Trained to win
pharmafile | November 13, 2006 | Feature | Business Services, Sales and Marketing |Â Â marketing, sales, trainingÂ
Pharmaceutical sales and marketing managers have a dizzying array of training courses, educational aids and events at their disposal, all of which claim to boost the performance of their teams.
Yet simply understanding how to assess this wide range of sales and marketing courses is currently open to debate, with no clear guides for either those who actually attend the courses or those who sign off the decision.
Whatever difficulties that may be involved, getting the training requirement right is essential if sales and marketing departments are to keep up with the evolving nature of the business.
"Pharma companies are going through massive changes, brought about by a host of factors including M&A activity, increasing globalisation of marketing processes and extensive pressure on new product launches," says Colin Wight, the chief executive of strategic healthcare business consultancy GalbraithWight. "We've trained pharmaceutical marketers from 42 countries across five continents over the past year, so we understand that this is a global phenomenon.
"We also understand that as a consequence of these changes and those seen in healthcare systems, there is much more pressure than ever before for marketers to achieve more with less, to build profit growth for their brands, and ensure the right patients gain access to the right medicines at the right time, with ever greater scrutiny of company marketing activities."
Budgets
Traditionally, the training budget has always been the first to be cut when times are lean or finances are coming under close scrutiny.
From the agency side, Alison Spink of training company Asparagus says: "Sadly, I think it is still the case, in my experience. It is the companies that are on the up-and-up that have the initiative and foresight to put in place longer-term training programmes.
"A good training programme, run consistently throughout a company, can raise productivity as well as profile. On top of that, investment in training demonstrates a company's commitment to its employees, which in turn, increases morale."
John McIlree, head of human resources, training and development at Merck Pharmaceuticals, thinks that pharma has been much maligned in its approach to training, and that cost-cutting usually means that all departments have to take their share of the pain.
He says: "In my experience, 'hard times' usually mean that all budgets will be looked at, and the idea that training will always be cut first is a bit of a myth, certainly in more recent times.
"It is likely that more attention will be paid to evaluating the contribution of training to meeting business objectives and to prioritising training activities to achieve this.
"The softer elements of training may be deferred during a budget period, but this principle would probably apply across more than just the training department. If HR/training has established a level of credibility for delivering meaningful training events, then, in my experience, it is more likely to be seen as part of the solution, rather than a cost-cutting target. The costly element for sales training is the reps' time off the road."
From a trainer's point of view, then and bearing in mind that a trainer is someone who is passionate about the positive effect of training on the bottom line there can never be enough training. From a pharma manager's point of view, especially when times are hard, training needs to be of the right kind, delivered with pinpoint accuracy and preferably, just in time.
A good in-house training team is one that will already have a reputation for delivering this, although inevitably, unless they are doing e-learning, the expensive resource – the rep – will be unproductive while he or she is off the road receiving training.
So, the general principle of training is reasonably secure within pharma – provided it gets results.
Training choices
However, there are literally hundreds of courses to choose from, and managers could be forgiven for throwing their hands up in horror at the prospect of having to decide between competing vendor offerings.
So which one do you choose? "A book could be written as an answer to this question," says John McIlree. Many companies develop and deliver their own training and development. "Activities range from short courses through diplomas to a full-blown MBA.
"There is a classic range of training events for both the sales and marketing disciplines. The essential components have not changed much over the years, although the more modern, snappier titles are tempting.
"There has been the development of a number of sales methods – you pays your money and takes your choice."
The in-house option is expensive but effective. He adds: "Many pharma companies have developed their own systems in recent years to reflect the changing NHS and customer mix. There are many specialised courses aimed at specific components of selling, and we find this an interesting way of revisiting sales skills.
"Often, a great deal of the products on offer can be seen as re-invented or re-badged basics. Marketing is well served with accredited programmes and providers such as the CIM. A range of courses and qualifications are available through a national network of providers.
"There is a huge choice for marketing in general, and a healthy offering for pharma marketing as well. Additionally, some new techniques, such as NLP, have attracted a significant number of devotees over the years. For instance, a good example of a new development has been the popular rise of Emotional Intelligence following the first journal articles in the early 90s.
"It is important to have a wide range of overlapping titles and subjects, because that helps facilitate the continued training and development to which the pharma industry is committed."
So with such a huge range of choice, what are the key criteria for choosing appropriate training?
John McIlree thinks mailings generate business, but he questions how relevant the training may be for the company investing in it:
"I believe a great deal of training is undertaken spontaneously in response to mailings. These courses may be interesting and, of course, delegates will always defend their choice, but it is often a case of the tail wagging the dog.
"It is important to analyse your needs and set your objectives, so you can identify relevant training. You need to identify an event, assess its best fit, and then research the suitability and ability of the provider, how it will be delivered, and whether follow-up is planned.
"Don't just rely on a course description in a brochure. Aim to speak to the provider and also to a trainer if possible, to assess how suitable it is for meeting your delegates' goals."
Finding the right course to meet delegates' needs is only half the battle. Another crucial aspect is making certain that managers and delegates are on the same page in terms of their expectations. If what is delivered is not as good as they expected, then the course will be deemed to have failed, even if it has provided useful learnings for the delegates. It may sometimes be better than expected, of course, but if it is undersold, then perhaps not enough people will turn up to benefit from it.
Measuring training returns
Inevitably, the question of ROI comes up, but no one has yet worked out how to measure whether training has a direct impact on improved performance or whether, say, the fact that management has shown confidence in you by sending you on an expensive training programme has had an impact.
So how should the range of courses available in sales and marketing be evaluated, by those who may go on them and more importantly by those who have to sign off? Opinion on the subject varies.
Colin Wight notes that, traditionally, training has rarely been properly measured. He adds: "However, we believe measurement of training is a critical success factor and measuring every GalbraithWight course is mandatory and a fundamental part of every programme plan."
For its programmes, the company measures changes in participants' knowledge after the training module; changes in behaviour noted by delegates' managers; the delegates' own evaluation of each part of the programme; as well as the direct business impact from specific projects run during their programmes.
However, many client companies don't even ask for ROI calculations, as Alison Spink explains: "Are we being asked to show how to evaluate the ROI on courses? Not really. The clients we work with find our training courses valuable and worthwhile without specific ROI evaluation.
"Sometimes, they do their own post-training questionnaires, and we always have a post-training briefing with the client to discuss how it went, and if any changes need to be made for any subsequent sessions.
"A training course is not just a 'day away from the office'. It has to have an impact on how people operate. The success of a course will speak for itself, both to those attending and those holding the purse strings."
John McIlree agrees, although he wonders whether the results are being measured rigorously: "Classically, you'd evaluate a training course by comparing the offer to the needs and also by assessing the ROI. The ROI assessment is demanding and I'm not sure that this is conducted rigorously in every case.
"Superficial attempts at evaluation, such as so-called 'happy sheets', which are completed as soon as a course is completed, sometimes even in the presence of the trainer, do not really provide the objective appraisal that you need."
There are two main types of training course. Tailored in-house courses are a valuable but expensive option, involving the trainer in consultancy in advance, which obviously costs extra, and these courses are likely to involve a relatively large proportion of the field force in order to make them cost-effective.
The alternative is to go for open courses, which tend to be more general in nature, more valuable for junior staff and, importantly, cheaper. But they may not provide the right amount of 'bangs for the buck'.
"If you are looking at open courses, then it is important to look carefully at matching content and needs. Open courses naturally tend to optimise the population to which they appeal and this can dilute the offering.
"My advice is to be sceptical of what is being offered and the impact it will have. Personal experience is valuable, preferably from company colleagues, but also from other companies, if the provider lists those with whom they work."
So, the trick is to pitch it at just the right level – but how can you ensure that trainees' and managers' expectations from courses are realistic?
Alison Spink thinks the key is in the planning: "You can ensure realistic expectations by taking a water-tight brief and making sure the course matches the requirements. We have a detailed briefing form, which clients complete to ensure we are on the same wave-length.
"To help delegates prepare for the course and know what to expect, pre-training reading materials are distributed. We will often ask trainees to complete a pre-course questionnaire to determine their current level of knowledge and experience."
John McIlree agrees: "You need to be thorough in determining what you are trying to achieve and how. A blend of approaches may produce a better result than relying on one activity. You could combine a course with self-study, shadowing, hands-on experience and personal coaching. That may be expensive, perhaps, if you are using outsiders, but a line manager can support much of this activity."
Training and beyond
Training is often taken to mean teaching people how to do things that are new to them, but the term can embrace a wider range of activities, and cover management at all levels.
When training grows up, it is usually called continuing professional development (CPD), designed to reinforce skills that are already there or improve and strengthen managers' weaker areas. Marketing and sales people, for instance, are not well-known for being strong on financial disciplines. So, what CPD options are open to sales managers and marketers and how much use are they?
For Merck's John McIlree, this is a key area: "We aim to provide a significant element of CPD in-house, both locally and corporately, but carefully chosen outside suppliers will help to enrich this offering.
"The use of international business schools, for example, is an effective and motivational tool for aspiring leaders. The level of investment will reflect the hierarchy and the potential of the members of the organisation's talent pool."
John Hosken is principal consultant at Information Advisers and also a qualified business coach. Visit: www.john-hosken.com
Related Content
Exscientia buys Austrian cancer cell screening company for €50 million
UK-based AI pioneers Exscientia has announced the purchase of rival AI firm Allcyte for €50 …
Deloitte acquires Iperion Life Sciences Consultancy
Deloitte have announced the acquisition of Iperion Life Sciences Consultancy, a globally-operating firm working to …
Novartis CEO sets aside $700 million to settle bribery lawsuit
Vas Narasimhan, Novartis’ CEO, has set aside $700 million to settle a bribery lawsuit in …
