The irony of technology

As access to HCPs becomes more difficult, life sciences teams need to make better use of the conversations they have. Activity targets alone give little guidance on how to do that.

Digital engagement provides data on opens, attendance and other interactions. Teams also need to understand the questions clinicians ask, the concerns they raise and how they respond to information.

Conversational intelligence records and analyses HCP conversations with the appropriate consent. This paper examines how that information can support representatives, brand and field teams, and business leaders. It considers the value of understanding what was discussed as well as recording that a meeting took place.

Key findings

The conversation adds context that activity data cannot provide

With consent, conversational intelligence can structure what was discussed, the objections raised, the reactions and agreed actions. The paper argues that this can add customer context to the record of commercial activity.

Value extends beyond rep coaching

The paper describes three layers of use: feedback and administration for representatives; customer insight and content improvement for brand and field leaders; and earlier market signals for executive decisions.

An interview illustrates deployment at scale

A global conversational-intelligence lead reported more than 40,000 recorded calls and an HCP consent rate of around 80%. These figures describe that organisation’s experience. They are not a benchmark that other programmes can assume.

Evidence and method

The paper combines Fractal Force’s assessment of conversational intelligence with an interview with a global lead at a large pharmaceutical company. The interview provides a practical example of deployment, governance and reported adoption; the value model organises the possible uses of the information.

How to interpret this

The reported scale and consent figures come from one organisation and are not independently audited results or a controlled comparison. Commercial impact depends on how teams act on the information. Consent, data handling and governance need to be designed for each setting; the example does not establish a universal legal or operational model.

Source: The Irony of Technology. The complete paper contains the supporting detail and references.