This study presents a review of current MSL performance metrics and offers 4 traditional and 1 consensus models to help executives establish best practices. The study presents an assessment of current practices, feedback from 153 executives across 92 organizations from 37 countries. The analysis provides executives with the various models of MSL performance assessments based on products’ lifecycles, as well as a “consensus” model.
A Practical Guide to MSL Performance Reviews is the newest (2023) and most extensive study to date that provides a framework for the MSL evaluation process. The research addresses what upper-level management, MSL managers and MSLs have struggled with for long - establishing appropriate practices to evaluate and value an MSL’s work. We find the issue mainly lies in the nature of the MSL function, a function that evolves with a product, from early phases to maturity. Whereas the set of activities of an MSL stays fairly the same throughout, they are applied to various degrees based on where the supported products are in their lifecycle.
So then, how best should the evaluation of the MSL role be handled? Should it follow one single path, with a similar focus across time, or should the evaluation follow distinct criteria based on what needs to be done in each phase of the product lifecycle? These are questions that the majority of Managers face year after year, with no real answers.
While we believe there should be somewhat of an overhaul to the traditional model, we conducted this study to identify the most common metrics and usual evaluation models used amongst medical affairs professionals surveyed through the research. And in the process, provide a performance metric assessment model that encompasses all findings.
The report findings are based on exchanges with 153 executives and MSLs representing 92 companies located in 37 countries.
This study provides an analysis on (refer to table of content tab for more details):
- The current MSL career landscape and future expectations
- Medical Science Liaisons Activity Profiles
- Typical key industry metrics used to evaluate MSLs
- Ins-and-outs of MSL performance reviews
- MSL performance assessment models - 4 approaches and the consensus framework
In addition to this report, the publisher conducted a review of thought leader engagement methods, typical profiles targeted throughout a products’ lifecycle, stakeholders and many more critical metrics to assist in the development of a grounded strategy
Table of Contents
Foreword
Study Highlights
Research Methodology
Respondents’ Profiles
- Working Environments
- Professional Backgrounds
- Profiled Companies
The Medical Liaison Function Landscape
- Status of Team Deployment
- Future Expectations
Medical Science Liaison’s Activity Profile
- Typical Activities - Pre-launch
- Typical Activities - Post-launch
- MSLs’ Involvement During a Product Lifecycle
- KOL Interactions Focus
Key Industry Metrics
- Number of Thought Leader Relationships
- Frequency of Interactions
- Length of In-Person Visits
- In-Person Interactions Shifting to Virtual Meetings
MSL Performance Reviews
- Common Pitfalls
- Frequency of Reviews
- Reviewing Performance Reviews
- Preferred Flow Patterns of MSL Performance Evaluations
- Key Performance Evaluation Criteria
MSL Performance Assessment Models
- The “One-Phase” Approach
- The “Two-Phase” Approach
- The “Three-Phase” Approach
- The “Four-Phase” Approach
- Assessment of Selected Evaluation Criteria
- The Educator Evaluation Comparison
- Factors Influencing KOL Relationships
- A “Consensus” Roadmap for MSL Performance Reviews
Methodology
Analysts use primary and secondary research resources to develop our studies. The quantitative and qualitative data are collected through surveys and interviews conducted with professionals within the area of study. The data presented in our studies are an aggregate of survey and interview input. When possible, the data is presented by country. region or other factor to outline meaningful differences. We protect the identity and privacy of study participants and therefore blind their personal information and the organizations to which they belong - we only present the participation by company size and titles. This enables us to collect unbiased information, provided confidently by participants.
LOADING...
