The New MSL Profile (PH135)

Medical Science Liaison Report Sample

The following is excerpted from Chapter 1, "MSL Activity Breakdowns." The full chapter examines MSL activities and the impact of relevant factors including company size, geography, and time in the field.

Pre-Launch Activities

Although interactions with KOLs were considered MSLs' main — and often only — priority just two years ago, other activities have limited the percentage of time dedicated to this activity. According to pharmaceutical company respondents, 34% of MSLs' time for an investigational compound is allocated toward KOL activities, both identification and relationship building. The time spent on and the number of activities for MSLs has grown as the role becomes more strategic. Figure 1.7 [shown in the full report] represents the normalized percentage of time spent on each activity across the pharmaceutical industry.

On average, 17% of an MSL's time is dedicated to clinical activities, including designing protocol, assisting with trials, and facilitating IITs.

Clinical development's influence on individual brands' potential market success is overwhelming. MSLs use their research expertise, knowledge of the disease state, and relationships with KOLs within the therapeutic area to aid clinical teams. MSLs can help expand a product's indication profile by encouraging potential investigators to run trials and enroll patients. Other major divisions of time include medical science liaison training for speakers, sales representatives, and new MSLs (17%); presenting scientific findings (10%); and gathering competitive intelligence (9%).

The following excerpt is taken from Chapter 4, "Applying Performance Metrics to MSL Teams." The full report examines life-science companies' performance metrics tracking external and internal activities. Data breakouts include by company type. A separate section also discusses performance metrics for major markets besides the US.

The same division (above-average metric counts and below-average metric counts) reveals differences in emphasis on internal value. The performance measures featured in Figure 4.4 [shown in the full report] track activities with direct value to internal stakeholders. These data show that teams with more sophisticated measurement systems are more likely to stress MSLs' ability to deliver internal value - not just services for external thought leaders.

Out of the companies with above-average metric counts, for example, 68% set goals for the number of IIT proposals that MSLs produce. In contrast, only 21% of companies with less-than-average metric counts track this measure. In the same vein, 40% of the above-average group monitors the number of publications that MSLs play a role in facilitating. Only 8% of below-average companies do the same.

These metrics reflect the efforts of more advanced groups to harness and promote MSLs' cross-functional utility. By tracking items such as internal customer feedback — something reported by no company with a below-average metrics count — they serve notice that MSLs can deliver value to a number of internal functions.

This excerpt is taken from Chapter 2, "Thought Leader Identification and Development." The full report contains recommendations and metrics to strengthen thought leader management.

Establish Milestones for Relationship-Building and Medical Science Liaison Training

Some companies rely too heavily on the MSL's ability to read a situation, without providing any guidelines to fall back on if necessary. Several interviewees, when asked why they do not establish even broad guidelines, responded simply that they trust their MSLs to "just know" what steps to take next.

An executive from Company 8 described her company's perspective as one that relies on the discretion and decisions of individual MSLs. While the company tracks certain performance metrics, such as number of IITs and the total number of KOLs, Company 8 does not set measures on individual relationships with KOLs. The executive feels that by hiring only experienced MSLs, the company can trust that they know their responsibilities and should not be judged on entry-level criteria.

Still, even the best MSLs cannot always "just know" what to do in every circumstance, with no training or plan to follow. Given that fact, other companies have developed guidelines for their MSL teams to use in building and developing relationships.

As part of its medical science liaison training program, Company 1 created a set of key steps for new hires to establish a territory within the first year. Within the 90-day training program are assessments at 30 days, 60 days, and a final assessment. Between the first and second assessments, the new hires should start setting up a list of their top 30 target opinion leaders and begin having face-to-face meetings with them. By the end of the first six months, the MSL should have seen 45 to 50 opinion leaders and have established a top 30 thought leader list. Within that first year, the members of this list should learn who the MSL is, what he or she does, and which company the MSL represents. This process generally takes at least two or three meetings.