Global Key Opinion Leader Compensation 2016


Paying physicians above fair market value to engage in advisory or consulting services places life science companies at risk for non-compliance. To avoid over- or underpaying healthcare providers (HCPs), compliance and legal teams should arm themselves with up-to-date benchmarks of HCP payments. This report provides a clear overview of FMV key opinion leader compensation trends in key therapeutic markets across the industry. The study contains year-over-year data comparisons in FMV compensation rates and highlights emerging trends.


Download a Sneak Peek Preview of "Global Key Opinion Leader Compensation 2016" Here

See a full Table of Contents and sample material

Top Reasons to Read Global Key Opinion Leader Compensation 2016

Base FMV Rates on Sound Methodology and Industry Experience: A salary-driven methodology undercuts the value of US physicians. Companies using this model would face push-back from physicians who will choose to work with other companies offering more reasonable rates. Rates in other countries face the opposite problem. The GDP+ Salary model highly overvalues every specialty, opening companies to significant scrutiny by regulators and the public. Instead, stay competitive and compliant with a methodology and rates that are generated via a three-step data analytic process that encompasses regression, outlier compression and balancing sample data with regression results through Bayes Theorem.

Understand Thought Leader Tiers and Industry Trends: In 2016, the average pharmaceutical company signed contracts with Exceptional-level thought leaders 28.8% of time, an increase of 2.1 percentage points from 2015. This highest tier of KOL is typically reserved for specialists with memberships in elite-level medical societies and extensive experience in conducting global-scale clinical trials. Meanwhile, the usage of Tier 3 thought leaders declined. There are several possible explanations for this upward shift, including the possibility that some companies are attempting to circumvent internal guidelines for tier compensation limits. In addition to reviewing shifts in industry trends, this report discusses how companies are determining thought leader tiers. While factors such as speaking experience and a background in clinical research still shape what types of activities KOLs are engaged in, the primary factor driving tiering is the KOL’s professional background. The potential scope of influence of a thought leader is more directly related to their career history than other indicators.

Key Questions That This Study Answers About Key Opinion Leader Compensation

  1. What are the most relevant factors to consider when determining FMV compensation?
  2. Are my company’s FMV payments for specialists and non-MDs defensible and clear?
  3. How do our rates compare to other companies’ compensation?
  4. How do subspecialists fit into companies’ FMV determination processes?
  5. What criteria should companies weigh when segmenting/tiering KOLs?
  6. What factors should companies take into account when formalizing their payments?
  7. What are the advantages of a statistical approach to FMV that considers the interaction between several factors versus one focused on salary and GDP? How might these different approaches to FMV calculation impact physician compensation rates?
  8. How are physician compensation rates changing in major therapeutic areas year to year in specific markets?
  9. How has implementation of the US Physician Payment Sunshine Act influenced transparency regulations and requirements in other countries worldwide?
Price $1,995
Publication Date 2016
Pages 75
Metrics 500 +
Charts / Graphics 30