Q&A: How to engage with KOLs
Emma D'Arcy, senior digital consultant with Complete Digital, on making pharma's relationships with key opinion leaders (KOLs) work
By on Apr 15, 2011How would you define a modern day KOL?
We're still using the term KOL, but we're approaching the relationship with them differently. The good news is, we've seen a maturation of both the expectations and outputs of alliances between pharma and physicians. Thankfully, we have moved past the profligacy and politics of yesteryear, the food frolics and friendship extravaganzas that failed to achieve scientific equanimity and fuelled the reactive media hyperbole where a relative handful of puritanical crusaders tried to impose a draconian code and pharma was hounded for attempting to work with KOLs. As with any polarized battle, a healthy middle ground has been reached and the value and importance of industry-physician interactions has been re-established with better working parameters. So it isn't so much that the terminology or definition of a KOL has changed, but the understanding that pharma are KOLs, too, and that the value of a physician KOL is better authenticated through strong scientific collaborations (not pens, pads, or pizza) defines the modern-day relationship.
The traditional KOL role has also expanded to include different HCPs, influencers, and advocates. We are experiencing the gestation of a new categorization of real world experts' who are a heterogeneous population of these influencers and advocates. We might call then POLs; we might call them healthcare ambassadors. Whatever the term, they are a collective tour-de-force to campaign for better real-world treatments and outcomes of treatments in complement to the KOLs who have traditionally emerged from the clinical trial world. We are looking at a future of participatory medicine with a multiplicity of experts from different backgrounds.
What are the biggest hurdles for pharma to overcome when engaging with KOLs?
I think pharma still hides behind a fear-of-engagement-failure or an apologetic approach to relationships with KOLs. They have spent too much time being quiet in response to their critics. It is great to see pharma standing up for itself and communicating the commendable projects and products they develop and deliver. Accordingly, it is good to see the KOLs within pharma itself starting to be more visible around the work they do. We want to learn about the extraordinarily talented researchers, medics, and healthcare experts in pharma. It is highly reassuring to know that these scientists are working away on our collective behalf. The popularity of pharma company blogs exemplifies this. Pfizer's Think Science Now' blog, for instance, demonstrates how overcoming a hurdle about telling your own story' serves to enhance transparency and ultimately trust and belief in what pharma does.
The same approach needs to keep building with regard to how pharma can and should engage with all physicians, not just HCPs. The Manhattan Research Group studies showed that more than two-thirds of EU physicians want to direct their patient to pharma product sites, which shows that physicians trust the info from pharma. Furthermore, physicians on social network sites like doctors.net and doctodoc very clearly seek information and relationships with pharma. When I launched the medpharmaconnect site last year, there were physicians from 17 therapeutic areas stating they wanted greater relationships with pharma, whereas pharma participation was less confident. Engage more, engage equally' is a sensible mantra.
What are the best ways to engage with the modern day KOL-stick with what we know works or consider social media and digital channels?
At the risk of sounding facetious, the answer is one and the same: Stick with what we know works and, given that almost all physicians are online, participate in social media. [Physicians] glean much of their prescribing information from digital channels, so there is clear indication of the best ways to engage with KOLs. (For more on engaging with KOLs online, see What's next for marketing and social media?', The pharma connection: How to foster patient-physician collaboration', and Nurses and physician assistants: A new pharma marketing channel'.)
Like the rest of the population, doctors are increasingly using the Internet for personal use: 77% watch online videos, 75% shop online, 49% visit social networks, and 46% instant message. Online activities are having a significant impact on their professional lives, too, and there's been a double-digit percentage growth in the consultation of online educational resources (rather than offline ones) since 2007. A few illuminating figures to show the importance of getting online activities right: In 2007, the average physician spent 9.5 hours per week online; in 2010, this figure had risen to 14 hours. Of those physicians who use the Internet for professional purposes, 83% said this was essential to their practice.
Therefore, I think the defense of digital channels, or the persuasion to use them for strong industry-physician interactions, has been resolved, especially around provision of information. What is more interesting is considering how we can use digital means to develop useful tools for the physician. A controversial point of view is that pharma should consider how to help the physician who needs to think like a salesman', in that the physician has to sell' a lifestyle change or responsibility to a patient. If a smoker sees their doctor about chest pain, for example, then the physician has to sell' the notion of quitting tobacco and there are great examples of digital tools to help manage that and social media campaigns to support that. Pharma should consider the wrap-around digital services that they provide to physicians and patients as part of their communication and relationship strategy. We have seen Janssen do this faultlessly with their psoriasis360 multi-channeled approach.
Regulations are always of top concern with any form of engagement. Given the grey areas around social media, is it best to stick with what's safe when beginning with KOL engagement?
Innovation has never been driven by regulation. In the UK, regulation-or lack thereof-is based on a code written in the 1960s, a different culture and technical capability. It is irresponsible to continue to apply that code now. In the US, there has been further delay on SM guidelines. The regulatory ennui will only be broken through practice; self-governing and the meritocracy of the social Web will deliver its own regulations.
Recommendations for anyone beginning their campaign?
Engage with equanimity. Consider influencers beyond KOLs. Participate in RWE channels in a RWE manner.
For exclusive business insights into KOLs, attend KOL and Stakeholder Engagement Europe 2012 on February 21-22, 2012 in Berlin.
For more articles on KOLs, see Special report: KOLs and pharma.
For more exclusive business analysis, download eyeforpharma's Pharma Emerging Markets Report 2011-12 and Pharma Key Account Management Report 2011-12.
For all the latest business analysis and insight for the pharma industry, sign up to eyeforpharma’s newsletters and follow us on Twitter.