. Research community members
consisted of 25 relapsing-remitting patients
who had been living with MS more than one
year. These patients were recruited from
business partner Inspire.com’s, MS patient
community, and from sister Kantar company,
Lightspeed Research’s consumer panel.
MROCs provide a unique approach to getting
qualitative insight from a patient universe.
Unlike an interview or focus group, which is
based on participant to moderator interaction,
MROC members tend to exchange ideas and
discuss issues with each other. Our moderator
mostly served as a catalyst to encourage
relevant discussions. The peer-to-peer
engagement, taking place in a natural setting,
enabled us to listen in and observe how
patients authentically feel about their MS and
the new oral therapies.
A true sense of community formed around
the four week mark, when participants began
speaking independently to each other and
started new discussions on their own. When
the MROC came to its conclusion, many of
the participants indicated that they wanted it to
continue. To accommodate them, we directed
those interested to continue interacting within
the open MS community at Inspire.com.
Note: Our MS MROC included
polls and surveys yet due to small
community size, insights cannot be
considered quantitative
Figure A. Market Research Online Communities
The SML portion of the study included an
analysis of online patient-to-patient discussions
about oral MS disease modifying therapies
from January 2010 – June 2011. A total of
2,803 discussion posts were reviewed by
our MS experts across a wide range of MS
community sites and forums. Our focus was
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Patient Community
By utilizing tightly
defined categories
such as Quality of
Life, Market Access
and Efficacy, we
were able to focus
on those posts
that would best
address our clients’
business issues.
on the qualitative nature of these discussions
rather than quantitative measures such as
brand share-of-voice and sentiment analysis.
By utilizing tightly defined categories such as
Quality of Life, Market Access and Efficacy, we
were able to focus on those posts that would
best address our clients’ business issues.
Our Findings
We found MS patients to be empowered,
positive, and determined. They were highly
educated about their disease, very willing to
share their experiences with us and other MS
patients, and very thoughtful about the pros
and cons of the new MS therapies. While there
was a high level of excitement about the new
therapies there was also a lot of uncertainty
about the efficacy of the new oral therapies
and a sense of satisfaction with existing
therapies, even with the inconveniences
and pain of injections.
Coincidentally, soon after we closed the SML
study, news about Gilenya-related deaths was
announced. (Gilenya is currently the only oral
MS therapy on the market.) We were able to
quickly “reopen” the study and literally watch
patient word-of-mouth as the news unfolded.
7
From these authentic conversations, we were
able to provide a real-time analysis of the
impact of this news on the product.
Each of the methodologies provided a slightly
different viewpoint on the potential of the new
oral MS therapies. After careful study of the
data, we found the social media listening data
to be “skewed” toward the “vocal minority”
of patients who we generally found to be
more positive about the new oral therapies.
In contrast, the patients who participated in
the MROC represented patients across the
spectrum – those who were naturally vocal,
those who needed prompting to share their
opinion, and all types in between. As such,
from the MROC participants, we found a more
diverse, and we believe representative, set of
voices and opinions.
The vocal minority skew that we observed
in the social media listening study does not
negate the value of this methodology. It simply
means that, when not integrated with another
more representative methodology, it should
not be used to address major business issues.
When used independently, given the vast
exposure of the opinions of this vocal minority,
it does have great tactical value. It is imperative
for manufacturers to understand what potential
customers are hearing, independent of paid
advertising messages. Understanding what
is being said about a disease category and
Figure B. MS Patients’ Attitudes Toward
Current Treatments
Achieving Insights in the US Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Patient Community
Digital methodologies
are another valuable
way of gaining insight
into patient behavior
and methodologies.
available brands/treatments, where it is being
said, and who the primary online influencers
are, can greatly inform future marketing
efforts, including both DTC and professional
campaigns, and online and offline programs.
Combining the analytics of both studies,
we were able to answer strategic business
questions and provide tactical guidance to
manufacturers of the new oral therapies.
Our Conclusion
Digital methodologies are another valuable
way of gaining insight into patient behavior
and methodologies. MROCs can be used to
generate insights based on immediate and
For more information,
please visit
www.kantarhealth.com.
About the author
Brian Mondry
Brian Mondry is Vice President, Integrated
Digital Solutions and Innovation at Kantar
Health.
For queries regarding this white paper please
email Brian Mondry at brian.mondry@
kantarhealth.com.
8
highly authentic, unbiased conversations that
can influence major business decisions. SML
can be used as a vehicle for collecting data
to inform tactical decisions, but also to study
how manufacturers should operate within a
social media environment. However, like all
methodologies, it’s the expert analysis of the
deeper and more insightful findings that makes
all the difference and gives us the real potential
to provide innovative direction for our clients
across a wide range of business issues.
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
9
White Paper
Catalysts driving successful decisions in life sciences.
Is pharma brand marketing dead
or has it just arrived?
Mark Sales and Fabrice Bourg
June 2014
www.kantarhealth.com
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
At present,
organizations are
not necessarily
working holistically.
10
While pharma observers speculate on the death of outdated drug
discovery and sales models, some critical wounds to brand marketing
have been largely ignored. But in the new multistakeholder-driven
environment that requires brands to stay one step ahead, Mark Sales and
Fabrice Bourg ask whether marketing has to address unrealized brand
opportunity or face extinction. Is brand marketing dead?
A question: How can you maximize the
potential of your brand? Put another way: How
do you know what opportunities for maximizing
that potential you are missing in the first place?
Focusing your resources on the right areas will
help you identify and exploit these opportunities
– but first you need to know what they are.
Let’s rewind a little. While there have been
significant changes around the pharma
industry in the last few years, not least in the
sales arena where the rise of payers and
empowered patients has realigned commercial
relationships with prescribers, the brand
marketing function has not yet been forced to
adapt to new realities.
The main problem is that, at present,
organizations are not necessarily working
holistically. Market access teams are doing
market access, brand people are doing
branding, and those who are doing the
execution, be it multichannel or sales force,
are still doing them separately. When it comes
to forecasting or building brand lifecycle, this
Sales
Patent cliff
Pharma downsizing
Niche products/
targeted messages
Marketing
R&D
Proliferation of
info / big data
Reduced sales
force ROI
New stakeholders
(payers, patients)
Figure 1: Several factors that have already affected pharma sales models are now driving
essential change in brand marketing.
lack of coordination means businesses are
simply not achieving maximum impact, or
consequently maximum benefit for patients.
Unrealized opportunities: how to grab them
The good news is that plenty of unrealized
opportunities are still out there in brand
marketing. But we need to do what we, as
an industry, have been talking about for the
last decade or so, which is actually pulling
everything together and taking a holistic
view at how we deliver our brands to our
key stakeholders. We know this has already
happened on the sales side, through necessity
rather than through choice, in part because of
patent cliff issues but also because of company
downsizing, more targeted segmentation
and messaging due to the increase in niche
indications, and the proliferation of information
leading to reduced return on investment (ROI)
from traditional detailing. There is also the
issue of market access and the change in
the identity and role of payers, plus patient
advocacy, but many of these environmental
“push” factors apply to marketing too, as
illustrated in Figure 1.
Pharma has looked very intensively at ROI
when it comes to the sales function (and also
trying to invest smarter in R&D), and attention
is now turning to marketing because this siloed
approach that we see time and again is simply
not an optimal use of resources. Doctors are
increasingly saying: “We are payers and this
is how we want to be walked through a new
product.” Throwing a sales rep or a market
access expert at them is perhaps not the best
approach; they need to be treated as
a customer.
Governments are waking up to this too.
In the UK, the much-vaunted value-based
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Healthcare systems
in every country
are looking very
closely at value.
pricing (VBP), which has now morphed into
value-based assessment (VBA), means an
organization needs to approach these more
and more powerful payers in a holistic way.
Rather than saying, “Here’s our strategy, take it
or leave it,” instead we need to say: “This is the
value we’re going to bring to the UK.” Any other
approach is increasingly likely to fall on its
face. All of this is further complicated by patient
groups and empowered individual patients
increasingly flexing their muscles when it
comes to influencing healthcare decisions.
Before writing off the UK as a “special case”
when it comes to market access, be aware
that healthcare systems in every country are
looking very closely at value, including large
insurers in the US, which will increasingly push
co-pay back to the patient for higher-priced,
“less effective” treatments.
The importance of evidence
These changes mean pharma needs to
produce more evidence and work more
collaboratively because payers themselves are
collecting much more robust evidence that will
either prove or disprove the claims the industry
is making for brands. They have access to
the same multichannel world as pharma and
are able to seek information on their own –
they don’t just rely on pharma anymore. The
sheer proliferation of information will be the
game changer, and this abundance of readily
available information, from multiple sources,
means that unless pharma is adding new
evidence, it has no value. One also sees a shift
in active data collection to behavioral sources
such as Twitter, online communities and device
tracking. This has to form part of the mix driving
decision making.
Perhaps as a consequence of needing to
provide more evidence-based data, we’re now
seeing marketing as more about measurement
and science in terms of the way companies
want to see returns, but with more of a
consumer approach from the marketing teams.
The understanding is that if you can’t measure
exact ROI for brand marketing in the way that
you can, for example, via sales with the launch
of a car, then at least companies should have
11
a more ordered approach to where they place
resources and maximize investment.
While it’s true that consumer skills have been
brought to brand marketing (where the rise of
empowered patients has again played a role),
the emotive approaches on which consumer
works are simply not enough in pharma;
there is now more of a focus on internal and
external evidence bases. We are seeing fewer
and fewer big, super-product, blockbuster
drugs coming to market. In the past there was
perhaps more leeway on whether you achieved
peak sales of $1.5 billion or $1.8 billion, but
now if that figure is going to be more like $500
million, you have to be confident in achieving
it. Consequently, companies are taking a more
scientific approach to pre-launch – not scientific
in the laboratory sense, but in the sense
of taking care to get a brand on that peak
trajectory in the first place. In the past there
might have been more focus on simply getting
the brand into the marketplace and working out
how to beat the competition when it’s out there.
That doesn’t work now.
Pharma needs this more scientific approach
to launch to be driven by evidence-based
research and more evidence-based
measurement of results. One of the biggest
organizational changes we’ve seen over the
last few years is the way in which responsibility
for the period “T minus two years to launch”
seems to have settled more in the strategic
marketing space and less in development,
reflecting a need to plan out the market access
pathway properly, get the channel mix right
and do the classic marketing exercises,
including forecasting.
Pharma’s internal walls need to fall
There is a major problem with this approach,
however. The internal structures of pharma
companies – particularly in market research
– make it too easy to go down the brandtracker route. No one will argue with this since
brand-trackers are common currency and,
as the old saying goes, “Nobody ever got
fired for buying IBM.” But this reflex desire to
measure all things – as opposed to the few
key things that might make the difference – is
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Pharma, in other
words, is
stopping pharma.
12
a major blocker to progress. It’s easy to call
your market researcher, add a few things to
the questionnaire from the last brand you
launched and just get on with it. It’s more
difficult to say: “Okay, let’s take a step back
and have a conversation around how we
optimize this brand in the marketplace through
its launch and lifecycle.” It may be that market
researchers themselves are not challenging
enough and thinking about how we could be
more strategic.
The real issue is that a “tickbox” approach to
analysis and evidence doesn’t help identify
opportunities; rather than thinking strategically
about brand optimization, you just do what
you’ve always done.
Pharma, in other words, is stopping pharma.
In short, pharma needs to think more about
getting diagnostic solutions. Brand teams
need to constantly be looking forward to make
better decisions that are evidence-based,
patient-centered and deliver against unrealized
brand opportunity. Whether you are six or 12
months from launch – or even just starting the
launch phase – it would be useful to check that
you are where you need to be in terms of the
crucial factors we believe are the new core
components of brand marketing (also shown in
Figure 2):
Experience
Unrealized
Brand
Opportunity
Whether the brand is
deemed of “value”
So we’re back to those unrealized opportunities
and the continuing need for some kind of solid
measure to help you understand whether you
are missing an opportunity and to explain what
you need to do to exploit it.
A roadmap for brand marketing success
Traditional customer
“feel” about the brand
Access
If market research is formulaic and doesn’t
get to the heart of where a product fits, then
customers – rather than the manufacturer –
will shape a brand’s place in the market. And
remember, these customers now include not
only prescribers, but also payers and patients.
We all naturally fall back into doing what’s
comfortable, and if you’re making money
and doing well, then why change? If this
continues there is a real risk of marketing
having little impact on brand performance.
If you do what you’ve always done then
nothing really changes.
Execution
Delivering brand
strategy in the field
Figure 2: Experience, execution and access form the essential pillars of exploiting unrealized
brand opportunity, founded on a solid evidence base.
„„ Experience: The more traditional way of
assessing brand performance based on
how doctors feel about a brand and how
they intend to use it.
„„ Execution: Whether your brand marketing
is actually being implemented (or is indeed
implementable) in the field.
„„ Access: The 21st century game changer
for pharma: Will payers actually support
budget for a product, even if doctors “feel” it
is a good brand?
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
No one knows
their own
market better
than pharma
companies
themselves.
Brand marketing also needs a coordinated
approach across this trio in addition to more
integrated working across internal silos. Do
this, and pharma is well on its way to acquiring
a roadmap for delivering unrealized
brand opportunity.
The first step is diagnosis, achieved by
quantitative and qualitative research
using internal and external sources and
benchmarking data. From this research it
is possible to develop a brand plan, which
includes the metrics used to measure
success, before moving to implementation and
monitoring of your strategy.
It requires a different approach. To start, you
have to nail down the key priorities: what
other data is available to be used, who will
be your team’s first point of contact, who are
the key stakeholders and how do you want
to implement a strategy? You have to take
into account the global program for the brand:
can your new strategy be applied in every
territory, or do sensitivities mean a different
key message is needed from one country to
another? The big advantage here is that no one
knows their own market better than pharma
companies themselves. But in order to set up
a holistic view you need to start with a blank
page: assumptions need to be challenged and
the limitations of any given solution understood.
Ultimately you need to find a strategy for the
brand based on what you know and what
you want to do. The approach is likely to
13
include talking to your internal stakeholders
when putting together the initial diagnosis,
developing the brand plan and monitoring,
perhaps bringing in the entire team to see who
is involved, and what internal deadlines are in
play. It is also important to talk about available
data such as sales that could be useful in
illuminating the way forward. It may be that
you have more of this than you think – it just
needs to be ordered differently or looked at in
a fresh way.
Key external stakeholders (prescribers, payers
and patients) can be approached using online,
video-driven research or something more
traditional, along with classic measures such
as what a physician thinks of a product, to
build up a picture of where a brand needs to
be for further growth or where you are missing
existing opportunities. From here you can
create a top-line profile of the brand that tells
you where you are in terms of perceived patient
share rather than actual market share and,
from that, where you could be. This difference
needs spelling out since it is fundamental to
getting this new approach right. For example,
the brand might have a perceived share gap
of 10 percentage points on the marketplace:
you can break this down into those three
key categories – experience, execution and
access – and thereby understand that there is
a problem with access or with the multichannel
strategy or something else. Highlighting this
means you can then be very directional in
terms of where to focus efforts.
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Is pharma brand marketing dead?
Ascending to the peak of brand performance.
“New” brand marketing
Experience
Access
Execution
Monitor:
Keep checking that you are going
in the right direction and adapt.
Develop:
Plot the quickest route to
success, using deep insight.
Diagnose:
Look ahead, internal and
external + benchmark
“Old” brand marketing
14
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Understand how
these three pillars
of brand success
– experience,
execution and
access – relate to
your brand.
The old way doesn’t work anymore
The way research agencies have looked at
brands in the past has very much revolved
around the experiential perspective: how
the physician is thinking and feeling about
the brand; whether they are trialing it, using
it, aware of it; what they think of it; how it
makes them feel – all of these things are
going through doctors’ minds when they’re
putting finger to keyboard. But there are
other elements to how a brand performs, and
accessibility and market access issues are very
important – after all, if you’re not on formulary
you’re not getting any prescriptions written.
How effectively you are able to act on this
knowledge comes back to the multichannel
world and the way that marketing has tended to
work in silos. You will probably have a market
access team with a strategy working in a
specific way that may not be linked (or perhaps
only linked quite loosely) to other work you’re
doing. Likewise, patient advocacy/public affairs
teams can play a critical role here, but only if
they work in a synergistic way with marketing.
This is why there is a need to take a real,
holistic view of the brand.
If you can understand how these three pillars
of brand success – experience, execution
and access – relate to your brand, you have a
good chance of understanding a) where your
opportunity is and b) how to close the gap you
have identified – and all three can be applied at
the planning and the execution stage.
Keep looking forward to stay ahead
If you take away nothing else, remember that
it is no good getting a diagnosis of what has
happened in the past. The new reality of brand
marketing is that any diagnostic tool needs to
be clearly looking forward toward opportunities
in the future – and that’s the main difference
between it and all the approaches that have
gone before. Whether you are looking at
current or new prescribers – that is, new or
existing targets – the focus has to be on the
people who are likely to change their habits.
This forward-looking view of your customers
is important: in traditional brand research,
15
everyone rates performance, but you also
have to look into likely future usage, examining
current share and identifying who would
consider using the product in the future.
By doing this it will be possible to build up
a 360-degree perspective based on your
experience of how, for example, a hospitalbased physician would work; looking at all
the environmental, influencing factors – such
as distribution, pricing, guidelines, hospital
recommendations and accessibility – in that
setting. While it’s difficult to predict changes in
the reimbursement environment, it is possible
to evaluate how much share you are losing
based on accessibility. From this you may well
find that it is still important to allocate resources
to communicating safety and efficacy but it may
also show that you shouldn’t invest in more
communications, but rather in lobbying. If you
simply keep communicating and don’t know
about the environmental factors that prevent
the physician from prescribing, then you are
just repeating the same thing – to
no effect.
Finding the key factors
Instead, pharma needs to isolate which
factors would contribute to gaining share and
come up with directly actionable means of
addressing them. As an industry, we need the
ability to predict which physicians are likely
to start using a brand in the future. We can
ask them whether they intend to, but it is from
other market factors such as formulary and
hospital recommendations that we will build the
clearest picture. Some doctors might want to
use the brand but simply can’t because of the
environment they are in.
Bringing together data on share, performance
and physician influence, including their
intention to prescribe and/or switch, as well as
what patient profile they would prescribe to as
essential. But this must then be analyzed in the
context of a broader understanding of different
disease areas and products to ascertain the
right strategy. Benchmarking is key here: KPIs
such as awareness, patient share, likelihood
to prescribe and corporate reputation will
guide you in how products tend to be adopted
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Companies need to
understand where
the gaps are in their
channel strategy.
16
in a specific therapy area. A benchmarking
database (and they do exist) that will tell you
what a good launch looks like in terms of a
particular metric in your therapy area is one of
the elements that will enable you to see how
much more you can do in this space.
Following initial analysis, many factors will
feed into developing your strategic brand
plan. Pharma needs to focus on a range of
contributing factors to improve product share
– such as sales reps or other environmental
factors – that need to be ranked. The most
important might be accessibility, the second
might be reps, the third patient advocacy, and
so on; you need to be able to break down
which aspects require focus to get something
tangible from the process.
At this point it would make sense for marketing,
communications and sales to come together
to discuss the results to ensure you are
comfortable with the data. From there it should
be a war-gaming process, looking at different
scenarios and what might happen in the
market. After developing an initial strategy,
it is worth revisiting – every two years at a
minimum and once a year if possible – to
monitor changes and see that everything
works, and perhaps even tweaking the metrics
if need be.
Above all you need a strategy that makes
sense, predicting the behavior of markets and
Evidence-based
strategy
Multistakeholder
approach
Forward-looking
implementation
A scientific approach to
internal and external
market analysis
Engaging with prescribers,
payers, regulators and
patient groups
Strategy and execution
that looks ahead, not at
the current market
Figure 3: Effective brand marketing must embrace an evidence-based, multistakeholder and
forward-looking approach to exploit unrealized brand opportunity.
individuals so you are never looking backward.
Some doctors will never change their habits –
but the key point is to protect your investment,
so focus on where you have the potential for
a good return. Companies must prioritize their
resources: we know there will almost always be
some barriers you can’t overcome, so leverage
what you can.
The benefits of a cohesive approach
If nothing else, you need a cohesive approach
to brand marketing that must embrace three
key elements (Figure 3):
„„ Rigorous, evidence-based “scientific”
planning to properly understand your brand
position and opportunities.
„„ Coordination across the payer, prescriber
and patient-focused teams.
„„ Forward-looking strategy and executable
implementation that is constantly looking
for improvements.
Perhaps it’s more useful to think of this as a
circle: companies need to understand where
the gaps are in their channel strategy, where
they are already successful and where they
need more help. Out of that will come different
conclusions about where the opportunities are
and what you need to do to take advantage
of each opportunity. Get this right and there
is the chance of putting together a sort of
virtuous cycle – a mini-diagnostic you can keep
repeating. Over time, ongoing measurement
will pull out areas of opportunity where you will
be able to drive success.
Along with the metrics, evidence and more
collaboration, what else is now required for
this new approach? Perhaps most important
is the forward-looking element. If you examine
classic brand equity metrics, they are either
looking at what’s happening now or at what has
happened in the past: How did we perform in
the last three quarters, and what is our current
brand equity? But you need to focus on the fact
that it’s about looking forward, making better
decisions and understanding where you could
be as an organization if you made the right
decisions, constantly rolling, planning ahead.
It’s all about planning and having a metric that
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
Myriad opportunities
exist for companies
that are prepared to
react to, and engage
with, the changes
that now influence
the landscape.
will identify that gap – you could be there and
this is how you get there – that works very
successfully in other industries. In some ways
this is about opening your eyes to what you
don’t know is there yet – the opportunities you
know are there as well as the ones you don’t
know you’re missing – and about bringing
direct action to bear on them.
Is brand marketing dead?
So is brand marketing dead? No, it’s just
gotten interesting. In the US, the healthcare
system has completely changed under the
“Obamacare” Affordable Care Act, which
means the nature of stakeholders has
changed. It is now about real key account
management. You’re not just throwing sales
reps out there anymore; you’re dealing with
organizations such as the NHS or major
insurers that demand value, not to mention the
patient voice demanding real-world results.
The fact that branded products have moved
away from broad, blockbuster molecules
coming down the pipeline to more targeted,
niche treatments has changed the way we
as an industry have to do things. We have to
be smarter now in this space to get what we
want. Pharma companies are slimming down,
being forced to act more like customer-centric
marketing organizations and adopt a true
multistakeholder, cohesive approach around
a brand.
17
The challenges are clear – but this is not a
question of, “Will the last person to leave
pharma please turn off the lights?” Myriad
opportunities exist for companies that are
prepared to react to, and engage with, the
changes that now influence the landscape.
It’s not about controlling the multichannel
environment; it’s about understanding it. Brand
marketing needs to change to reflect new
customer needs but pharma brands already
have all the skills and evidence available
to be successful. The key is applying them
in the right way, and this is what will deliver
unrealized brand opportunity.
For those who are smart enough to embrace
this new approach, perhaps it’s more a case of:
“Brand marketing is dead! Long live brand
marketing!”
Is pharma brand marketing dead or has it just arrived?
For more information,
please visit
www.kantarhealth.com
or contact us
at pinnakle@
kantarhealth.com.
About the authors
Mark Sales
Mark Sales is global head of Brand and
Stakeholder Management for Kantar Health. Mark has worked with many of the world’s
leading healthcare brands, in both primary
and specialty care, and on the client and
agency sides across Europe, the Americas
and Asia Pacific. Mark is a published thought
leader and regularly speaks at industry
conferences about pharma’s commercial
model, including challenges and opportunities,
as well as leading a number of digital programs
across healthcare.
Fabrice Bourg
Fabrice Bourg is senior vice president,
Business Services and Methods, for Kantar
Health. A leading researcher, he has worked
with many highly recognized market research
Institutes in France, including DAFSA, CSA,
TNS and Worldpanel. A trusted advisor to
clients in the areas of brand management
and positioning research, his experience
encompasses several high profile industries
including healthcare, automotive, banking
and IT. Fabrice has helped to develop new
proprietary tools focused on measuring
consumer behavior and as head of Marketing
Insights for Kantar Health in France helped
developed many innovative and complex
quantitative methodologies.
This white paper was written and produced in
partnership with:
18
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical Stakeholder Insights
19
White Paper
Catalysts driving successful decisions in life sciences.
Research Gamification for
Quality Pharmaceutical
Stakeholder Insights
by Brian Mondry and Leah Fink
March 2015
www.kantarhealth.com
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical Stakeholder Insights
Gamification
techniques in market
research must go
beyond graphics to
put respondents in
a more interactive
setting that will
better engage
their subconscious
thinking.
20
Already popular in the marketing space, Gamification is now seeing
broader adoption in market research. Survey gamification is becoming a
necessity in these days of declining completion rates and the propensity
of some survey-takers to speed through questionnaires. To get higher
completion rates plus more thoughtful responses on a questionnaire, you
need to employ some aspects of gamification into your studies.
The term “gamification” refers to using
game design and mechanics in non-gaming
contexts1, which for online surveys could
include enhancements such as achievement
badges, progress bars, avatars, virtual
currency, and respondent challenges.2
However, the use of gamification techniques in
market research must go beyond just graphics.
A truly successful gamified questionnaire puts
respondents in a more interactive setting that
will better engage their subconscious thinking
and motivations, allowing them to think outside
the box, give a less obvious answer, and be
more engaged in the survey taking process.
These benefits can extend across industries
from consumer research to surveying
physicians or patients in the healthcare sector.
Therefore, metrics resulting from an ATU are
often incorporated into tracking studies.
Given the often sensitive subject matter
we deal with in the healthcare sector, there
may be concerns about executing some
of the more elaborate gaming tactics listed
above. However, in most cases, it is perfectly
acceptable to replace long, repetitive text- and
grid-heavy survey formats with interactive
visual response options and features for
a more playful design; or creating storylike scenarios that set a more interesting
and realistic context in which respondents
answer questions; or formulating questions
as problems or challenges using the logic of
games, all while maintaining the integrity of the
subject matter.
In addition, traditional ATU survey design
typically asks respondents to rate various
attributes on a scale of 1 to 7. This type of
rating system has been associated with
country-level bias in scoring. For example,
respondents in Spain are known to generally
provide higher scores compared with their
French and German counterparts.
Using New Design to Inject Life into
Traditional Survey
One often used quantitative survey technique
is the ATU (awareness, trial and usage). The
objective of ATU surveys is to assess key
performance indicators related to awareness,
importance of various criteria, brand/product
performance on these criteria and intent to use.
Despite the key role ATU surveys play in
analyzing and tracking performance, these
surveys are known to have some limitations.
Specifically, respondents (in particular those
who are part of panels) have become very
used to the standard survey format. These
questionnaires are typically composed of
large blocks of questions that are repeated
frequently for different products/brands and for
different indicators (satisfaction, importance).
Therefore, frequent survey respondents may
be answering automatically, not taking the
time to carefully read all questions and
response modalities.
When a client needed an update to their
long-term ATU study completed by a physician
panel, we worked with our sister company
Lightspeed GMI to break the mold of “classic”
surveys. This survey suffered from many of the
standard limitations of ATUs: It was a multicountry survey used to track performance of
very similar products. The same physicians
responded to the questionnaire as many as
three times per year.
To address the challenges, Kantar Health and
Lightspeed GMI worked together to develop
a new approach based on gamification
techniques that would incorporate a
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical Stakeholder Insights
Kantar Health
developed a
new approach
to questionnaire
design that includes
gamification
techniques to
increase respondent
engagement.
21
questionnaire design to increase
physician involvement.
„„ If not, which treatment would you personally
have selected?
The new survey design had three main
objectives:
Diminish country bias to better track
aggregated data
1. Improve physician engagement while
responding to the survey
Prior to adapting the ATU questionnaire, each
wave of research produced the same results:
the Spanish physicians were more satisfied
will all products. However, based on other
sources of information, we knew this was
not necessarily the reality. For satisfaction
questions, replacing numerical scales (“Please
indicate on a scale of 1-7 how each brand
performs on response rate”) with sliding scales
(“Do these treatments increase response rate?
Definitely not…..Definitely so”) harmonized
country data.
2. D
iminish country bias to better track
aggregated data
3. Identify new strategic points of
differentiation for our client’s brand
Improving physician engagement while
responding to the survey
For this specific projects, more than 80% of the
sample responded to the survey three times a
year. Therefore, the physicians were at great
risk of “speed taking” the survey. The first
action taken to improve engagement was the
removal of all grid-like question layouts. In the
gamified survey, only one question appeared
per page and physicians used a “drag and
drop” function to respond for all products at the
same time. Question labels were shortened
and scales were personalized to make sure
physicians read the questions prior answering.
In the traditional ATU, physicians would rate
overall survival and impact on quality of life on
the same scale. Now, physicians rate overall
survival on a scale of “longest” to “shortest” and
impact on quality of life from “least impact” to
“most impact.”
Physician engagement was also addressed
by creating a more interactive way of asking
some standard questions. For example, a
non-gamified survey might ask a physician
respondent, “Approximately what proportion
of your patients do you treat with the following
regimens?” For a gamified survey, however, a
series of questions designed to better engage
the physician would be asked, such as:
„„ Which treatment would you be most likely
to offer this patient? Can you predict the
most popular treatment selected?
„„ Would you choose the same treatment?
In addition to being more satisfied, in the
traditional ATU survey, Spanish physicians also
appeared to be more knowledgeable about all
clinical trials and pipeline products, possibly
out of worry that their competency was being
tested. For questions relating to knowledge,
the 1-7 scale was replaced by a four-item scale
with short phrases: Not aware; Aware but not
of details; Quite familiar; Very familiar. Each
item had an accompanying visual logo. The
results of this change were clear; all countries
in the scope now had much more comparable
answers, making it possible to aggregate
country-level data.
Identify new strategic points of
differentiation for our client’s brand
In the case of this research, our client was
facing a challenge of having a direct competitor
with a very similar product. In the traditional
survey format, differences between the two
products were not always obvious, with
the majority of physicians providing similar
responses for both products. However, in the
gamified version of the survey, physicians
needed to place both products on a single
scale using a “drag and drop,” therefore
highlighting slight nuances in performance
that were previously undetected on the sevenpoint scale.
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical Stakeholder Insights
Gamification in the
healthcare sector
has great potential to
unlock new insights
into prescription
rationale, allowing
us to peek behind
the curtain to
learn physicians
reasoning.
22
Another change involved asking respondents
to think about overall product satisfaction in
a new way. Instead of asking them to rate
satisfaction on the seven-point scale as they
rated other criteria, respondents were asked
if they were to publish a guidebook for the
product how many stars they would give it.
While their rational mind may consider the two
products identical with a score of 6 out of 7, if
physicians picture a guidebook, they may be
willing to give one product five stars and the
other four stars. The new star rating gives the
rare opportunity in quantitative research to
assess subconscious thinking when making a
decision between two similar brands.
to their medications, their side effects, their
comorbidities and relationships with their
doctors, thereby improving their experiences
and health outcomes. The days of long,
repetitive, grid- and text-heavy surveys are
coming to an end. In these days of short
attention spans and always-on connectivity
with the office that has expanded the workday
beyond traditional 9-6, we need to employ
new strategies that maximize engagement
with research studies as well as ensure those
studies yield not only comprehensive but
high-quality data. Better data leads to better
insights, and better insights lead to smarter
business decisions.
The Results Are In
References
In addition to yielding richer data, the newly
gamified survey design made the ATU
experience interactive and pleasant while
increasing user engagement. We found that
the new and dynamic presentation of questions
actually increased physician involvement in
the questionnaire. Time to complete the ATU
questionnaire increased from 14 minutes
for the classic version to 17 minutes for the
gamified version, yet physicians frequently
mentioned that the new questionnaire “seemed
shorter” or was “quick.”
1. Anderson J. The State of Gamification in
Market Research. Greenbookblog.com.
8 Apr 2013. http://www.greenbookblog.
org/2013/04/08/the-state-of-gamification-inmarket-research/
But gamification goes far beyond simply using
nicer looking surveys. A survey that yields
data that can uncover hidden opportunities or
challenges is predicated on having a strong
questionnaire. A survey employing gamification
does not mean just using the previous ATU
survey and adding some graphics. The survey
must be designed with the user experience in
mind and the questions written in such a way
as to lend themselves to the new interface.
Working to bring out the simplicity in the
questionnaire makes the questions come alive
with the design of the interface.
Gamification in the healthcare sector has
great potential to unlock new insights into
prescription rationale, allowing us to peek
behind the curtain to learn physicians’
reasoning. In addition, applying gamification
techniques to patient surveys can unlock
insights into how adherent they are (or aren’t)
2. Using Gamification in Online Surveys.
Survey Gizmo. 14 Mar 2013. http://www.
surveygizmo.com/survey-blog/usinggamification-in-online-surveys/
Research Gamification for Quality Pharmaceutical Stakeholder Insights
For more information,
please visit
www.kantarhealth.com.
About the authors
Brian Mondry
Brian Mondry is Global Head of Digital
Innovation at Kantar Health. He is an integrated
marketing expert with a primary focus on the
digital space. He has been advising clients on
how to use digital channels for marketing and
insight purposes since the mid-1990’s, back
when the Internet was just starting to become
a viable marketing medium.
Brian has global responsibility for digital
strategy around areas such as Mobile, Social
Media, Online Research Communities and
Quantified Self technology.
For queries regarding this white paper please
email Brian Mondry at Brian.Mondry@
kantarhealth.com.
Leah Fink
Leah Fink is a Research Manager for Kantar
Health France. She works on multinational
quantitative research with an emphasis in
oncology. She has a bachelor’s degree in
Genetics and French and a master’s
degree in Marketing, both from the University
of Wisconsin.
23
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy
24
White Paper
Catalysts driving successful decisions in life sciences.
The Battle Between Big Data and
Big Privacy
by Jessica Santos, Ph.D.
November 2014
www.kantarhealth.com
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy
Undoubtedly, Big
Data is helping
researchers beyond
their dreams.
25
As one of the most mentioned buzzwords in the market research industry,
it is impossible to avoid the phrase “Big Data” at any major conference,
keynote speech or business meeting at the moment. Big Data is promised
to “yield big savings”1 and is “transforming healthcare”;2 it is certainly
the future with its “big benefits.”3 However, Big Data comes with a big
question – privacy. Most data subjects (that is, you and me, ordinary
people) are unaware of how our personal data is collected (not only by
providing our details while shopping online, but also simply by some
browsing activities), stored (in which country), transferred (where will it
go) and used (where it is going). Simply asking data subjects to click on
lengthy pages of “I agree with Terms and Conditions” before allowing
them to use a service is no longer sufficient from the Federal Trade
Commission’s (FTC) perspective. The “Big Privacy” movement already
has advocates and increasingly bigger fines.
Will Big Privacy kill Big Data? Will consumers let go of their privacy for the
benefits of Big Data? Will the few privacy advocates talking about privacy
violations reverse the trend?
Big Data
Data, data, everywhere…Some argue that the
focus of the Big Data phenomenon has already
moved from “Should we adapt Big Data into
our business?” to “How can we use Big Data
to make our business grow?” We have moved
from a data-scarce era to an era where we
are being flooded with more data than we
can comprehend. Undoubtedly, Big Data is
helping researchers beyond their dreams:
Comprehensive medical records covering a
wider population, holistic healthcare evaluation
from primary care to secondary care, and
multiple perspectives of a single case are all
easily available.
Expenditure relating to Big Data is expected to
grow from $27.7 billion in 2012 to $54.4 billion
in 2016, and thanks to Big Data 4.4 million
jobs will be created globally by 2015.4 Big Data
will benefit not only the private sector but also
large public authorities like the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), which already has plans
for their Big Data ambitions.5 SEER-Medicare
– a combination of National Cancer Institute
registry data and enrollment and claims data
from Medicare – has allowed researchers
to calculate the risk of hospitalization after
prostate biopsy, the cost of breast cancer
recurrence and other healthcare metrics. Such
studies have implications for the commercial
success of drugs but exist beyond the control
of pharma companies. By working with the
holders of real-world data, drug developers can
at least ensure they know how their products
fit into treatment pathways. This can ensure
companies are prepared in the event a third
party presents data questioning the safety or
efficacy of a drug. The FDA now has access to
a wealth of safety data with the Mini-Sentinel
database, which contains records on more
than 178 million individuals, 4 billion medication
dispensing and 4.1 billion unique medical
encounters as of July 2014.6
The data is currently helping the FDA assess
rates of bleeding among patients taking
Boehringer-Ingelheim’s Pradaxa. The FDA
might be able to identify groups of high-risk
patients by diving in Big Data. The FDA set up
the database in the wake of safety concerns
involving Merck’s arthritis drug Vioxx. The FDA
is also making raw downloads and application
programming interfaces (APIs) of adverse
events data available publicly.
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy
26
Big Privacy
Do data belong to
the individual or
to the company
who collected and
analyzed it?
The big questions often ignored by Big Data
worshippers are, where are these data coming
from, and do we have the required explicit
informed consent in place from all of these
sources? One common reason this question is
swept under the carpet is the answer: We don’t
know. Data on your desk right now could have
been transferred from hundreds of different
data brokers already; maybe they are part of
an extraction from a larger database so that
the original source becomes untraceable.
However, “unknown” doesn’t mean it is legal,
ethical or even “totally anonymous.” Especially
with Big Data analytics, some argue that
anonymised data no longer exists.7
The next big question is, what can or will Big
Data analytics do? If these actions involve any
possible disadvantages to the data subject
even in the future (increased insurance
premium or employment discrimination),
or occur without proper consent (or simply
discontent by the data subject), Big Privacy will
likely win. Facebook8 and Google9 have made
headlines because of fraud claims over data or
privacy violations. And privacy advocates and
the FTC have called fitness tracking apps10 a
“nightmare” and “very disturbing.”
After all, whose data is it? Do data belong to
the individual or to the company who collected
and analyzed it? Ownership of a database is
often sold with a price tag, but what percentage
went to the individual data subject?
In the battle with Big Data, individuals do not
need to be “identified” in order to be placed in
a disadvantageous position. For example, if
all de-identified medical records were openly
available, will health insurance premiums
increase simply because we live in an area
with a high prevalence of smoking and obesity?
Even when medical records are available
only for public sector research, a sharp drop
in women reporting postnatal depression has
been observed because of the fear that their
babies may be taken away. Or will we refuse to
be treated by an HIV-positive nurse,11 or not go
near a hospital with a higher-than-average rate
of hepatitis infections? Given enough money,
resource and time, all de-identified data can be
identified again.
More frequent privacy audits and increasingly
hefty fines seem to be the answer to this
battle. Many big names have been caught by
Big Privacy in an effort to protect user data.
Snapchat settled with the FTC for a recordbreaking $22.5 million in May 2014 over
charges that the company inaccurately claimed
that messages disappeared once they were
sent.12 Ireland’s data protection commissioner
will audit companies such as Apple, Adobe and
Yahoo, which have offices in Ireland, to ensure
their use of online data complies with the EU’s
strict privacy laws.13 Regulators are exercising
their power by amending laws, increasing
fines and offering consumers compensation
globally.14 Some practitioners claim these
measures might bankrupt tech companies.15
What does the future hold?
Should transparency be the new privacy? This
might be a compromise between Big Data
worshippers and Big Privacy advocates. A
well-written, detailed privacy policy including all
aspects of privacy (what will be collected, how
it will be used, stored, transferred, processed,
etc.) is a good start, but in reality it is rarely
read by consumers. Forcing consumers to read
hundreds of pages of privacy policy or carefully
select their individual privacy setting before any
activity seems to be impractical either. Perhaps
an industrywide data transparency principle
would better inform consumers and ease their
concerns about privacy.
Another idea is to let consumers decide who
buys their data. Forbes reported on a working
paper that considers “a market where firms
set prices and disclosure levels for consumer
information, and consumers observe both
before deciding which firm to patronize and
how much personal information to provide.”
The paper, “Competing with Privacy,” by
Roman Casadesus-Masanell and Andres
Hervas-Drane of Harvard, looks at how the
disclosure of personal information (in privacy
policies and via marketing) affects economic
competition.16 After all, AT&T is already offering
$30 per year for your personal data and all
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy
27
transactions.17 Meanwhile, compliance officials
say “the entire technology industry is struggling
to keep up” with the relationship between
technology and privacy.
Security and
accuracy are the
two main concerns
from Big Privacy
advocates, especially
in the healthcare
space.
The trend is moving toward giving consumers
control of their own data and allowing them to
change their minds about what they share in
a swift, pain-free manner. Regulations always
move slower than technology; this time, Big
Data technologists can proactively work with
Big Privacy policymakers to address concerns
and issues as they arise.
What shall healthcare market
researchers do?
Big Data has certainly gained the attention of
healthcare market researchers. It is important
to engage practitioners, patients and regulatory
bodies regarding the benefits of participating
in Big Data research by conducting individual
needs assessments. Stakeholders need to
learn “what’s in it for them,” and an awareness
campaign with positive stories from data
subjects benefiting from Big Data is a good
start.
Security and accuracy are the two main
concerns from Big Privacy advocates,
especially in the healthcare space. If Big
Data practitioners can gain the trust of
practitioners, patients and regulatory authorities
by safeguarding a transparent process for
collecting accurate, accessible data, we might
see a happy ending of both Big Data and Big
Privacy winning!
References
Bates DW, Saria S, Ohno-Machado L, Shah A,
Escobar G. Big Data In Health Care: Using Analytics
to Identify and Manage High-Risk and High Cost
Patients. Health Affairs. 2014 July;33(7):1123-31.
1
Weil AR. Big Data in Health: A New Era for
Research and Patient Care. Health Affairs. 2014
July;33(7)1110.
2
Sarasohn-Kahn J. Big Data and Dark Data for
Health. The Huffington Post. 18 July 2014.
3
Gartner Says Big Data Creates Big Jobs: 4.4 Million
IT Jobs Globally to Support Big Data by 2015. Press
Release. 22 Oct 2012.
4
Baker P. The FDA’s Big Data Hunt for Drug
Problems in Your Medical Records. FierceBigData.
23 July 2014.
5
Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database “At A Glance.”
http://www.mini-sentinel.org/about_us/MSDD_At-aGlance.aspx. Accessed 5 Aug 2014.
6
Anonymisation: How Anonymous Is Anonymous?
IAPP Europe Data Protection Intensive 2014, 29
April-1 May, London. https://www.privacyassociation.
org/media/presentations/14DPI/DPI14_
Anonymisation_PPT2.pdf
7
Gullo K. Facebook Must Again Face User Fraud
Claims Over Data. Bloomberg. 8 May 2014.
8
Whitney L. Google Pays $1.4 Million Fine Over
Italian Street View Snafu. CNET. 4 April 2014.
9
Peterson A. Privacy Advocates Warn of “Nightmare”
Scenario as Tech Giants Consider Fitness Tracking.
The Washington Post. 19 May 2014.
10
Anderson R. Why Anonymisation Doesn’t Protect
Privacy. https://www.privacyassociation.org/media/
presentations/14DPI/DPI14_Keynote_RAnderson_
PPT.pdf
11
Wortham J. Off the Record in a Chat App? Don’t Be
Sure. The New York Times. 8 May 2014.
12
Scott M. Irish Regulator Finds Himself at Heart of
Privacy Debate. The New York Times. 28 May 2014.
13
Lim J. South Korea Increases Data Breach Fines,
Lowers Liability Threshold. Bloomberg. 19 May 2014.
14
Singer N. Federal Regulators Seek to Stop Sale of
Students’ Data. The New York Times. 23 May 2014.
15
Gerdeman D. Companies Should Compete for Your
Privacy. Forbes. 19 May 2014.
16
Big Data, Privacy and Intangible Assets. IAPP Data
Protection Intensive 2014. 29 April-1 May 2014,
London. https://www.privacyassociation.org/media/
presentations/14DPI/DPI14_Big_Data_Intangible_
PPT.pdf
17
The Battle Between Big Data and Big Privacy
For more information,
please visit
www.kantarhealth.com.
28
About the Author
Jessica Santos, Ph.D.
Dr. Jessica Santos is the Global Compliance
Director in Kantar Health, the largest custom
market research company focused on the life
sciences industry. She is primarily responsible
for providing oversight and support across the
40+ Kantar Health global offices in the areas
of regulation, interaction with clients, suppliers
and others within Kantar Health, Kantar and
WPP. Dr. Santos is responsible for maintaining,
anticipating and coordinating all activities with
regard to compliance laws/regulations, industry
guidelines, pharamcovigilance and client
contracts, defining and driving the execution
of Kantar Health’s Quality Strategy – our
approach to measuring and improving our
quality efforts.
Dr. Santos is an experienced statistician,
analyst, methodologist and market research
scientist. She gained her reputation through
her publications and professional committee
work in the industry. She is a frequent speaker
and contributor in major conferences and has
a Ph.D. in Marketing, an MRS fellowship and
Chartered Marketer status.
Dr. Santos is a member of UK Research Ethics
Committee, EphMRA, BHBIA and PMRG
Government Affairs Committee, reviewer and
co-chair of ISPOR, and MRS Professional
Development Advisory Board and Examiner.
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
29
White Paper
Catalysts driving successful decisions in life sciences.
The Myth of Anonymization:
Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
by Jessica Santos, Ph.D.
March 2015
www.kantarhealth.com
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
30
Anonymization has been a golden ticket for researchers, a “get out of
jail free” card to use data or to legitimize the use of personal data in our
normal business practice. Anonymization is aimed to protect individuals’
personal details, or in the grander scope – human rights. But as Big Data
is continually growing, will anonymized data still exist?
Anonymous Data—No More
To qualify data as anonymous, either the data
subject is no longer identifiable or identification
is no longer possible, whether by the data
controller or any other person taking account
of all the likely means to be reasonably used
either by the controller or any other persons to
identify the individual.1
As Big Data is
continually growing,
will anonymized data
still exist?
One common myth among researchers is that
data will be considered anonymized as long
as the name and address are removed. With
Big Data being collected all around us, a name
and address are no longer needed to identify
an individual. For example, an average UK
postcode covers 15 households;2 with just a
postcode, all that is needed to locate a person
is to see who is “the one who mows his lawn
on early Saturday morning.” With shopping
behavior plus demographic categories, service
providers can predict a specific teenage
pregnancy before her family.3 Geolocation data
can gather a person’s place of work and place
of residence, which is enough to identify most
individuals. How many of us have an identical
self who lives and works at the same location?
It is not impossible to identify an individual with
genetic data combined with profiles available
on social media, especially considering 80% of
rare diseases are genomic.4 Big Data knows
your personality and potential behavior before
you are aware of it, remembers where you’ve
been after you’ve forgotten, and tells your
employer whether you’re a reliable worker
before you submit your application.5 Few of us
are aware that when we find a missing data
cell in our anonymized dataset, matching it with
another “anonymized” dataset or Googling are
actually attempts of identification.
It can be argued that in the Big Data era,
with reasonable effort, all anonymous data
can be identifiable again. After all, Big Data
remembers everything you forgot or wanted to
forget.
Pseudonymous Data—What
Is It?
Most researchers are aware that heavy
restriction on use of personal data is welldocumented in privacy legislation. Researchers
are eager to strip off the obviously identifiable
information (e.g., name, telephone, address),
put them in a separate file in case the original
data needs to be verified, and are happy to
carry on with the processed anonymised data
file. However, few researchers realize they
are handling pseudonymous dataset, not the
anonymous one they intended.
Pseudonymization is the process of
distinguishing individuals in a dataset by using
a unique identifier that does not reveal their
real-world identity. Pseudonymous data is also
indirectly identifiable and, therefore, personal
data. Although the European Commission’s
Article 29 Working Party acknowledges that
the application of data protection rules may
be more flexible, pseudonymous data are
still “within the scope” of the personal data
category.
One example is whether key-coded clinical
trial data is considered anonymous data and
therefore is exempted from data protection
legislation. Some of the major DPAs (data
protection agencies) (e.g., Italy’s Garante per la
protezione dei dati personali, Spain’s Agencia
Española de Protección de Datos, the UK’s
Information Commissioner’s Office) are not
giving the affirmative go-ahead; some even
explicitly include key-coded pseudonymous
data within the data protection domain.
To truly qualify as anonymous, researchers
must completely erase the original data
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
Data breaches cost
healthcare firms $5.6
billion annually.
31
or traceable file containing any personal
information. This raises several questions.
If data is completely non-retraceable, how
do we ensure quality? How do we manage
risk of adverse events for safety purposes?
Most prospective cohort studies and RCTs
(randomized clinical trials) cannot use the word
“anonymous” anymore.
retained by another affiliate (e.g., vendor,
client or another in-house department). With
some effort, individual personal identifiable
information (PII) can be retraced. Before
applying the disproportionate effort exemption,
we could check the original consent purpose.
If the purpose is compatible, analysis can be
legitimate.
So What Should Practitioners
Do?
Purpose Limitation
Burying our heads in the sand and believing
that we are processing anonymous data are
certainly not recommended. After all, data
breaches already cost healthcare firms $5.6
billion annually.6
In the absence of harmonized local
data protection acts, the implications of
pseudonymous data are still unclear. If we use
a narrow interpretation (or safest approach) to
treat all pseudonymous data as the strictest
sense of personal data, we would apply the
“informed explicit consent from individuals”
practice to the pseudonymous dataset before
proceeding. This will certainly be a deliberate
identification process, and the biggest
challenge is most informed consent requests
will not yield any reply, let alone the huge effort
and costs associated with this practice.
Some data protection legislations stated that
statistical guarantee can be a method to
ensure anonymity, but it is still an area of active
research and can often be challenged.
Motive
First, what is your motive to analyze
pseudonymous data? Where is it coming
from, and where will it go? What is the original
consent process, and it is compatible with
your motive? It is worth mentioning that
“disproportionate effort” is a possible exemption
noted in Article 11 of the EU’s Data Protection
Directive, but it should always be interpreted
narrowly.
A typical example is a researcher receiving
a pseudonymous dataset that is ready
for analysis. The personal identifiers are
What will you do with the data? It is likely the
aggregated analytical results will be send to a
client or third party. Is this purpose specified,
explicit and legitimate? Will the data be further
processed in a way incompatible with the
original collection purpose? For example,
pseudonymous data collected based on
consent for research shouldn’t be used for
marketing purposes.
Consider Potential Consequences
What are the potential consequences of your
analysis? Will it cause any harm to individuals?
For example, will the client who receives
the data use it to raise insurance premiums
or deny treatment for certain individuals?
Prohibition of unfair or deceptive acts or
practices is explicitly stated in the US FTC
(Federal Trade Commission) Act (Section 5).
This is particularly significant if the original
purpose is not clear or obtainable.
General Practices
Removing directly identifying elements is
not enough; additional measures to prevent
identification also should be taken, such as
permanently separating the storage location
of identifiable data or encryption. In addition,
randomization and generalization are data
treatment methods to prevent identification and
maintain data integrity.7
What Is the Reference
Guideline on This?
The Big Data phenomenon is evolving faster
than most legislation and industry codes.
Different national DPAs (Data Protection
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
Not all practitioners
should follow BMW’s
example of saying
“no thanks” to Big
Data analytics.
32
Authorities) are suggesting different measures
in recognition of this topic.
practice principles of transparency, confidential
and honesty at all times.
The UK’s ICO introduced the “motivated
intruder test”: The “motivated intruder” is a
person who starts without any prior knowledge
but who wishes to identify the individual from
whose personal data the anonymized data has
been derived.8 The test assesses whether the
motivated intruder would be successful.
Although Big Data is the cause of death
for anonymity, it also reveals beneficial
consequences for medical research. Through
Big Data, individuals with high genetic risk
have been discovered before they themselves
were aware of it; an epidemic can be prevented
down to individuals who are in the second
or third layer to be infected. If the future
of healthcare is developing personalized
medicine, should the position on the
contribution of personal data be reconsidered?
After all, isn’t ”medicine for me” better than
“medicine for people like me”?
France’s data protection authority, the CNIL
(Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et
des Libertés), included a section in its 2010
guidance on security of personal data about
anonymization that outlines basic measures
for anonymizing data. The measures include
generating a “secret” code of the appropriate
length and complexity, applying a “oneway” function to the data, and setting up
organizational measures to guarantee the
confidentiality of the “secret” code if it needs to
be preserved.
Across the pond, U.S. HIPAA rules have 18
clear identifiers to achieve the “safe harbor”
method of de-identification that is cheered by
most practitioners, but any doubtful “unfair
and deceptive act” will still be governed by the
Federal Trade Commission. Motive, purpose
limitation and potential harm are still applicable.
References
European Commission. Article 29 Working Party.
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/
index_en.htm. Accessed 27 Jan 2015.
1
2
Office for National Statistics. http://www.ons.gov.uk/
Piatetsky, Gregory. Did Target Really Predict
a Teen’s Pregnancy? 7 May 2014. http://www.
kdnuggets.com/2014/05/target-predict-teenpregnancy-inside-story.html
3
EURORDIS – Rare Diseases Europe. About
Rare Diseases. http://www.eurordis.org/about-rarediseases. Accessed 27 Jan 2015.
4
Five really scary things Facebook knows about you.
Yahoo News. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/five-reallyscary-things-facebook-knows-about-you-110004949.
html. Accessed 27 Jan 2015.
5
Solove, Daniel J. The Best Preventative Medicine
for Health Data Breaches. Teach Privacy. 6 Oct 2014.
https://www.teachprivacy.com/best-preventativemedicine-health-data-breaches/
6
ISO’s Technical Specification for
pseudonymization also contains principles
and requirements for privacy protection using
pseudonymization services and defines a basic
methodology for pseudonymization services,
including organizational and technical aspects,
and specifies a policy framework and minimal
requirements for trustworthy practices for the
operations of a pseudonymization service.
Sidley Austin Anonymisation: How Anonymous is
Anonymous? The EU Legal Position.’ IAPP Europe.
2014.
7
Information Commissioner’s Office. Anonymisation:
managing data protection risk code of practice.
https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/
documents/1061/anonymisation-code.pdf
8
Murphy, Margi. BMW says “no thanks” to tech
companies asking for its connected car data.
Computerworld UK. 14 Jan 2015.
9
Last Thoughts
Not all practitioners should follow BMW’s
example of saying “no thanks” to Big Data
analytics.9 However, we should be extremely
careful to know that the safety net of
“anonymity” is no longer clear. Researchers
should balance public and individual harm with
benefit to future medical advancement with
The Myth of Anonymization: Has Big Data Killed Anonymity?
For more information,
please visit
www.kantarhealth.com.
About the Author
Jessica Santos, Ph.D.
Dr. Jessica Santos is the Global Compliance
Director in Kantar Health, the largest custom
market research company focused on the life
sciences industry. She is primarily responsible
for providing oversight and support across the
40+ Kantar Health global offices in the areas
of regulation, interaction with clients, suppliers
and others within Kantar Health, Kantar and
WPP. Dr. Santos is responsible for maintaining,
anticipating and coordinating all activities with
regard to compliance laws/regulations, industry
guidelines, pharamcovigilance and client
contracts, defining and driving the execution
of Kantar Health’s Quality Strategy – our
approach to measuring and improving our
quality efforts.
Dr. Santos is an experienced statistician,
analyst, methodologist and market research
scientist. She gained her reputation through
her publications and professional committee
work in the industry. She is a frequent speaker
and contributor in major conferences and has
a Ph.D. in Marketing, an MRS fellowship and
Chartered Marketer status.
Dr. Santos is a member of UK Research Ethics
Committee, EphMRA, BHBIA and PMRG
Government Affairs Committee, reviewer and
co-chair of ISPOR, and MRS Professional
Development Advisory Board and Examiner.
33
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
Articles
34
10 key activities in measuring and communicating pharma
product launch excellence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Minding the gap in the UK multiple sclerosis market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Measuring and Communicating Pharma Product Launch Excellence
35
10 key activities in measuring and
communicating pharma product
launch excellence
From setting your KPIs to finding suitable
benchmarks, David Hanlon lays out 10 things to do
to track the ascent of a new pharma product.
Communication
of launch success
drives motivation
internally and
investor confidence
externally.
Quirk’s Marketing Research Media
First published: March 2015
Consider defining the market using the
following parameters:
In the current economic climate, where
pharmaceutical company profits are declining,
it is essential that new product launches
achieve their full potential. Key to achieving
launch success is being able to measure and
communicate this success both internally and
externally. Tracking a new product launch is
an iterative process of measuring, managing
and monitoring key performance indicators
(KPIs) for the market and both your and your
competitors’ brands within it.
„„ prescribing dynamics – new, add-in,
switch and repeat prescriptions, which are
particularly important in chronic diseases;
„„ indications and patient types;
„„ line of therapy;
„„ competitive set – brands only or brands and
generics;
„„ physician specialty.
Here are 10 key, integrated activities that
are important in measuring performance
and communicating launch excellence in the
pharma industry.
Therefore, for example, communicating a 25
percent share of the dynamic market (new,
switch or add-in) in severe psoriasis patients
for dermatologists is much better than a 3
percent share of the total psoriasis market (to
include repeat prescriptions and all specialties).
2. Identifying your audience
1. Getting your market definition right
In today’s marketplace, communication of
launch success drives motivation internally
and investor confidence externally. The fate of
a company’s share price can rest on the spin
put on new product uptake. Therefore, market
definitions (i.e., patient types, indications,
competitors, etc.) are key.
The pharma marketplace can be split into
two segments: the static repeat prescribing
segment and the dynamic segment
(new initiation, switch, add-in, etc.). In
communicating launch success, the most
appropriate share figure that describes the
competitive set of brands must be quoted.
Increasingly, pharma companies are targeting
specific groups of physicians (specific
specialties, high prescribers or those with
a special interest in a therapy area). This
can affect measuring the success of a new
product’s uptake and the research approach
used (i.e., whether free-found samples or
target lists of GPs, specialists or other HCPs)
to measure the effectiveness of your launch
campaign, so ensuring that you are targeting
the appropriate audience is important.
3. Setting your KPIs
Jan Leschly, ex-CEO of SmithKline Beecham
and former professional tennis player, once
famously said, “If you don’t keep the score,
you’re just practicing.” In other words, it is
Measuring and Communicating Pharma Product Launch Excellence
If you don’t keep
the score, you’re
just practicing.
essential to have KPI measures in place that
will help you monitor the success of a new
product launch. These should closely match
your market definitions, form the basis for
internal goals and include standard rational
ATU measures of prescribing dynamics such
as awareness, percentage uptake, growth,
new/repeat/switched prescriptions and
assessment of product attributes.
However, companies are focusing more on
prescribers and their emotional engagement
and are including additional measures to
capture their affinity toward new brands and
the diseases they treat. Getting these right is
key in measuring, managing and monitoring a
successful launch and for later measurement of
brand equity.
4. Finding suitable benchmarks, norms and
analogues
Two important questions to be able to answer
are “How will I know if the new product launch
is successful?” and “How realistic are our
expectations for brand performance?” It is
imperative that realistic benchmarks are used
so that future launch goals are challenging but
not impossible to attain.
One of the caveats regarding use of
benchmarks is that they tend to be based on
average levels of uptake across a range of
products, therapy areas and specialties, which
may not be reflective of the marketplace being
examined and thus can act as only a rough
approximation of what constitutes a measure of
success.
Much of the primary benchmark data available
are based on different measures and it is
important to clarify the market definitions used.
Benchmark data can be subject to bias due
to market definitions as outlined above and
variations in sampling (i.e., free found/random
sampling versus target lists versus various
recruitment/screening criteria and time scales
of the data). Therefore, any internal or external
benchmarks must be scrutinized to understand
variations in the measurements, depending on
the criteria used.
36
An alternative is finding suitable analogues
from sales data by which to compare and
measure uptake but there are always
objections to looking outside of the product
class or using other therapy areas as
surrogates. Finding an identical scenario is
rare, so companies have to be more openminded in their comparisons with other product
launches. As with benchmark data they are
subject to the same caveats in terms of market
definitions.
5. Setting launch goals: carrot or stick?
Goal-setting is a highly sensitive and political
exercise; left to their own devices, people
tend not to set themselves difficult-to-achieve
targets. It is imperative to determine realistic
ambition levels that agree with local, regional
and global headquarters’ goals. Therefore,
finding good benchmark data or new product
launch analogues to help set these targets is
key.
Once the benchmarks are in place, it
is necessary to review them in light of
performance goals set for the brand and the
sales/marketing teams. Some flexibility in
performance levels is needed as they will vary
widely by country.
There also need to be a change in mind-sets
with success levels being set as motivations
rather than barriers to be breached. More
qualitative terminology when comparing crosscountry performance, such as bronze, silver,
gold and platinum levels of success or trafficlight systems, are useful rather than focusing
too much on just the number/percentage
penetration or growth, although ultimately
these are important.
Goal-setting over time can be easily
constructed by applying different rates of
uptake curves to reach a desired endpoint
at a specific point in time (i.e., peak share).
Again, these can be based on benchmarks/analogues and adapted to measure
success across your main KPIs and built
into management dashboards to track
performance.
Measuring and Communicating Pharma Product Launch Excellence
The 3Ms –
measuring,
managing and
monitoring – are key
in communicating
the success of a
launch campaign.
37
6. Deciding when to measure
8. Communicating success
The timings of measuring the success of a
new product launch depend on the primary
and secondary data sources, frequency of
measuring required, type of product, sales
force size and visit frequency.
The market is changing with respect to
deliverables. Large tomes of data are no longer
acceptable and straightforward, easy-to-read
management dashboards or scorecards to help
make quick decisions are essential as upper
management no longer have the time to wade
through acres of information.
Many secondary data sources are available,
although there can be a lag between
measurement and when the data is available.
For secondary data sources, detailed
breakdown of prescribing tends to be very
general as they are built for the syndicated
market and hence may not cover all KPIs.
More often than not a customized or ad hoc
market research approach is used so that
company-specific KPIs and questions can be
incorporated.
Ideally the following timings are used to
monitor launch: one to two months pre-launch
and usually one, three, six, nine and 12 months
post-launch. Decisions can be made as to
when to include a full market analysis or at
certain intervals concentrate on monitoring
some of the more important KPIs – i.e., a
“full brand health” check at major points, with
smaller temperature checks in between.
7. Managing timing
In any new product launch upper management
is impatient; they will be eager to see progress
and from Day 1 will be asking to see data.
Measuring primary market research must be
fast and accurate. Due to lag periods between
the research and results one must be clear
in defining time periods when communicating
results. Timings must also be clear and realistic
to help manage expectations but as fast as
possible.
Timelines also must be synchronized with
sales rep force sizes, frequency of visits and
coverage of audience so that, for example,
measures at three months cover 75 percent
of the target audience and 95 percent at six
months.
About the author:
Based in the U.K., David Hanlon is group
director, Kantar Health.
These bring into play the benchmarks, goals
and performance KPIs so that management
can easily see whether the launch campaign is
over- or underachieving expectations.
9. Avoiding missed opportunities
Measuring, monitoring and managing a new
product launch must be action-oriented. What
is the good of producing market feedback if no
further action is taken to help understand both
negatives and positives that can be addressed
or reinforced?
Opportunities are often missed in terms of
follow-up. More in-depth qualitative interviews
with customers help better understand the
issues that arise and what they see as benefits,
as there may be a mismatch of messages or
messages may not be credible, may not be
getting across or may be considered irrelevant.
10. Gauging competitor response
Often, the excitement of a new product launch
focuses many of the launch activities internally
and tailors communications toward customer
needs and reactions. It is all too easy to neglect
competitor response in terms of their reaction
toward a new product launch regarding
their counter-communications of competing
benefits, reactions to your campaign and any
new areas or change in focus for their product
communication.
The 3Ms – measuring, managing and
monitoring – are key in communicating the
success of a launch campaign and following
these 10 key steps will go a long way to
ensuring a new product reaches its full launch
potential and it will be “All systems go” rather
than “Houston, we have a problem.”
Minding the Gap in the UK Multiple Sclerosis Market
38
Minding the gap in the UK
multiple sclerosis market
Identifying brand opportunities in competitive
markets with several new and innovative contenders
requires a disciplined focus on the three pillars of
brand success – experience, access and execution.
Richard Goosey puts this into a UK perspective.
Identifying the right
area of focus can
enable companies
to substantially grow
market share.
Pharmaphorum
First published: 25th September 2014
The global multiple sclerosis market is
estimated to grow by more than 50 per cent
over five years, from $12 billion in 2013 to
$18.3 billion by 2018, according to research
by Datamonitor Healthcare1. This growth is
driven by the emergence of a cluster of new
oral therapies, such as Gilenya, Aubagio and
Tecfidera, which suggests the incumbent
brands will struggle to maintain current share.
But such a busy and competitive market also
serves to demonstrate opportunities for brands
to realise their full potential and start closing the
gap between the market share they currently
command and the share of preference reported
to us by prescribers, in this case neurologists,
if they were free to select the products they feel
are most appropriate for their patients.
In the past, multiple sclerosis has been quite a
turbulent market, as products that have been
through the licensing and guidance processes
have been withdrawn because of side-effect
problems only to be reinstated once new data
became available. Now it is in flux because
a number of new and innovative Diseasemodifying drugs (DMDs) are challenging the
status of the established first-line treatments for
relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, which, in
the UK, are Rebif, Avonex, Betaferon, Extavia
and Copaxone.
The agents, old and new, all have different
selling points and the most important thing
in such a market is to know where to focus
communications and associated materials.
There are issues to do with the market and
positioning in terms of what is used as the
central lever to ensure the brand’s data is
fully utilised and supported by the key opinion
leaders (KOLs). Identifying the right area of
focus can enable companies to substantially
grow market share.
This requires a new approach, as outlined in
the white paper ‘Is pharma brand marketing
dead or has it just arrived?’, which combines
the core components of brand success –
experience, access and execution – into a
single analytical and holistic framework to
pinpoint the critical issues that can open up
new opportunities.
In terms of experience, it is important to
observe that there are several different
methods of administration available for multiple
sclerosis treatments in the UK. All first-line
treatments are given by injection either
intramuscularly or subcutaneously from daily to
weekly, current second-line agents being either
monthly IV or daily orally, and new pipeline
products being focused on oral administration.
They compete on elements of convenience,
but the most important differentiator is their
efficacy in controlling the advancement of the
disease, resulting in fewer relapses.
This creates an opportunity for a current
second-line agent, which is given every
four weeks by IV and performs strongly on
the key drivers of reducing the number of
relapses, good efficacy, having a positive
Minding the Gap in the UK Multiple Sclerosis Market
Share of preference
becomes a key
evaluation metric,
which shows the
products prescribers
would select if they
had free choice.
impact on myelin repair, and reducing neuron
degeneration.
However, the obstacle preventing this novel
agent from realising its potential is an access
issue, not in terms of its cost-effectiveness but
in that it is not currently licenced as a firstline treatment. Due to the very high levels of
satisfaction with the agent among neurologists,
an extension of its licence to first-line treatment
would almost triple its brand share from 12 per
cent to around 33 per cent.
This is confirmed when you consider execution
of the brand strategy in the market, i.e., how
pharma companies are communicating the
value of their products. To do so, you need to
evaluate all the various marketing elements,
including the share of voice being created in
the marketplace, the performance of the sales
force, the channels they are using and the
quality of the materials that are being prepared
for neurologists. This agent again outperforms
all of its competitors in the methods it is using
to communicate the benefits of the treatment
for the patients, significantly creating an equity
gap between its current market share and its
preference share with prescribers.
Here, share of preference becomes a key
evaluation metric, which shows the products
prescribers would select if they had free choice.
A clear differential with market share reveals
an opportunity or true brand equity which can
be exploited. As the drug is already used by
85 per cent of prescribers (within the terms of
its licence), prescribers were keen to use it in
many more of their patients.
Suddenly, a useful picture of the opportunity
has emerged, built using social media listening
to first observe how patients feel about their
current treatment, and what other treatments
they are advocating (the voice of the patient is
being heard), before conducting more direct
research with prescribers and payers to flesh
out the drivers behind treatment pathways and
decisions to switch.
This example looks at just one market and one
therapeutic area, but the focus on experience,
access and execution is valid in many other
39
areas. For our novel multiple sclerosis
treatment in the UK it highlights how, in a highly
complex market with multiple agents, the most
important area to focus on for closing the gap
between realistic and optimal market share is
access – lack of licence approval as a first-line
treatment.
Many other areas could be researched and
exploited by the marketer, all of which might
make them feel like they are doing useful work
reaching for ‘low hanging fruit’, but missing
the true opportunity and not realising the full
potential of the brand.
For example, Biogen recently demonstrated
this in multiple sclerosis, when its new product,
Tecfidera (twice-a-day tablet), received final
draft guidance from NICE (July 2014) for
treatment for adults with active relapsingremitting multiple sclerosis, reversing the
decision to not recommend Tecfidera made
in the previous draft consultation document
issued in February 2014. The MS Trust was an
active contributor to the review process.
Brand opportunities in competitive markets are
not easy to identify, and getting it wrong can
be as expensive as the rewards that can flow
from getting it right. For pharma marketers, it is
becoming ever more important to mind the gap
between a product doing well and one that truly
lives up to its potential.
Reference:
1. ‘Multiple Sclerosis market to reach
more than $18bn by 2018’, Datamonitor
Healthcare, Aug 2013.
About the author:
Richard is chief methodologist and senior
director of advanced methods for Kantar Health
UK. He has 30 years’ consultancy experience
in marketing sciences and advanced analytics
on both agency and client-side. Richard
joined Kantar Health from Roche where
he specialised in business planning and
forecasting in support of the Oncology HER2
team. Prior to Roche, Richard was at Lundbeck
UK where he was head of commercial planning
Minding the Gap in the UK Multiple Sclerosis Market
and business intelligence. Richard was
instrumental in developing the PINNAKLE
Kantar Health system for measuring the
unrealised brand opportunity for new and
existing healthcare products.
For more details on PINNAKLE, please visit:
http://www.kantarhealth.com/solutions/brandsuccess
40
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
Fact Sheets
41
About Kantar Health: Helping improve the health and
well-being of people around the world. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Marketing Insights: Informing decisions across the
product lifecycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
PINNAKLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Healthcare Advertising Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Kantar Health Mobile Market Research: Offering Bigger and
Better Data that Leads to Richer Business Insights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Expertise in Qualitative Healthcare Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Super Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
About Kantar Health
42
Catalysts driving
successful decisions
in life sciences
Helping improve the health
and well-being of
people around the world
www.kantarhealth.com
About Kantar Health
43
Kantar Health is the one organization that healthcare companies can
count on to get an informed answer to their product development,
launch and brand questions. A trusted partner to healthcare companies
worldwide, we are a dynamic consulting and market research firm that
excels at extracting the full market potential from the brands of the
world’s leading healthcare, pharmaceutical, biotech, medical device and
diagnostic companies.
„ Over 600 professionals dedicated to
healthcare-focused consulting
„ Broad disease experience
„ Footprint in more than 40 countries;
presence in 81 countries
We combine evidence-based research with
deep clinical, commercial and brand expertise
to help our clients assess market opportunities,
prioritize product development and portfolio
activities, and differentiate their products to
drive brand success. Our global teams are the
catalysts for astute decision making across the
full product lifecycle, helping our clients better
understand diseases, develop and promote
innovative healthcare solutions, and improve
patients’ health worldwide.
Clinical Expertise
„ Industry-leading, proprietary, patientcentric information sources
National Health and Wellness
Survey, the world’s largest selfreported patient database
CancerMPact®, the leading-edge
oncology data resource
Epi Database®, the premier
epidemiology database
„ Expert at linking science and research
to solve business challenges
„ Strong global reach, with localized
expertise
„ Part of Kantar, one of the world’s
largest consulting and market research
firms, and WPP, the world leader in
communications services
If you’re looking to put the right R&D clinical
programs in place, Kantar Health is your
consulting partner. We offer our clients:
„ Clinical knowledge and expertise
„ Real -world research and value
„ Market research resources
„ Healthcare-focused consulting experience
„ Clinical and patient-reported outcomes
Commercial Expertise
Kantar Health understands the complexities of
launch and how to bring brands to market. By
working with you to understand market drivers,
pricing and regulatory requirements and other
keys to your business, we can help you make
the right investment decisions to drive growth.
Working with Kantar Health also gives you
access to unique real-world evidence via
global systems that collect clinical and patientreported outcomes, including safety and
effectiveness, from patients and physicians in
over 70 countries.
Which patient characteristics are you
addressing? What are the projected health
outcomes? Our commercial expertise helps
you focus on patients and health, as well as
the marketplace.
Brand Expertise
Kantar Health’s clinical expertise can help you:
„ Fulfill regulatory requirements and efficacy
in the safety space
„ Obtain the best price and reimbursement
coverage in different markets
„ Achieve scientific differentiation
„ Substantiate your product’s value
proposition starting at the very beginning of
the product lifecycle
Invite Kantar Health to be an extension of
your brand team, and together we’ll arrive at
actionable recommendations to drive patient
share and move the performance needle.
Our deeply knowledgeable, healthcarefocused consultants provide strategic brand
assessment and market research that includes
message testing, positioning alignment and
customer experience management.
We can take you beyond brand equity in the
present day and offer you long-term strategies
and direction for future success. Bring Kantar
Health to the table and achieve success – in a
measurable way.
© 2014 Kantar Health
About Kantar Health
44
Marketing Insights
Marketing Insights is the foundation of our
We combine market research with strong
methodologies, wide therapeutic experience
and specialist expertise.
expertise, with capabilities that span
The patient voice is being recognized by
regulators, payers and medical professionals
as the missing link in global healthcare.
Patients want to be involved in their healthcare
decisions and to partner with their healthcare
provider in finding the right treatment for
their condition.
to post-launch activities
Kantar Health research and data solutions
create a bond among the patient, the
healthcare professional and your brand to
help you succeed. We help you improve
the customer experience and maximize the
effectiveness of your marketing programs and
sales force through a combination of traditional
and digital tools.
Local Expertise, Global Reach
The Kantar Health advantage lies in our ability
to integrate both strong global reach with
localized expertise. We operate offices
in 40 countries, with a presence in 81
countries, and cover major markets including
the Americas, Europe, Asia Pacific, the
Middle East and North Africa. Our company
features more than 600 healthcare
professionals who are on call for your
specific business engagement.
the product lifecycle from early development
Pricing
KOL Influence Mapping
Patient Journey
(buying process)
Market Landscape
Opportunity Assessment
Customer Experience
Demand Estimation
Corporate Reputation
Segmentation
Sales Effectiveness
Competitive Event
Assessment
TM
Brand Equity: Pinnakle
© 2014 Kantar Health
Clinical Trial Optimization
Positioning
Communications
Development and
Execution
Messaging
Marketing Insights
45
Catalysts driving
successful decisions
in life sciences
Fact Sheet
Marketing Insights
At a glance
At Kantar Health, we combine evidence
Informing decisions across the product lifecycle
generation with robust analytics specifically
designed to drive success along the
product lifecycle, including:
„ Assessing current portfolios
„ Understanding the market landscape
„ Assessing clinical and commercial
potential
„ Identifying key target customers and
influencers
„ Aligning messaging and
communication channels
Our Marketing Insights capabilities have been
expertise, global footprint, and best-in-class
applied to hundreds of product launches
innovation in analytics. This comprehensive
across multiple geographies and stakeholders
approach focusing on triangulation of data
(patients, payers, KOLs and healthcare
sources and expertise allows our clients to feel
professionals). What differentiates Kantar
confident they are making the right decisions
Health is our focus on answering our clients’
and developing the right strategies for their
business issues. We do this by combining our
products.
proprietary data assets, clinical and commercial
Health
Marketing
Insights
GlobalFramework
Framework
KantarKantar
Health
Market
Insight
Global
„ Monitoring key performance indicators
Our global Marketing Insights team
connects and informs your business
decisions by drawing insights from primary
and secondary market research and
utilizing advanced methods.
Why Kantar Health?
Kantar Health is a leading global
healthcare consulting firm and trusted
advisor to many of the world’s leading
pharmaceutical, biotech and medical
device and diagnostic companies. It
combines evidence-based research
capabilities with deep scientific, therapeutic
and clinical knowledge, commercial
development know-how, and brand
and marketing expertise to help clients
evaluate opportunities, launch products
and maintain brand and market leadership.
Our advisory services span three areas
critical to bringing new medicines and
pharmaceutical products to market
– commercial development, clinical
strategies and marketing effectiveness.
Lifecycle
Post-Launch
Pre-Launch
Early Development
Pricing
Clinical Trial Optimization
KOL Influence Mapping
Market Landscape
Patient Journey (buying
process)
Opportunity Assessment
Customer Experience
Demand Estimation
Corporate Reputation
Segmentation
Positioning
Sales Effectiveness
Competitive Event
Assessment
Brand Equity: PINNAKLE
TM
Communications
Development and
Execution
Messaging
Visit us at EphMRA, Booth 14, for more on Marketing Insights.
Contact Us:
Please email [email protected] for more information.
© 2015 Kantar Health
www.kantarhealth.com
Marketing Insights
46
Fact Sheet
Marketing Insights addresses your business issues at all stages of the product lifecycle
„
Clinical Trial Optimization
„
„
Market Landscape
„
„
„
„
Opportunity Assessment
„
„
Demand Estimation
„
Segmentation
„
„
Positioning
„
„
Communications
Development and Execution
„
„
Messaging
„
„
Brand Equity: PINNAKLE™
© 2015 Kantar Health
„
Which attributes/clinical endpoints will make our
product competitive in the market?
Which endpoints/thresholds are critical to our
product’s success?
How is the market characterized (key drivers, unmet
needs, barriers)?
What are the current treatment patterns/algorithms?
What drives interest – clinical and non-clinical?
What are the minimal endpoints required to
motivate use?
What strategies need to be employed to maximize
opportunities and minimize barriers?
What is the commercial potential of our product?
How will achievement or otherwise of the various
clinical endpoints alter the brand potential?
What are the distinct customer segments in the
market?
Who are the key customer segments identified as
offering true potential for the product?
Which product benefits (features or emotional
benefits) resonate most with target customers and
will best compel them to utilize the brand?
Which of these benefits are unique in the market
and will create a sustainable advantage for the
brand?
How should communication materials be
developed, designed and executed to best
maximize use of the product?
What is the story that should be conveyed to
effectively communicate our benefits?
Which messages (and combination of messages)
are most motivating to customers?
Do these messages differentiate the product and fit
its positioning?
Is our brand reaching the real peak of it’s sales
curve?
Are you taking a holistic view of brand experience,
access and execution strategies?
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
What is the market potential under different product
configurations?
Which patient types will drive uptake?
Which perceptions of the market and key competitors drive
decision making?
How is the market expected to evolve in the future, and how
can we respond?
How should my brand aim to enter the market?
In what patient profile?
In what line of treatment?
Which brand are we likely to replace/be replaced by?
How receptive are key stakeholders to the target
product profile?
What additional non-clinical variables are likely to affect
brand potential?
Which patient characteristics drive use?
„
How should targeting and messaging be employed to
address the needs and wants of those key customer
segments and maximize share of the brand?
„
„
„
How is my brand currently positioned in the market?
For which patients is it being prescribed?
What are the prescribing dynamics in terms of share
gains and losses?
What repositioning is optimal for an underperforming
brand?
„
„
When and how should specific channels be utilized to
more effectively showcase the brand?
„
Are these messages believable, sustainable and in line
with the strategic direction of the brand?
„
What concrete actions should our brand be taking to get
the real unrealized brand opportunity?
What can be done pre-launch to maximize brand
potential?
„
www.kantarhealth.com
Marketing Insights
47
Fact Sheet
Marketing Insights addresses your business issues at all stages of the product lifecycle
(cont.)
„
Competitive Event
Assessment
„
„
„
Sales Effectiveness
„
„
„
Corporate Reputation
„
„
„
Customer Experience
„
„
„
„
Patient Journey (Buying
Process)
„
„
„
KOL Influence Mapping
„
How will market events (new data, competitive
entry, etc.) affect the commercial potential of brand?
What opportunities do these market events uncover
for the brand?
Which hospitals should we be targeting for our new
disease area?
What is the patient flow per pathology per hospital
department?
Which treatments are applied?
„
What market barriers need to be overcome to retain/
gain competitive position/advantage?
„
How can tablet- and smartphone-enabled sales
forces and customers change the paradigm in sales
effectiveness?
How can traditional national-level, sample-driven
metrics like customer experience be delivered at a cost
effective territory level?
How can new and traditional measures be combined to
drive further value at the rep level?
„
„
How strongly do customers identify with my
company (for brand)?
Is my brand perceived positively in the marketplace
among customers and stakeholders?
How do I manage my reputation and identify issues
that put my reputation at risk?
„
What drives the customer experience?
How do we measure and manage the
multistakeholder commercial model for customerfacing teams?
How can we optimize customer management
across multiple channels?
„
What are patients’ experiences and needs?
How do patients enter and move through the
treatment process?
At what points in the patient journey can we
influence behavior in favor of our compound (i.e.,
key decision points)?
Which behaviors do we want to change to gain
disproportionate impact?
„
Who are the right thought leaders (current and
rising stars) to engage/advance uptake?
Which physicians do peers trust for insight and
advice?
Which physicians should we recruit for speaker
programs?
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
„
Pricing
© 2015 Kantar Health
„
What price will optimize the revenue potential of a
new product?
What is the optimal launch price we can achieve
across Europe to minimize the impact of price
referencing?
What are the implications of adopting a low- vs.
high-price strategy in terms of overall uptake and
profitability?
„
„
„
Is there a direct correlation between reputation and
pricing and success for my brand?
How does corporate reputation compare pre-launch to
post-launch?
What are the potential competitive threats and risks to
the brand/portfolio?
How can we learn from other industry sectors that have
excelled at customer experience management for many
years?
How can we embrace technology to drive real-time
customer experience management?
What are the potential competitive threats and risks to
the brand or portfolio?
What is the interplay between stakeholders who
influence decisions?
How will market changes affect the treatment journey?
What is the role of the different stakeholders in the
diagnosis, description and follow-up of the patient?
How can we support patients through the treatment
journey to enhance uptake and adherence for our
product?
Which physicians have the highest value for motivating
prescribing of our product?
What is the network of KOL influence at a geographic
or hospital level?
Which product benefits do stakeholders value the
most, and how much more will they be willing to pay for
them?
What pricing strategy should we adopt when our major
competitor comes off patent?
What is the impact of differential pricing and different
priced competitors across indications and dosing
levels?
How shall we structure the price differences among our
three different dosing options?
www.kantarhealth.com
PINNAKLE48
PINNAKLE
TM
DISCOVER YOUR UNREALIZED BRAND OPPORTUNITY
IS TRADITIONAL
BRAND MARKETING
DEAD?
PINNAKLE49
You’re challenged to maximize
potential for your brand across
the product lifecycle. However,
in today’s dynamic marketing
environment, the question
everyone asks is – “Is traditional
brand marketing dead?” At Kantar
Health
NO
we believe the answer is
.
We’ve discovered a gap between
the traditional brand growth
trajectory and a second trajectory
representing unrealized brand
opportunity. Capturing this
potential can translate into
millions of dollars of additional
sales and profits, allowing you to
reach the PINNAKLE™ of brand
performance.
PINNAKLE50
PINNAKLE™ seamlessly
integrates multiple information
sources and pinpoints relevant
KPIs to deliver a holistic view
and action-ready blueprint for
closing the gap and growing your
brand opportunity. PINNAKLE™
combines
the core components of
LAUNCH
SUCCESS
– brand access, brand execution
and brand experience – for the
first time under a single, analytical
framework to discover unrealized
brand opportunity, measure and
optimize brand performance, and
improve customer experience
across the product lifecycle.
Conversion Model™ is
PINNAKLE’s engine that
finds your unrealized brand
opportunity. Conversion Model™
is a leading global methodology
that Kantar harnesses
across multiple sectors to
provide detailed insights
into category dynamics and
spending patterns, pinpointing
opportunities to attract new
consumers, re-win existing ones
and optimize their spending.
PINNAKLE51
An Experienced
Partner
Kantar Health is a leading global
healthcare consulting firm and
trusted advisor to many of the
world’s leading pharmaceutical,
biotech, and medical device
and diagnostic companies.
We combine evidence-based
research capabilities with deep
scientific, therapeutic and
clinical knowledge, commercial
development know-how, and
brand and marketing expertise
to help clients evaluate
opportunities, launch products,
and maintain brand and market
leadership.
Kantar Health deeply understands
the influence of patients, payers
and physicians, especially as they
relate to the performance and
payment of medicines and the
delivery of healthcare services.
Our 600+ healthcare industry
specialists work across the
product lifecycle, from preclinical
development to launch, acting
as catalysts to successful
decision-making in life sciences
and helping clients prioritize
their product development and
portfolio activities, differentiate
their brands and drive product
success post-launch. For more
information, please visit
www.kantarhealth.com.
For more information on
PINNAKLETM contact us at
[email protected].
Follow Kantar Health:
Healthcare Advertising Research
52
Healthcare Advertising Research
Advertising research typically comprises three phases of research with distinct objectives
and methodologies, e.g.:
Phase 1:
Concept generation: the
aim is idea generation and
co-creation
Phase 2:
Phase 3:
Concept reduction and
Final concept selection: the aim
improvement: the aim is to
is to select the winning advert
identify the ‘winning elements’
Typically qualitative group
research to promote:
• Brainstorming
• Spiralling of ideas
• Different perspectives
• Fun activities
• Support encouragement
• Co-creation
• ‘Best’ ideas taken forward
Qualitative approaches include:
• Face to face, telephone with
supporting online concepts,
fully online research
• Eye-tracking and EEG used
to help identify the ‘winning
elements’
• Full exploration of all concept
elements
Surveys or qualitative research with
self-completions:
• Rating and ranking to identify
overall ‘winner’
• Rating and ranking to identify
performance against creative
objectives
• Rating and ranking against
brand positioning and strategy
While some merging of these three phases is possible, no ‘one-phase’ can address all of them
equally, hence the importance of defining and prioritising goals. Yet successful advertising
research involves much more than strong data collection. Other aspects include:
3 way partnership
Defining ‘best’
Testing advertising
involves a 3 way
partnership; client,
research agency and
communications agency
Good research identifies
concepts that best meet
the objectives or the
creative brief; not
necessarily the one that is
‘liked’ the most
The three stakeholders should work
together to share the research and
creative briefs and, ideally, all
attending/observing fieldwork
The creative brief, or a summary,
should be used by the research
agency to ensure that the ad concept
performs well against its objectives
Message is ‘On
brand’
Good research will test the
ad for being ‘on brand’ as
well as meeting the
campaign objectives
The advertising testing should also
test whether the overall concept is
helping to build the brand, as well as
delivering the desired campaign
messages
1
Healthcare Advertising Research
53
Healthcare Advertising Research
Emotional and
rational
Real world
simulations
All advertising conveys
emotional as well as
rational messages; testing
must include both
elements
Good research bears in
mind how ads are seen in
the ‘real world’ and mirror
that where possible e.g.
include ‘short exposure’
evaluations
Eye-tracking, EEG recordings, nonverbal evaluations and projective
techniques are all ways in which the
emotional aspects of the advertising
concept can be assessed in addition
to the more rational messages
A good advert?
In the real world an advert has
only seconds or less to deliver a
message and capture attention.
‘Glimpse tests’ or other
simulations need to be included,
in addition to ‘deep dive’
questioning
Message testing must show
whether an ad is good, or
simply the best ad from a
poor selection
Normative data helps to identify the
‘strength’ of an ad, especially when
different norms are available for
secondary and primary care. If a
campaign is being refreshed the new
messages should be evaluated
against previous executions or
competitors.
When the above principles are followed the resulting communication
the boxes.
High
impact
Relevant
Credible
Builds
desired
brand
image
Conveys
desired
tone
will tick all
Differentiates from
other
communications
Drives
actions
To find out more please contact:
Hazel Haskayne – Group Director, Qualitative.
+ 44 1372 825 459
[email protected]
2
Mobile Market Research
54
Catalysts driving
successful decisions
in life sciences
Fact Sheet
Kantar Health Catalysts
The Kantar Health advantage lies in our
ability to act as catalysts to successful
decision making in life sciences and to
help clients improve their contribution to
patient health. We put together project
teams that are optimized for each business
issue, drawing on a global network of
the world’s leading consultants, analysts,
specialists and practitioners.
Kantar Health Mobile Market
Research
Offering Bigger and Better Data that Leads to
Richer Business Insights
As the digital world rapidly moves from a PCcentric to mobile-centric model, tremendous
opportunities are emerging in mobile market
research. That’s because mobile research
offers methodologies that simply were not
possible in the past. More than anything else
in the marketplace today, mobile research is
transforming the landscape as we know it.
Creating Client Value
Kantar Health is creating client value through
innovations in mobile-enabled market research,
allowing us to gather bigger and better data
that leads to richer business insights.
Partnering with
Kantar Health
Kantar Health is a global healthcare
consulting firm and trusted advisor to the
world’s leading pharmaceutical, biotech
and medical device/diagnostic companies.
We combine evidence-based research
capabilities with deep scientific, therapeutic
and clinical knowledge, commercial
development know-how, and brand and
marketing expertise. To learn more about
our capabilities with online research
communities, please e-mail Brian Mondry
at [email protected], or visit
www.kantarhealth.com to view additional
information, including articles, case studies
and blogs.
© 2014 Kantar Health
If you are not leveraging mobile research you
are missing opportunities. Kantar Health’s
experts can help you accomplish your business
objectives. While many companies provide
analysis around mobile research as a subject
of research, Kantar Health focuses on using
mobile devices as a method of research.
By including a mobile component in our
quantitative and qualitative engagements with
patients, caregivers, physicians and payers, we
achieve multiple benefits, including:
„ Higher completion rates – we make
engagement easy and convenient by giving
participants a choice in how they provide
feedback.
„ Quality, accurate data – we gather
information at the “point of experience”.
„ Better access in emerging markets –
we excel where mobile device ownership
exceeds PC ownership.
„ Richer data – we utilize smartphones’
camera and video features to truly capture
real-world experiences.
Enhanced Patient and Physician Insights
In the healthcare arena, mobile technology
extends far beyond mobile devices such as
smartphones and tablets. We collect biometric
data from “wearable devices,” such as Internetconnected blood glucose monitors, fitness
sensors and heart monitors. We combine this
data with information from surveys, interviews,
online research forums and other methods to
provide a true 360-degree view of the patient.
Our mobile-enabled research provides
enhanced insights for both the patient and the
physician.
Patient Insights
„ Adherence and compliance
„ Patient journey – living with a health
condition
„ Physician-patient interactions
„ Reactions to DTC promotions and patient
educational materials
„ Direct experience with specific drug brands
Physician Insights
„ In-the-moment insights regarding
prescribing decisions
„ Reactions to detailing around new products
during or immediately after exposure
„ Physician-patient interactions
„ Feedback about pharmaceutical sales rep
interactions during or immediately after
sales calls
„ Feedback around experiences from medical
conferences
www.kantarhealth.com
Qualitative Healthcare Research
55
Expertise in Qualitative Healthcare Research
For every qualitative project there are numerous aspects
that must be taken into account:
Q
A
Q
A
Why is it so important to do traditional research
well?
… because even in the age of digital, traditional methodologies have an
important role and are here to stay. At Kantar Health we often carry out
traditional qualitative approaches within research programmes and select the right
approach according to the recognised strengths it offers. We stop to think, is this
right for my client’s business issue? The answer to that question determines
whether we adopt a traditional approach or consider new technologies.
Why is it so important to embrace new technologies
such as online communities and eye-tracking?
… because they can garner a wealth of insights and understanding on which
to base your decisions. At Kantar Health we have invested in online qualitative
approaches, both as an alternative to more traditional approaches and to
complement them. These technologies give us the potential to recruit from a wider
pool of respondents, over an extended time period or geography, obtain input from
everyone and explore sensitive research topics in more depth. The use of mobile
apps and webcams mean that the range of qualitative research has expanded to
truly understand ‘in the moment’ behaviour. We will work with you to identify the
optimal choice of traditional, digital and innovative approaches for all projects.
… but it doesn’t stop there! We also embrace innovations used widely in other
industries, for example using eye-tracking in communications testing; used to
measure engagement and to move beyond what is verbalized by respondents. Eyetracking is also highly useful when understanding how physicians view and interact
with more complex communications such as new websites or packaging. Also, with
social media being a core communications channel in developing a mobile strategy
we need to understand how communications work across different channels and use
social media listening to interpret the pulse of the target audience.
1
Qualitative Healthcare Research
56
Expertise in Qualitative Healthcare Research
Q
A
Q
A
Why is it so important to have the necessary
processes in place for every qualitative study?
… because this can make or break a study! For every qualitative study we
run here at Kantar Health, whether domestic or international, we have a Field
Project Manager (FPM) who ensures everything that happens behind the scenes
runs to plan. Our FPMs, in partnership with the client facing team, ensure the
quality and smooth running of our projects from planning through to recruitment
and fieldwork.
Why is it so important to have a good moderator?
… because they can make or break a study! Have you ever attended
research at a viewing facility and left feeling that it only scratched the surface?
This is likely because the moderator did not have the necessary skills to get the
best from the discussion.
At Kantar Health we handpick moderators to ensure the ‘best fit’ for your study.
Working with both Kantar Health moderators and/or Kantar Health preferred
suppliers you can be sure that you have the best for your project. The selection
process takes into consideration the therapy area, specialist expertise required
and the respondents themselves. In some instances it makes sense to ask
respondents for their views too. Some men prefer to talk about erectile
dysfunction with women, others with men.
2
Qualitative Healthcare Research
57
Expertise in Qualitative Healthcare Research
Q
A
Q
A
Why work with qualitative experts who have both
Domestic and International expertise?
… because In the international arena one size doesn’t fit all! Kantar Health has
a wealth of expertise in conducting qualitative studies in established and emerging
markets, as well as the UK. Approximately half of the 200 studies we conduct each
year from our Epsom office include qualitative research. The best insights come
from multi-country research in which such factors as the appropriateness of
different techniques, setting, length and individual or group research are understood
and taken into consideration.
Where is the value in theory?
… because good qualitative research is not as simple as it looks! Both the
choice of projective or exploratory techniques, and the final analysis, should both be
theory driven.
The qualitative practitioner must understand how to select
appropriate qualitative techniques and how to interpret the findings. Our qualitative
experts typically have higher degrees in psychology which, together with other
relevant training, ensures that our qualitative offerings are driven by the quest for
meaning.
To find out more please contact:
Hazel Haskayne – Group Director, Qualitative.
+ 44 1372 825 459
[email protected]
3
Super Groups
58
Super Groups
Why are different specialities typically interviewed
separately in market research?
When there are multiple healthcare professional types to research, each interviewed in
isolation. Traditional thinking has taught us not to combine roles that might be perceived as
different in status or expertise.
At Kantar Health we like to challenge this norm and have achieved great results by bringing
GPs, Specialists and Pharmacists together, or KOLs, payers and pharma company health
economists into one ‘Super Group’ to explore and build on shared knowledge. Our
experience has shown that with skilful moderation and sufficient time, richer insights can be
achieved by blending respondent types together, rather than speaking to them in isolation.
Read on to learn more about the benefits of this approach.
Our ‘Super Group’ approach goes beyond the regular 2 hour group discussion. In a
‘Super Group’ we spend either a half or full day with the respondents to fully explore an
issue or develop ideas. We have found the ‘Super Group’ approach works best when:
 You want respondents to be creative and get involved in the development of materials
 When the topic lends itself to an exchange of viewpoints and participation in activities
 When the aim is to explore the ‘big picture’ in order to understand the influence and role
of different healthcare professionals
In particular, the ‘Super Group’ approach allows enough time for respondents to be able to
complete extensive exercises as adapting detail aid messages for different types of
communications, designing services, building patient journeys and treatment pathways or
future-thinking.
When designing our ‘Super Groups’ we make sure that respondents are able to work in
their different specialities for short periods of time, in addition to taking part in whole group
activities. This allows us to delve into areas specific to each respondent type, and validate
the responses given in the wider group setting.
1
Super Groups
59
Super Groups
A key benefit of the ‘Super Group’ is that by creating an environment where all respondent
types work together, react to materials and share and develop ideas, you uncover insights
that you would not have unearthed if they were interviewed separately. A large group of
respondents, all with slightly different agendas and opinions generates dynamic discussion
and lively debate. The natural differences between a GP, Specialist and Pharmacist triggers
conversations that would not happen if each had been interviewed separately. With time,
greater rapport is built between respondents, enabling us to apply the right exercises and
techniques to elicit different points of view, collect rich and honest feedback and develop
strong, actionable insights.
In a ‘Super Group’ the choice of venue and facilitator is very important. Often we will use
two or more facilitators to ensure energy and pace is the best it can be. While central
locations can be used, creative work spaces or hotel conference facilities are ideal as they
provide a clear break from the ‘norm’ and have the space required and ‘break out’ areas.
The joy of breaking the ‘norm’ is that it can start to bridge the gap between a ‘traditional’
research discussion and a creative, strategic workshop. We also encourage our clients to
play an active role, you can simply observe the session first hand, or participate in group
discussions and / or exercises and enrich your understanding of those most vital to your
business. We have found that this approach delivers not only a fun, engaging and rich
experience; a single day can deliver as much as 3-4 days of traditional fieldwork addresses
each respondent type separately.
In summary, we must always be questioning tradition and the ‘ingrained’ assumptions that
become embedded over time. Our experience shows that there is no need to fear mixed
groups, providing that the blend of respondents is considered carefully, there are two or
more moderators, there is range of activities, and there are discussion points to ensure
momentum within the group is maintained.
To find out more please contact:
Hazel Haskayne – Group Director, Qualitative.
+ 44 1372 825 459
[email protected]
2
Market Research – The Essential Compendium Vol 1
Infographics
60
Kantar Health Market Insight Global Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
ePersuasion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Inductive Decision Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Message Optimisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Wearables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Market Insight Global Framework
61
Kantar Health Market Insight Global Framework
Life-Cycle
Post-Launch
Pre-Launch
Early Development
Pricing
Clinical Trial Optimization
KOL Influence Mapping
Market Landscape
Patient Journey (buying
process)
Opportunity Assessment
Customer Experience
Demand Estimation
Corporate Reputation
Segmentation
Sales Effectiveness
Competitive Event
Assessment
Brand Equity: Pinnakle
TM
Positioning
Communications
Development and
Execution
Messaging
Visit us at EphMRA, Booth 14, for more on Marketing Insights.
ePersuasion62
ePersuasion
Research focused on developing a
compelling communication strategy
using emotional persuasion
which product or service
features provides...
Communication Strategy
rational benefits...
and emotional
benefits...
ue
s
we make decisions based
on our CORE VALUES
co
re va
l
that link to our core
values
This can either be done in a qualitative or quantitative study. The results are analysed with an eye to strategic message development,
however, they can also be used to:
Creating or modifying features of products so they trigger desired benefits, thereby triggering preference
Segmenting the marketplace into groups based upon shared personal motivations and desired benefits
Positioning products based on values (ultimate benefits) rather than features
Developing marketing communications which effectively link product features, consumer benefits, and personal motivations
Inductive Decision Mapping
63
Inductive Decision Mapping
Key Issue: Understanding how treatment
decisions are made
Inductive Decision Mapping offers
something new and different…
Main research methods
traditionally used
Conjoint – for a patient type as
importance of attributed depends on the
patient
Patient case records – asking for
treatment decision given the treatment
options, including new treatments
Generates patient
types from attribute set
and asks for a
treatment decision.
Each respondent asked for a
treatment decision for 25 patient
types – all randomly generated.
Example for hypertensive
Patient scenario ......
Gender:
Aged:
Diet:
Lifestyle:
BMI:
Co-morbidities:
Current treatment:
Female
40-50
Good
Inactive
28
Chronic Kidney Disease
ACE+CCB+BB
....... Select Treatment Decision
Analysis – Strategic Database
Potential methodology
limitations
Attribute importance - what should we
focus on in our communications?
Conjoint – many patient types lead to
multiple Conjoint exercises with
significant increases in cost &
complexity
Patient case records – highly
dependent on doctors having seen
patients recently
Segmentation using
CHAID allowing clear
targeting of high response
groups
Market Sizing by linking
with incidence
Message Optimisation
64
Message Optimisation
Bridges the gap between positioning
and message executions
Message
Optimisation
Positioning: the single intellectual idea
Message: the words and visuals that
which will be the basis for the reason
customers will to use your compound - see
Kantar Health’s ePersuasion
creatively communicates the product
position.
Message Optimisation builds advanced quantitative research techniques into what has
historically been only a qualitative process ensuring an exhaustive exploration of the host of
messaging opportunities for your product, and...
...providing the hard evidence to support brand team’s convictions to convince senior
management of a given direction.
Message Optimisation consists of 4 phases
Phase IV execution testing
Marketing & Creative
Phase 1
Internal
Brainstorming
(Qualitative)
Market exploration
& internal message
element generation
Phase 2
Phase 3a
Rasch
Triplet Scaling
(Quantitative)
Refining
Messages
(Qualitative)
Prioritise
elements
Refine
messages for
quant modeling
Phase 3b
Phase 4
Choice Model
Platform Test
(Quantitative)
Identify optimal
message
platforms
Execution
Testing
(Qualitative)
Test executions
Internal
Brainstorming
(Qualitative)
Rasch
Triplet Scaling
(Quantitative)
Execution
rating
Execution
rating
Refining
Messages
(Qualitative)
Choice Model
Platform Test
(Quantitative)
Credibility
Uniqueness
Quantitative research makes sure the winner
is the best of the best, but Qualitative
research picks the winner.
Execution
rating
Execution
Testing
(Qualitative)
Overall goals :
Test executions
Motivating
Power
Optimal
Execution
Message Optimisation gives powerful guidance to creative development by qualitatively and
quantitatively prioritising a vast array of message elements.
rigorous and creative
1. Combines
quantitative research into the
message development process
determine the best elements for
2. Helps
brand identity
3.
Builds optimal message platforms –
ensures that you are communicating
the best of the best
Message Optimisation outputs
What’s the benefit?
Why should I believe it?
and are these.....
- Motivating
- Credible
- Differentiating/unique
Message Optimisation ensures that you are communicating best of the best
Wearables65
Who’s currently wearing their
health on their sleeve?
New research by Kantar Health finds that while many millennials in Germany are aware of
wearables as a fitness device, many fewer are aware of their use as medical devices,
and fewer still actually use wearables for medical purposes. This infographic examines
where the opportunities might lie.
69%
10%
Only 10% presently use
a wearable as a medical
device, so there is still
enormouse scope to
build this market.
Awareness of fitness wearable
devices is quite high, but
awareness of medical related
wearable devices is considerably
lower.
66%
of these are men
which is useful to
know for R&D,
branding and
positioning.
34%
By default, less than half
are women. An opportunity
to generate awareness and
create a more female
orientated medical device?
10%
Awareness of fitness
devices
Monitor blood pressure
Monitor glucose
12%
69%
27%
44%
44%
don’t use a medical
or fitness device yet.
66%
45%
45%
are willing to share their
data with ‘others’, but the
real opportunity would be if
they shared the data with
their physicians.
34%
51%
51%
do not trust their data will be
securely stored on a medical
device, so there is an opportunity to
improve security on devices and/or
communicate it better.
To effectively seize these opportunities, there is a greater need for co-creation between
pharma and patients when developing new wearable devices.
Catalysts driving
successful decisions
in life sciences.
About Kantar Health
Kantar Health is a leading global healthcare
consulting firm and trusted advisor to many
of the world’s leading pharmaceutical, biotech,
and medical device and diagnostic companies.
It combines evidence-based research
capabilities with deep scientific, therapeutic
and clinical knowledge, commercial
development know-how, and brand and
marketing expertise to help clients evaluate
opportunities, launch products and maintain
brand and market leadership.
Kantar Health deeply understands the
influence of patients, payers and physicians,
especially as they relate to the performance
and payment of medicines and the delivery
of healthcare services. Its 600+ healthcare
industry specialists work across the product
lifecycle, from pre-clinical development to
launch, acting as catalysts to successful
decision-making in life sciences and helping
clients prioritize their product development and
portfolio activities, differentiate their brands and
drive product success post-launch.
www.kantarhealth.com