Questions and answers
pharmafile | April 27, 2009 | Feature | Medical Communications | Pfizer, Q&A, communications
As a young child, I am reliably informed that "why" was my favourite word for an extended period. While that little insight does much to suggest my parents were due some considerable sympathy, it does perhaps explain why they were convinced that I would ultimately become either a scientist or a policeman. Given that it is unlikely that any of the latter will be reading this article, I am comfortable that I won't offend anyone by saying I believe I made the right choice in pursuing the scientific option.
For any communications professional, the ability to ask the right questions – and, of course, elicit the right answers from those more expert – is crucial. For someone communicating in a technical and scientific environment, ever more so.
Communications in the pharma industry involves taking what is often a complex, detailed and jargon-rich story and translating it into one that resonates with our more generalist audiences. Moreover, the challenge is to tell that story in a way that can not only be understood but, most crucially, cannot be misunderstood.
Therein lies the subtle difference between good communication and great communication. Done well, communications programmes can help build advocacy, trust and ultimately bring about a behaviour change.
An everyday example of this challenge can be found in the armoury of any communicator; the ubiquitous 'Question and Answer' document. The great majority of you reading this article will have read a Q&A, many of you may have contributed to one, some of you may even have written one.
They can be valuable documents – sitting at the hub of your efforts around a particular communications issue or activity. But their value lies not in the end product, at least not solely.
Much more important is the development process itself, requiring as it does input from a broad group of individuals. Such an approach can help bring consistency and clarity to your messages and, most crucially, it affords the wider team the opportunity to get fully involved and to ask those questions that perhaps wouldn't normally get asked in the midst of day-to-day business.
Developing a Q&A gives all involved licence to ask whatever they think their audiences might ask, however awkward, however basic, however obvious. We can all at times be guilty of relying too heavily on the opinions of those closest to us. After all, surely those individuals who understand the subject best, can articulate the issues, know the audiences, offer the best counsel, no? Often, but in my experience, the individual with less background knowledge or experience can also ask the 'killer question'.
I have read a great many Q&As and I never cease to be surprised how often the 'answer', just isn't one. Rather than responding to a direct question with a 'yes' or a 'no', and then adding qualifying information as necessary, so often we seem to sidestep the question, make an appeal to empathy, a plea for the reader to understand what a difficult and troublesome issue we are facing and how hard we are working to rectify it.
We add numerous statistics, facts and figures to our answers and, while these are clearly important, overuse can give the impression that we are deliberately adding to the 'fog of war' or worse still, avoiding the question all together.
Who can forget the infamous 'Jeremy (I'll keep asking the same question until you answer) Paxman/Michael (I'll just keep repeating what I want to say in response) Howard interview'?
It was awkward to watch, left both interviewer and interviewee looking clumsy, and didn't 'work'. In a similar way, our credibility is at stake each time we are asked to respond to an issue.
Our commitment should always be to answer the question in as clear and simple terms as possible. It is by improving transparency that we will move towards genuine advocacy for our industry on the part of clinicians, patients and the general public.
From a communications perspective, the Q&A is really no more than a precursor in an evolutionary process, a tool to help the team develop what is really required to deliver a story and communicate a position: a set of key messages that may be used in a much more proactive way than in the reactive manner Q&As are traditionally utilised.
So, the next time a Q&A lands on your desk, ask yourself two things: are the answers actually answers, do they address the nub of the question, and provide sufficient detail without being too wordy? And, most fundamentally, can you identify your key messages?
Andrew Thomas is a communications manager at Pfizer UK
Related Content
NICE recommends Pfizer’s new once-weekly treatment for haemophilia B on NHS
Walton Oaks, 21st May 2025 – Pfizer Ltd announced today that the National Institute for Health and Care …
Pfizer releases results for severe RSV-associated LRTD treatment study
US-based Pfizer have announced results from its substudy B of the ongoing phase 3 clinical …
New Real-World Data Published in Journal of Cardiac Failure on Effectiveness
Patients treated with tafamidis were associated with greater rates of survival compared with patients untreated …
