This document discusses measuring the return on investment (ROI) of promotional activities. It summarizes a presentation on optimizing ROI through non-personal selling tactics like eDetailing. The presentation finds that while personal sales calls were traditionally preferred, physicians now get information from various sources and eDetailing in particular is an effective low-cost alternative. A case study shows that an eDetailing program for two dermatology drugs led to a 25% increase in prescriptions from participating physicians compared to a 3% increase for non-participants, demonstrating the impact of this non-personal promotional method. In conclusion, fully utilizing existing digital assets and effective recruiting are keys to maximizing ROI from eDetailing programs.

1. Measuring Promotional Success
Optimizing ROI
Sponsored by ScienceMedia
Become Part of a Greater Body of Knowledge

2. Table of Contents
• Introduction and session objective
• Traditional promotion in a changing
environment
• Historical return on investment summary
• eDetailing ROI case study
• Maximizing your return on investment
when producing digital assets

3. Introduction
• Chauncey Smith – Sr Brand Manager at Glaxo SmithKline
Consumer Healthcare
– Medical Marketer of the Year 2002
– VP elect for MMA – Programs 2005-07
– Committee Chair: Medical Marketer of the Year – 2005
• The information shared in this presentation has been collected from a
variety of sources and reflects my personal point of view of medical
marketing and return on investment methods
• Every effort has been made to reference all sources and not infringe on
proprietary or trademarked work
• Michelle Youngers – CEO at ScienceMedia has underwritten this
session.
– ScienceMedia is a company that uses rich media for the
visualization and communication of scientific concepts in marketing
and training programs with an emphasis on instructional design.

4. Overview
• Session objective: Stimulate a robust
peer to peer discussion about the
promotional returns on investment, from
several points of view:
– Relative and absolute cost efficiency of
non-personal selling tactics
– Full utilization and amortization of digital
assets created to support these tactics

5. The untapped potential of
non-personal selling for medical marketers
Medical Marketing Association
2005 Annual Conference

6. A recent article in Product
Management Today proclaims
not having sales force support is
a product manager crisis!
Let’s examine
this a little closer

7. A “historical” perspective helps to start
framing our discussion by examining where
physicians prefer to get product information
is probably useful
0
20
40
60
80
%response
Percent response
Important Sources of Medical Information
Journals CME Conferencesymposia Colleagues
Reference Publications Dinner Meetings Pharma Reps Audio Cassettes
Videocassettes On-line
Source: PERQHCI, June 1998

8. Promotional Environment Situation Analysis
• Physician’s attitudes regarding drug promotion are
changing, and although personal selling is preferred
method for brands with sales >$100M, the use of non-
personal methods are growing
(eg- journal advertising, eDetail, eCME, web based tactics)
• The current industry model remains with the status quo,
because of the fear of a competitive response
• However, clever marketers are testing new promotional
alternatives, like eDetailing, with success
– Smaller brands are adopting these non-personal strategies at a
even faster rate, because of the efficiency of spend
• Many small to mid-sized brands can not effectively
support the expense of personal selling and recognizes
the challenge of a non-personal selling strategy as our
way forward

9. How do we as medical marketers
successfully navigate today’s
environment and identify “small brand
opportunities” into market success?
• Personal experience and traditional wisdom
have taught us to believe personal selling is
imperative for a successful product launch.
– But is this tenet still a truth in today’s marketplace
with 95,000 pharmaceutical reps clamoring for
physician attention?
• While the answer is not yet definitive, there is clearly
evidence to suggest “detailing” may not be as influential
today as in years past, because physicians have more
outlets to get their information
• Non-personal selling can be an efficient and
effective alternative to our traditional wisdom

10. In today’s crowded offices, more representatives are finding it tougher to
break through
and have meaningful a dialog with physicians
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Physicansresponding
Targeting realities
Total calls See MD More than Sample drop More than 2 mins Message recalled
Pharmaceutical Executive Supplement – 5/04
* Out of every 100 attempted
sales calls, pharmaceutical reps
get 2 or more minutes with
physicians less than 10% of the
time, and less than 5% is the
message recalled

11. Source: Access to high prescribers: The World of Doorknob details, 1999; Scott-Levin; associate ride-alongs
and interviews; financial press articles; MD interviews
FEWER MEANINGFUL PHYSICIAN INTERACTIONS MEANS FEWER OPPORTUNITIES FOR
REPRESENTATIVE LED PRODUCT DIFFERNTIATION
• Only 12 out of 300 (4%) possible details are recalled by
physicians
87% of calls
last less than
2 minutes
• Drop samples
off at
receptionist’s
desk
•Leave before
receptionist’s
desk (i.e.,
other waiting
reps, restricted
access signs)
• No physician recall• Drop samples
off at sample
closet
85 reps
100 reps
(300 details)
57 reps 20 reps
= 20 calls
8 calls
??
12 recalled
details**
15 28 37 12

12. 10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Focus on top
recommenders
Ignore mainstream
recommenders
Traditional Medical
Sales & Marketing

13. 2004
Traditional Medical Sales & Marketing
Personal Selling
Potential
Overspend?
50-60%
No Contact
70-80%
No Contact
Good Spend
90-95%
No Contact

14. 2004
Self-Service and
self-selected for
lower tier ($)
Integrated Medical Sales & Marketing
Personal Selling
Integrated Marketing (1:1)
Optimal experiences with
heavy recruiting for
top prescribers ($$$)
Mass-Customized approach
with moderate recruiting for
mid-tier prescribers ($$)
“Spend in proportion to HCP value, and in alignment with their preferences”
Decile 8-10 Specialists
Decile 4 -7 Specialists
Decile 7-10 PCP
NP/PAs in Specialty
Decile 1-3 Specialists
Decile 1-6 PCP
NP/PAs
Pharmacists
$$$
$$$
$$$
$$
$

15. • Traditional
selling model
• Elements of new
selling model
• New selling
modelSteps can be
taken to improve
the existing model
Steps can be
taken to improve
the existing model
• “Tightening the screws”
– Enhance sales force
productivity
– Simplify organization
strategy
– Improve front-line
performance
management
– Maximize DM impact
– Ensure technology
payback
– “Turbocharging the
model”
– Develop more sophisticated
capabilities for customer
knowledge, e.g.,
segmentation, CRM and
KAM
– Pilot tailored approaches
– Explore new channels
– Drive pull through with
marketing and managed
care
– Ensure streamlined,
effective technology support
– “Creating a new
paradigm”
– Create new avenues
of access
– Reach physicians
through multiple
coordinated, highly
effective channels
– Micro-segment and
deliver tailored
messages and
benefits
– Provide a solution
across networks of
physicians
and patients
Capabilities must be
built in the
intermediate term
Capabilities must be
built in the
intermediate term
Future paradigm
informs intermediate
steps
Future paradigm
informs intermediate
steps
The consulting community discussed this rapidly evolving Pharma Selling
Model way back in late 2003
Clever marketers are evolving
with the market to address the
new model’s realities

16. The old, tried and true media provide a
reliable ROI
Journal advertising, banner ads for patient
record forms have solid track records
Tying a direct response mechanism to them
can add life beyond the single impression

17. Journal advertising remains a very efficient non personal selling tactic
delivering excellent target reach and frequency
Spend
($000)
Sales
Increase
($000)
ROI
(Per $ Spent)
Print Only $ 939 $ 2,244 $ 2.39
Detail Only $ 9,988 $19,477 $1.95
Print+Detail $25,213 $67,571 $2.68
TOTAL
(49 campaigns)
$36,140 $87,097 $2.41
Source: IMR Survey of 125 Pharma. Co. Marketing Executives – 999

18. The Tuck School of Business recently reconfirmed this dynamic with the
publication of the RAPP study
ROI per
Dollar spent
(1991 – 99 launches with
Brand sales of $25-200MM)
1997 – 1999
launches
(Brand sales of $25-
50MM)
Margin of error
95% confidence
Detailing $1.72 $1.45 + $0.19
Journal Ad $5.00 $2.22 + $0.88
Medical Ed $3.56 NA NA
DTC $0.19 $0.25 + $0.52
Source - ROI Analysis of Pharmaceutical Promotion Study – Ass’n of Medical Publications - 2002

19. “Low tech” example of banner ad campaign
dampened anticipated erosion
FORMEDIC NSAID Promotional Evaluation- Market Share
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Dec-96 Jan-97 Feb-97 Mar-97 Apr-97 May-97 Jun-97 Jul-97 Aug-97 Sep-97 Oct-97
Test n=22,068 Control n=22,068
Match Period Covariate
Period
Test Period

20. Test vs Control
NRx Patient Record Banner Ad test
Physicians who were using Formedic patient record forms (test group) prescribed 29.4%
significantly higher new prescriptions for a new ADHD line extension as compared to the control
physicians during the 17 month post-test period. (cl*=99.99%)
Note: *cl = Confidence level; if cl >= 90% the program impact is significant, else it is
directional. Analysis conducted : ANCOVA.
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
Jan-
02
Feb-
02
Mar-
02
Apr-
02
May-
02
Jun-
02
Jul-
02
Aug-
02
Sep-
02
Oct-
02
Nov-
02
Dec-
02
Jan-
03
Feb-
03
Mar-
03
Apr-
03
May-
03
Jun-
03
Jul-
03
Aug-
03
Sep-
03
NRxs
Control Test

21. So what’s up with all the noise around
eDetailing?

22. Physician Acceptance of Online Detailing*
Physicians are using Online Detailing
• 206,280 physician participants
• 109,440 intend to participate in 2004
• In 2004, roughly 50% of all physician will participate in an online detail
• Current eDetailing Users attended 8.8 programs/physician in past 12
months and expect to increase to 14.8 programs
Physicians who use Online Detailing are high value
physicians
• Current eDetailing Users write 193 Rx/week vs. 108 for non-users
Online Detailing is an important channel for keeping
up to date on info
• Current eDetailing Users expect to decrease time with reps by 30% and
double their time with electronic detailing programs
• Physicians access from home an average of 59% of the time
*Source: Manhattan Research

23. GSK has been testing alternative
methods of promotion for more than
2 years now to measure the
changing attitudes of physicians
59% of participation time was
outside of rep work hours!
A GSK product eDetail test - 2003

24. An early insight to me was that physicians view “e-Details”
more like symposia and less like a sales call
The implication of this finding may be a driver of future intent of eDetail use

25. 19%
21%
25%
26%
35%
46%
21%
22%
27%
24%
36%
48%
17%
20%
24%
27%
35%
45%
Will improve the quality of
the time I spend with detail
reps in general
Supplements the amount of
info/visits I receive from
pharma companies
Will reduce amount of
redundant info I receive
from the detail reps I see
Have the option to obtain
more info after a visit from
the detail rep
Can access information
when a new product is
launched
Can access info when and
where it is most convenient
for me
ePharma Specialists
ePharma PCPs
ePharma Physicians
Increasing Interest in Participating in eDetailing
Source: Medsite and Industry Research

26. High – Medium
(varies by cluster)
Very High
Very High
(varies by cluster)
Medium
High
High - Med
ROI
(depending on
volume)
Medium – Low
High High
Med - Low
ROI
(depending on
volume)
Med - Low
ROI
(depending on
volume)
eDetailing has utility throughout the Product Life Cycle
High - Med
Decile
Lower
Decile
Launch /
Growth
Mature Decline /
Harvest
General
Strategy
 Accelerate Adoption
 Anchor Key Messages
 Integrate with Reps
 Protect Relationships
through smarter
segmentation of customer
base…defend market share
 Deeper Penetration of
customer base…fill in
coverage gaps
 SFA /eDetail feedback loop
 Cushion Erosion
 Migrate to low cost
promotional / sampling
channels
Reported ROI 300% -1500% 200% - 1000% 200% - 400%
High - Medium
Response
ROI
Key
Source: Medsite

27. My recent experience with
eDetailing agrees with the
research
Test Objectives
• CH was interested in exploring online promotional marketing to
maintain professional relationships with US prescribers (challenge
faced with reduction of field sales support)
• Focus on two mature dermatology products Aclovate®
and Cutivate®
• Increase interaction with brand message and raise brand
awareness
• Communicate the use of these products in combination therapy
• Creating a low cost solution for developing an online marketing
channel
Targets
• The program goal was 2,300 completes with 10% high value targets
recruited by MedSite based on a target list of 40,000 (MedSite
received 8,000 derm & ped targets)

28. eDetail Aclovate/Cutivate
Program Overview
• A 1-wave; 7-minute
interactive multi-media
program
• Includes comprehension
and profile questions to
keep participants engaged
in (and to measure) the
program
• No honoraria in a channel
where pharma companies
are offering up to $25 worth
of medically relevant gifts
• Launched August 26, 2004
• GSK owns all assets which
can now be redeployed on
www.dermprofessional.com

29. Full amortization of digital assets
is must to maximize ROI
• The animations used in the eDetail for
the mode of action, etc was extracted
from a CDDVD based training program
– Source files (flash) were sent to the eDetail
provider during storyboard phase
– Out of pocket expenses were minimal for
content development, because the bulk of
the cost was absorbed by previous project

30. Recruiting is key!
Participants & Completers – By Channel
Physicians may enter site through more than 1 method
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Participated
Completed
Completion Rate
Participated 1525 854 244 2623
Completed 1157 755 214 2126
Completion Rate 76% 88% 88% 81%
Email Fax Invites Total

31. Test Case - Program Summary
Program Launched August 26th
, 2004
Cumulative results through March 9th
, 2005
Average time spent in iDetail: 7 minutes
Total Time spent in iDetail: 31,620 minutes
2000
2886
2590
2106
296
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Program Statistics
Summary
2000 2886 2590 2106 296
Enter Goal
Total
Details
Unique
Participant
Unique
Completion
Repeat
Participant

32. Rx Derm eDetail - Results
Increased Self Reported Intent to Prescribe
• Before eDetail 19% self reported prescribing Aclovate
• Following eDetail 63% ‘very likely’ (top 2 box rating) to prescribe
Aclovate
• Before eDetail 22% self reported prescribing Cutivate
• Following eDetail 67% ‘very likely’ to prescribe Cutivate
High Marks for Engagement / Completion
• 1,308 completes in 5 months
• 82% completion rate
• 52% completing after business hours
• 13% visited the web site after the eDetail

33. Post period analysis shows a TRx change of
+25% for brand prescribers, while segment
was +3%
1145
1441
11519 11924
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Pre eDetail Aclovate TRx 5/04-
07/04
Post eDetail Aclovate TRx
1/05-03/05
Pre eDetail LPTRx 5/04-07/04 Post eDetail LP TRx 1/05-
03/05
Aclovate TRx Analysis on All Docs Receiving eDetail

34. Rx Derm eDetail - Results
Increased Scripts
• The number of scripts for Aclovate among the targeted
physicians who completed the eDetail more than
doubled in Q4 ’04 vs. Q1 ’04*
(controlling for all other forms of promotion)
– Pre eDetail monthly avg. scripts per HCP - 1.372
vs. Post eDetail monthly avg. scripts per HCP - 2.817
– There was a 105% increase in total scripts between the
two quarters (219 v. 614 scripts written post eDetail)
* Note: the results only refer to Aclovate as Cutivate came off patent
in May and the number of scripts actually declined

35. My eDetail Summary
• Key Take Aways
– This Interactive Learning Program has proven to be
successful
– Not having an honorarium slowed the completion rate
but has not stood in the way of success
– This is a low cost approach to educating HCPs about
our products
• $44 per completed detail
• Drove traffic to the web site and gained opt-in for future
communication
– This cost per contact may not be easily replicated
since it was taken on as a trial by the provider
– Scaling up may be to NPs, PAs and other PCPs but
high value Derms and Peds have proven hard to reach

36. My Conclusions
• No doubt, Pharma selling model is evolving rapidly as
physicians have more channels to access for information
• While personal selling may be the “gold standard” of
promotional opportunities, there are viable alternatives
channels for marketers to consider, regardless of size.
• My experience has been with a well known drug in a well
established category. This dynamic and opportunity may
not be as well defined in emerging or replacement
therapeutic categories.
• Non-personal selling strategies can greatly increase
reach and frequency against category prescribers when
compared vs personal selling centric plans
• When I combine these industry facts and data with my
own experience, I believe it’s possible that small to mid-
sized brands can be effectively promoted without
personal selling and return a positive ROI for your
respective organizations

37. Acknowledgements for
significant contribution to my
learning and presentation
• GSKCH – Alan Schaefer, Cameron
Poluszek, Jari Rouas, Will Hignett
• E2 - Peter Rush
• Medsite – Bill Paquin, Natasha Allam
• H2 – Tim Husni
• Formedic – Kent Roman
• ScienceMedia – Michelle Youngers
and Julie Gegner, PhD

38. Measuring Promotional Success
Optimizing ROI
Sponsored by ScienceMedia
Become Part of a Greater Body of Knowledge