#optibrand rx

[optibrandrx]

Fundamentally Flawed: Why Rx Launches Fail

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57LYD9xSDBw

IMS has documented the changing nature of Rx launches in a series of four white papers focused on Launch Excellence. These chronicle both corporate and market challenges over some 10,000 Rx launches of new chemical entities (NCEs) in 17 chronic disease categories across 8 major markets.

  As we all know, the pharmaceutical market has changed dramatically over the past decade from highly competitive to unforgiving. Today, the environment is tougher, riskier and more complex as new issues undermine marketing performance and intensify the old familiar challenges. Our markets have migrated from primary care to specialty segments overlaid by the demands of payers and (increasingly) patients in the mix. Brand teams cannot afford to approach product launches or brand positioning the same way anymore because the marketing environment is only going to get more complex.

  Launch trajectory is established in 3-6 months!  The market share attained as early as three months after launch establishes the launch trajectory for most brands. Once the launch trajectory is established, it is likely to remain the same 18-24 months later or even five years later. This is the case for 80% of new Rx brands! (Source: IMS Launch Excellence) In the absence of extraneous factors like new clinical data, a new indication or some other newsworthy finding, most Rx brands never improve on that market share beyond the growth of the market as a whole.

  Fundamentally flawed?  The traditional Rx positioning model used industry-wide provides no indication – or validation - that you are differentiating your brand in the best strategic manner. Too often the result is under performance. This can manifest itself in different forms: the trajectory of your new brand could be hugging the X axis, or your brand, even if perceived to be successful, could be falling short of its true potential. The root of the problem is that positioning selections traditionally are not based on data-driven predictive modeling.

  Your Rx brand doesn’t have to hug the X-axis.  Despite the years of planning, preparation, research, monitoring and massive coordination needed for a successful launch, a weak Rx brand positioning can sink the entire effort in a matter of months.

  Think of strategic brand positioning as the foundation of a house. Without a solid platform to build upon the entire structure loses its strength.

  When the strategic positioning is not right, the Rx brand is not perceived as meaningfully different in the eyes of stakeholders (read: Prescribers, Payers, Patients as well as internal audiences and marketing partners). Accordingly, it will not be prescribed, but will be reserved for last. Consequently, market share will remain weak.

  "Less than 20% of Rx brands were able to improve their trajectory after the initial three months of launch. Most did not improve." - IMS Health

  Improve the trajectory of your Rx brand.  Launch Excellence has confirmed that literally every company in the biopharmaceutical industry has commercially underperforming Rx brands. Commercial success or failure can be diagnosed rapidly allowing brand teams to optimize their brand positioning. When the brand’s positioning is properly optimized, vetted then implemented correctly, it can be a game-changer.

  The benefits of Positioning excellence.  Positioning done correctly provides a real competitive edge with information you need to maximize the return on your investment. It enables your brand teams to:

  • Identify your best brand positioning option (not the brand positioning it should be but the one that it to be for the highest return on investment throughout its lifecycle)

• Evaluate its impact in real-world prescribing situation based on the results of a rigorous data-driven predictive model

• Understand how to take the positioning forward and execute a strategy that ensures optimal brand performance across stakeholders

• Create a high impact creative brief that will align all communication partners and advise senior management

  Brand positioning is a pivotal marketing decision. Yet, the topic has not received the analytical attention it deserves. In today’s complex and unforgiving environment, excellence in strategic positioning is the key to unlocking true launch excellence. Use of a specialized and rigorous validation process to inform strategic positioning can make the difference between commercial success and failure.

  The results of this approach are well documented in a variety of case studies. Contact us to learn more.

[optibrandrx]

4 Positioning Mistakes That Reduce Your Brand To A 'Me-Too'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzoAGEWuwRc

Any drug or device proven safe and effective by surviving the regulatory gauntlet deserves its best shot at commercial success. That product, your brand, should stand on its own merits and never be characterized as a 'Me-Too'.

  A recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal by Henry I. Miller, MD, provides an excellent rebuttal to longstanding and misleading criticisms of pharmaceutical research for producing, "too many medicines which are only minor variations of the older one." (1)

  Backed by findings from the Tufts Center for Drug Development, Dr. Miller presented several compelling arguments why a new drug-even one that appears from initial trials to be no better than alternatives - may prove valuable.  His arguments revolved around the fact that drug development is a race where several investigational drugs in the same therapeutic class vie for regulatory approval before any drug in the class is approved.  Some drugs survive this gauntlet; others don't.  In other words, companies don't start out with the intention of developing a 'Me-Too' product. 

  Of course, just because a number of drugs are based on the same chemical structure, doesn't mean they all work the same.  Some may work better in certain patient populations or conditions, may be metabolized differently, have different drug-drug interactions, (through supplementary approval) may be found to be of benefit in additional indications via different formulations, regimens, routes of administration, strengths, etc.

  As we read Dr. Miller's editorial, we couldn't help but relate the perception of  'Me-Too' drugs he describes to the billions of dollars in sales lost to valuable brands relegated to 'Me-Too' status  -- because they were not positioned appropriately. There is good news: This does not have to be the fate of your brand.

  Skeptical?  Pick a random sample of Rx ads. Same or different product categories; doesn't matter. See any brands that stand out as clearly different?  Not many.  That's the problem.  Odds are you could even interchange the logos from each and apply them to the others.  Don't blame the creative.  Don't blame being late to launch.  Blame weak positioning.

The challenge is industry wide:  Your company has just invested about ten years and close to a billion dollars for regulatory approval to market your brand in a new therapeutic class. The problem is, your brand is among several others with similar chemical structures / mechanisms of action.  Your brand may receive approval first, sixth, or somewhere in between.  The question:  How are you going to differentiate your brand against all the others in your class...as well as from the multibillion dollar brands already entrenched?  If your brand's point of difference isn't clearly communicated across all communication channels, that brand is destined to be perceived as the same -- a 'Me-Too'. 

  Brand Positioning: the reason to prescribe.  The purpose of positioning is to hone in on what differentiates your brand from the competition and will give prescribers a reason to write it.  Your messaging should be a reflection of your positioning.  If the positioning isn't right, your messaging cannot compensate for that shortcoming.  Your advertising will fall into the vast sea of sameness of pharmaceutical advertising.  Your revenue curve will follow.

  There are examples of this phenomenon in every therapeutic category.  For example, IMS Healthrecently posted a whitepaper on the Type II Diabetes Market that clearly shows the failure of DPP-4 drugs to be differentiated (read: effectively positioned) from the market leader -- even when there are marketable distinctions. (2)

  Brand positioning is an art and a science.  The art is in identifying opportunities to be crafted into positionings that are simple, singular, relevant and focused.  Without creative direction based on validated brand positioning, creative execution will be off-strategy -- and sales will follow. 

  These Four Positioning Mistakes Will Make Your Brand A 'Me-Too'

  
1. Lacking a singular positioning. 

What idea best differentiates your brand?  It's not the product profile, which describes multiple separate concepts. Strategic brand positioning must focus on the one compelling aspect that sets the brand apart, and it must do so in a manner that is simply understood and relevant to the decision maker.  Failing to meet this will result in concepts that are not crisp, clear and ultimately not differentiating. Soft and fuzzy may work for beauty pageants; not so much for branding wars.  Unless your positioning is singular, the resulting messages will not build the perception needed to differentiate. They will be fragmented and confusing, forgettable and lost. The result: your brand will not be remembered and not prescribed until all else fails...a 'Me-Too.'

  That said, if your process stops here, Murphy was right.  At best, the odds are only 50:50 the positioning is really on-target. 

  
2. Believing you CAN'T own a position because a competitor CAN make the same claim. 

Here's a consumer example: Volvo®.  Everyone knows that Volvo is positioned around safety. Safety is the Volvo mantra and has become deeply rooted in the brand’s history.  Today, all of Volvo's competitors are also 'safe,' BUT they cannot root themselves in the safety mind space as they'd be considered a 'Me-Too.'  Volvo placed a stake in the ground and now owns 'safe'.  In the Rx world Nexium® is known for ‘power’ and has seen strong sales by carving out that space. ‘Power’ is a claim that can also be made, and in fact was, by competitor Prevacid®. By trying to entrench on an area already owned by a competitor Prevacid unknowingly began sending its customers to Nexium and as a result could never regain even 50% of the global earnings from prior years.

  
3. Thinking minor improvements in clinical data v. competitors are sufficient to drive usage. 

The time to plan for meaningful clinical differentiation starts with Preliminary positioning / Brand Visioning which should be conducted in Phase II prior to brand naming.  Preliminary positioning should drive clinical protocols to deliver meaningful data that supports areas of opportunity, perceptual voids in the market.  This integrates product commercialization strategy with clinical and regulatory planning to differentiate your brand in a relevant way.

  
4. Failing to Optimize or Validate your positioning options through specialized positioning research. 

Specialized positioning research determines if your positioning is communicated clearly and meaningfully to the target audience(s) and improves the degree of confidence.  After all, even positioning-rooted validated insights are still hypotheses until they are placed in front of customers.

  Traditional research methodologies, those similar to testing creative work, simply don’t give you the full picture.  It is very difficult for a respondent to consider a concept in terms of a future marketplace. Without a process built for positioning, they respond based on what is comfortable to them today.  This means that a ‘Me-Too’ positioning may be the front-runner when -- in reality -- it is the concept that pushes them the least - in essence the ‘Me-Too’ red flag.

  Your investment in your brand is significant.  So why not explore a different process of brand positioning developed to maximize revenue potential?  One proven to actually boost your revenues.

  Learn to Differentiate Now.  If you're a leader, an innovator, a competitor interested in learning more on how to optimize the performance of your brand or portfolio, we offer free/no obligation brand positioning seminars.  This learning will change your perspective and help to optimize the performance of your brands.  And best of all, no more 'Me-Toos'.

  
Click HERE to RSVP a date for your team. Lunch is on us.

  1. Critics of 'Me-Too Drugs' Need To Take A Chill Pill, Henry I. Miller, MD, Opinion Page, Wall Street Journal, Jan 4, 2014. 

2.  Launch Excellence in the Diabetes Market, Whitepaper, IMS Health (PDF)

[optibrandrx]

Your Brand Name is a Message

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeTrPJNEI-I

With all of the regulatory issues we face in marketing pharmaceutical products, one of the most forgotten strategic goals is a MARKETABLE brand name. It seems that at times the goal for many teams has shifted to a process of just getting to a name that clears the regulatory hurdles. Already I’m sure the red flags are going up in your mind, but for a team in the midst of an approaching launch this is the harsh reality.

  Being that our product’s brand name is going to create the visual and verbal impressions for our brand, it’s imperative that the name works as hard as possible to communicate and support the brand’s positioning.  Every ad, medical review, tradeshow, sales rep, prescription, label, website, etc will feature your brand name. Constructing a strategically appropriate name can save significant promotional dollars while also avoiding confusion and prescription misinterpretation. Yet, an often-overlooked aspect of a marketable brand name is its importance in patient-prescriber communication.

  Time and again we’ve seen research results where nearly 80% of patients have difficulties recalling brand names, but can recite many of the messages associated with the brand.  When the patient has learned about a product via DTC ads then asks their physician about the product they will recite these messages.  The physician is then left to guess the name of that brand. (I experienced this recently). With so many options in so many therapeutic categories, the chances the physician will select the same product the patient has requested is minimal. As an example, one study we conducted in the proton pump inhibitor category revealed that in 8 out of 10 interactions, when a patient was reciting messages for one product, the physician actually prescribed the competitor!

  Certainly this situation presents a huge challenge in healthcare marketing. But there are a few tips that can help expand the range of options we have for a brand name while remaining compliant with guidances from regulatory agencies around the world.

  #1 – Seek inspiration from the brand’s position:

We’ve seen way too many brand name generation exercises geared completely on developing names using a mix of attribute and benefits of the product. We recommend generating names that help support a brand’s positioning. A proper brand positioning should be emotional and focused on owning an unmet need within the market. With that, the brand name should be an extension of that brand’s positioning.

  For example, Lunesta is a prescription sleep aid.  It’s positioning hones in on a “Restful Night’sSleep.” The main attribute/benefits are that Lunesta helps you fall asleep AND stay asleep. Clearly, the name Lunesta is intended to communicate the concept of nighttime, alluding to the moon, which most would associate with sleep and peacefulness. In essence, the brand name is working hard to drive home Lunesta’s brand positioning. Making that association is a big reason it is the #1 prescribed sleep aid.

  #2 – Do not weigh all attributes & benefits equally:

Be sure to understand which attributes and benefits of your product have the most value in either supporting your brand positioning or connecting your product with an unmet need in the market. Many attributes can be seen as cost of entry or irrelevant to prescribing so focus brand name development on those attributes and benefits that are the most differentiating and strategically appropriate. Again, following our practice using the brand’s positioning to drive name development makes this task very simple.   

  #3 – If no finalized brand positioning is in place, create brand name candidates on areas of opportunity:

We understand that in many cases pharma brand names are being generated as early as phase II as a result of the long trademark and regulatory review period. Ideally in these situations we recommend conducting preliminary brand positioning exercises to uncover and prioritize potential strategic avenues for the brand prior to name development. We understand that the budget is not always available to engage in preliminary brand positioning, especially with products in such early stages of clinical development. In these cases, a market audit should be conducted as part of the brand name immersion phase highlighting key areas of opportunity within the market. This will allow for development of names within the many ways a brand could potentially be positioned. Then, when a brand positioning is finalized, the pharma brand team can choose name candidates that best suit the strategic goals of the finalized brand positioning strategy.

  #4 – Avoid “Blank Canvas” names that are completely blank:

Rx brand name approval is full of regulatory risks.  The last thing your team needs is a curveball that eliminates the strategically sound options developed, which is why including a few “blank canvas” name candidates is a is always smart move.  These types of names are seen as having a bit more success in clearing regulatory hurdles, although that is not always true.Just because a “blank canvas” name has no direct links to our product or its attributes does not mean it should be void of any form of connection.  These names can still create positive impact and should resonate with the positioning through tonality and personality.

  The importance of brand names for our products is not in question.  However, we must further scrutinize the brand name development process with a view to maximize strategic effectiveness to optimize brand performance.

  Responsible for naming an Rx brand in 2014?  We'd love to chat.