Cricket & Pharma

To many of my readers, especially those from America, you may have difficulty understanding this blog.

By Anonymous (not verified) on May 8, 2009

To many of my readers, especially those from America, you may have difficulty understanding this blog. As, for the most part, I shall be drawing comparisons and examples from the great English institution that is.... Cricket.

Bear with me here.

Cricket as a sport was dying, viewing figures were collasping faster than England's middle order (That was a cricket joke, sorry if you didn't get it) TV had cut funding, the sport was losing interest at grass roots and attendances were at an all time low. The public just weren't engaging with the sport, they had lost interest, bored of the routine and less than overawed at the excitement levels, skill, tactics and gamesmanship which was played out on the pitch.

What hope would cricket have for the future?

Then cricket realised that if it was to survive and flourish it would have revise it's image and engage with the public to see what they wanted out of the sport. Thus 20/20 Cricket was born, a format where by each time would have 20 overs (6 balls in an over) to bowl the other team out and then likewise. This would mean a match would last only a couple of hours instead of what was days. The teams were given exciting names and colours, they introduced night games and all sorts of gadgets and analysis to excite the fan both in the stands and at home.

Essentially Cricket knocked it's own ball for six right into the 21st Century and the public lapped it up. It gave a new energy and lease of life into a failing game and it also sparked a wider interest in the one-day and five-day test matches. Cricket was re-born because of a simple strategy of understanding exactly what the 'customer' wants and how they want it.

Which brings me directly back to Pharma, for years we as an industry stood around on the field, not doing much. Telling people this is the way it is, the way it has been and the way it will be for everyone involved.

We sold to the physicians in the same way.
We told our patients to take the medication in the same way.
Our companies ran in the same way.

And then we lost the game.

We had to quickly rethink our strategies about how to re-engage and communicate with our market and now we are beginning to claw ourselves back into the reckoning.

From my research across many divisions of pharma across the globe I am seeing the ways pharma are trying to find their own version of 20/20

Our increasingly effective use of social media
Our deeper understanding of 'personalised' adherence
Our shift towards partnerships with physicians instead of buyer/seller role
to name but a few....

I'm not saying we are there yet, But at least, like Cricket we are acknowledging the rules of the game have changed and we need to move with it.

Keep up the good work.

Thanks ;-)