PRforPharma

Discussions about social media, PR and marketing for pharmaceutical companies

Regulatory Concerns Should Not Dominate Pharma Social Media

February 4th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

Social media focused on regulatory concerns only does not line up

Those of you that have read this blog more than once know that I have been beating the Return on Health (ROH) mantra lately when it comes to pharmaceutical social media. The thought is that far too many social media programs start by considering how they will extract value and not how they can add value.

That’s a misaligned process. Instead, marketers need to start by focusing on the patient with an eye toward how their interactions will enable access to more information and better health outcomes. That’s the value you bring to the able as a pharma marketer. That doesn’t mean you ignore your ultimate goal of building a brand that drives more revenue. But instead of starting off with that at the forefront, you rely on a marketing principle that fosters long-term and authentic engagement. It’s a significant shift in thinking but one that is critical if social media ever hopes to gain widespread adoption by pharmaceutical companies.

That shift in thinking is needed across the board and includes things like our fixation with adverse events and off-label usage. I am as guilty as the next guy when it comes to spending an inordinate amount of time thinking about how to handle these very important issues in pharmaceutical marketing. And we should continue to give careful consideration to where they fit into a social engagement strategy. Dismissing AEs and off-label usage discussion as non issues demonstrates a clear lack of perspective. These topics remain at the forefront of every pharmaceutical legal, compliance and regulatory department, and thus should remain a part of our conversation.

But we shouldn’t limit our discussion to solely focus on how to navigate the issues of adverse events and off-label usage in social media. Why? Because focusing the conversation in this area relegates the patient to the sidelines. How many patients know what an adverse event is and even realize they are discussing off-label uses for a particular drug? I would venture to guess is it a very small minority. These types of issues, though important, are really geared at how a company can limit its liability with regulatory bodies. It’s a necessary step and a conversation that needs to occur, but perhaps not at “stage one.”

The better approach would be to work from the patient out. As pharmaceutical marketers, first ask yourself if there is a concrete reason for you to be engaged in social media. If the answer is no—stop there. Go no further. Starting off the discussion focused on adverse events and off-label usage reverse engineers the process. It starts with a company-centric point of view and eventually finds its way to the patient.

Successful engagements will start with the patient in mind and incorporate regulatory planning only if the first criterion is met.

Comments »

Posted in FDA and Pharma Social Media, Pharmaceutical Online Marketing, Pharmaceutical Social Media, Return on Health

Pharma Social Media is Ad Hoc at Expense of Strategy

February 2nd, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

Do you have a strategy to fit into the community?

As has become painstakingly obvious, the standard of communicating in the business world has changed dramatically over the last few decades. First it was the advent of email and most recently the rise of what we’ll call “the digital communications era”—namely the ability to reach anybody, anytime, on any device. Text messages, Twitter and Facebook have accelerated this dynamic and fed our appetite for smaller and smaller bits of content.

The ripple effects of this change are widespread. Of course, the positive perspective is that work output is increased, productivity enhanced and the decision-making process accelerated. In addition, as we have chronicled here, social media opens up an entire new toolkit for the marketer. This is particularly true in the world of pharmaceutical marketing where customers are becoming increasingly wary of what they viewed to be nefarious efforts of pharma companies. They craved a more authentic interaction with companies that would disband the ads that seem to strike fear more than they provide useful information. Insert social media. Social media allows pharmaceutical companies to introduce a different dynamic to its marketing programs—one built on trust and transparency. In that sense, social media and micro content is a boon. However, it’s not all good.

There is a fundamental disconnect between the types of communication facilitated by social media and strategic marketing plans. The very nature of social media may be tempting marketers to put strategy on the backburner. When you boil it down, a person’s interaction on a social network is ad hoc. It’s not a planned, measured and calculated interaction. This is a dynamic that many marketers have yet to solve. How do you conform to the community norms of authenticity and put a strategic plan in place?

Unfortunately, too often marketers have opted for the wrong answer; either throwing strategy to the wind or going too far in the other direction and planning every interaction. The flaw in both approaches should be obvious. If a pharma marketer plans every single interaction he intends to have on social media his conversations will no doubt be manufactured. His very presence will be loaded with ulterior motives. However, if a marketer surveys the landscape and concludes that strategy and focus are not needed she too will fail. Strategizing every interaction may not be needed, but having a reason for being there is imperative. Rather than focusing on tactical plans to the minutest detail, pharma marketers should focus on decision-making frameworks that guide interactions in social media circles. Empower the faces of your social media presence to act with confidence.

In the old days in business, the standard form of communicating a message to a large group of people was writing a memo. Those memos were well-crafted, thought-out documents. They had to be. You couldn’t afford to be ambiguous in your message or marching orders—the medium did not allow it. Social media does allow for ambiguity and poorly defined communication.

Perhaps it’s time we took a page out of the 1980 playbook and apply it to social media.

Comments »

Posted in Pharmaceutical Online Marketing, Pharmaceutical Social Media

Tags: Pharma social media Social media for pharma

Analyzing Pharma Social Media Working Group’s Response

February 1st, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

As you may have seen, the newly minted pharma “Social Media Working Group” accepted the FDA’s invitation for comments on its recent public hearing on social media. The group consists of representatives from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AztraZeneca, Millennium Pharmaceuticals and sanofi-aventis.

First off, let me start off by saying that I applaud the efforts of this group to make a concerted effort to offer solutions. Throughout this public discourse on the use of social media for pharmaceutical companies, there has been a noticeable lack of proposed solutions; replaced instead by unintelligible noise. This group of five pharmaceutical companies has taken the opportunity to separate itself from the noise and help move the conversation forward. Bravo!

Take one look at the document submitted by the Social Media Working Group and it is painstakingly clear how complicated of a problem this really is. Clearly, the individuals that drafted this document went to great lengths to consider every FDA rebuttal before proposing an action plan. I shudder at the effort it must have required to get this document through the appropriate channels at each company and out the door. The fact that this document did make it to the final stages speaks volumes as to how seriously the pharma industry takes social media. In addition, the very measured approach to this document illustrates that marketers view this as a strategic imperative—not a “shiny new object.”

When things like this emerge, it is important that we not only spend time criticizing—but also building off the base that was provided. For starters, the SMWG makes it clear that its goal in social media is to ensure the accuracy and completeness of information as an authoritative source. There’s no doubt that pharma’s primary role is as an information broker. These companies are taking a patient-centric view that is imperative in any social media engagement. This is a base that all pharma and bitotech companies must have before moving forward with social media.

The letter to the FDA also attempts to tackle possibly the two most difficult issues facing pharmaceutical marketers when it comes to social media: discussion around off-label usage and adverse events. In my opinion, the trickier of the two issues is how to handle the discussion of off-label usage so we’ll start there.

Off-label usage is a very important part of medical care. Doctors routinely prescribe medication for uses other than its approved list of indications. In many cases, this type of prescribing can have a profound impact on a patient’s quality of life. Naturally, patients are eager to share that type of information online and with communities of people they trust. But as stipulated by the FDA, pharmaceutical companies are not permitted to promote off-label usage (and with good reason). That leaves the question, what happens if a pharmaceutical company becomes aware of off-label usage discussion through social media channels?

The SMWG breaks this down into two buckets: sites maintained by the pharma company and those that are not. The group suggests that on a company’s own site, it should clearly post rules of engaging in conversation (such as no discussion of off-label usage) but anticipate some community members will step out of bounds. They are right on that part. The group then suggests that if and when an off-label comment does appear, the pharmaceutical company should quickly notify the community the nature of that discussion is related to off-label discussion and direct the commenter to the right outlet inside the company.

I’m not sure that is viable. At face value it makes sense. Responding to the commenter in a public fashion ensures that transparent engagement remains intact and helps to ensure the community sees the pharma company is taking action. But the speed at which social media spreads is going to make it nearly impossible to contain off-label discussion once it begins to occur. That one comment is likely to spur another, and another, and another. You get the picture. Many of those comments are likely to take place off your own site. Then what? If they originated from your site, are you then responsible for every subsequent comment that spread throughout the vast social media landscape?

It’s an impossible task. Instead, why not hold ALL comments for moderation and reserve the right to not publish those that refer to off-label usage. You could even respond directly to that commenter offline with the appropriate channel within the company. This way you still engage with the individual but spare the community of the discussion. Sure, in a perfect world you wouldn’t have to moderate every comment, but this isn’t a perfect world. And yes, this does introduce problems of scale, but doesn’t the alternative as well? Ultimately, pharma companies cannot hope to moderate off-label discussion on a company site without approving comments.

As you can see, I have only begun to scratch the surface of the Social Media Working Group’s response in an attempt to expand on their recommendations. In the coming days, I’ll dig a bit deeper into other aspects of the document and offer my two cents.

But what about you? How would you have expanded or changed the document? What would you add to complete this response to the FDA?

Comments »

Posted in FDA and Pharma Social Media, Pharmaceutical Online Marketing, Pharmaceutical Social Media

Tags: FDA and Pharma Social Media Pharma social media

Defining Value in Pharma Social Media

January 29th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

In my last post, I attempted to make the case that pharma social media is nothing new—just a form of relationship marketing using a different channel. In essence, sales reps have been making a living for decades based mostly on their ability to cultivate relationships. Those relationships are developed based on an exchange of value—the docs get access to information (and sometimes incentives) and the reps get a hefty commission. Without some sort of exchange of value, no relationship can function. In that sense, sales reps and social media programs are not all that different. Right?

Sort of. While the basic tenants of building a relationship are the same, one key difference does exist—the definition of value. In the more traditional form of relationship building, value can be defined a number of different ways. Value can be access to information. Value can be key clinical trial data. Value can be providing access to a drug that widens a doctor’s treatment options. Those are all good things. But the problem is: value in this world can also be defined by expensive lunches, putting doctors on payroll and fancy country clubs. This type of value should not dictate the subscribing patterns of doctors. And while there are a lot of great sales reps out there that provide a very admirable and needed service, there are also those that fight tooth and nail for every sale by resorting to whatever it takes. This type of relationship building is still predicated on an exchange of value.

Social media is vastly different in this regard. Value is not defined by pharma companies and doctors, value is defined by the patients—the community. In social media, the idea of value is redefined from past relationship marketing efforts. Because patients are intimately concerned with their health, they have the right to define value in their own communities. This is why pharma companies need to focus on Return on Health (ROH) as a key guiding principle of social media. It allows them to focus their efforts where it counts—on the patient. Of course, just like any relationship, there is always the possibility that it can be exploited. The same types of motivations that drive sales reps could certainly drive marketers to cross ethical boundaries in social media. But the difference is—the social media community won’t allow it to happen. It can’t happen for an extended period of time in social media circles because pharmaceutical companies do not dictate value. While sales reps function in the friendly confines of a doctor’s office, social media takes place in front of a giant spotlight. The patient has decided what value they are seeking and if pharma companies fail to oblige they will be ostracized.

That leaves pharmaceutical companies and the agencies advising them with a choice: get in by understanding the value the patient has dictated or get out.

Comments »

Posted in Pharmaceutical Online Marketing, Pharmaceutical Social Media

Tags: Pharma social media Pharmaceutical marketing Return on Health Social media for pharma Uncategorized

Comparing Social Media to Pharma Sales Reps

January 25th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

Relationship marketing is really nothing new in the world of pharmaceutical companies. For decades, the industry has relied on the ability of its sales reps to form lasting relationships that pay off in the form of increased prescriptions. Say what you will about how the reps cultivated those relationships, but the fact is, they were able to tailor their information delivery to what doctors were seeking.

In recent years, the pharmaceutical industry has sought to regulate how those relationships are formed by cutting back on tchotchkes, expensive lunches and other ethically questionable practices that influence prescription writing. Just today, the news circulated that New York Governor, David Patterson, was seeking to eliminate the practice of providing gifts to doctors after an office visit. In some ways, this mirrors the voluntary code of ethics adopted by Big Pharma a little over a year ago. However, others argue that the new limitations that Governor Patterson seeks to impose are too rigid and eliminate the ability of the sales rep to deliver his key value—education. It’s an interesting conundrum: how do you allow the free flow of information to ensure access to the best sources available while at the same time curtailing the types of seedy relationships that place undue pressure on doctors?

Before you answer, ask yourself an additional question: is this problem all that different from what pharmaceutical marketers face when entering the world of social media? To be an active participant in social networks, the key skill you need to possess is the ability to form relationships. For a pharma company, the biggest value they can provide patients and doctors online is information. In much the same way that sales reps face regulations on their relationship-building practices, pharma marketers will inevitably be faced with the same ethical questions. But you knew that already. That is the primary reason why the FDA has started to pay attention and is certainly the reason why many pharma companies are skittish about launching a social media initiative. The more pressing question is: how do you establish boundaries that govern a pharmaceutical company’s ability to provide information without crossing regulatory guidelines? Can impending guidance from the FDA actually make it more difficult for pharma companies to get information it the hands of patients as a result of strict regulations?

There is no easy answer. On the one hand, as a social media advocate, I believe that the primary value a pharmaceutical company can provide is information. Impending regulation that prohibits the company’s ability to do that may ultimately harm the patient in the long run. On the flip side, I also realize the importance of governing this industry given what is at stake and by no means would advocate a wild west atmosphere of lawlessness.

Yet still I struggle, how far is too far when it comes to restrictions on pharmaceutical companies? In the offline world, there are hordes of honest, hard-working sales reps that feel they are providing a service in the form of information. Regulations such as those proposed by Governor Patterson make it far more difficult to provide that service. Online, we strive to provide that same service while at the same time thumbing our nose at the tactics of sales reps. Where is the line between providing information and breaking an ethical code of conduct? In some cases, the line is not always clear.

We often trumpet the arrival of social media as the newest tool in a marketer’s bag of tricks. But it’s merely an extension of what has been taking place for decades at pharmaceutical companies—building relationships based on providing value to the target audience.

I have my own thoughts on why social media is different from the relationship marketing of years past, but would be curious to hear your feedback in the meantime. I’ll post my ideas tomorrow on why social media is a new form of relationship marketing and how the ethically questionable tactics—regardless of guidance—will be rooted out.

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Pharma sales reps Pharma social media Pharmaceutical marketing Social media for pharma Uncategorized

Why Do Pharma Companies Fire Their Social Media Agency?

January 21st, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

Working in the agency world is a little bit like the dating scene—if you are around it long enough, you are bound to get your heart broken (or wallet as the case may be) once or twice.

It’s no secret that agencies are let go for a variety of reasons that range from the completely justifiable to the head scratchers. The average retention rate of clients in the PR business is something in the neighborhood of 12-16 months depending on which reports you choose to believe (I am happy to report SHIFT’s is much longer!). With such a revolving door, one must wonder: what drives a pharmaceutical company to fire its social media agency?

There is no definitive list of reasons that leads to an agency getting the boot. It can be a result of missed metrics, poor strategy outlines, faulty execution, budget constraints, etc…And while the list is long, I’d venture to guess that there are two primary buckets that cause a pharma company to fire its social media agency—false promises made by the agency and unreasonable expectations of the pharmaceutical company (sometimes one causes the other). We’ll take these one at a time.

False Promises Made by the Agency

I touched on this one a bit in yesterday’s post. Too often, agencies walk into a pitch eager to win business and selling whatever they think the company at the other side of the table wants to buy. They do this without regard for whether or not they believe they can deliver on those lofty promises. Why? They don’t care. The goal is to win the business and earn a quick buck—not create sustained value. This breeds the thinking that social media is a silver bullet. With people out there selling it as such, it is no wonder that some marketers think that social media has the ability to mask existing problems. It does not. Because agencies are selling false hope, when they can’t deliver on that hope, they get the axe—justifiably.

A good social media agency will outline challenging goals, but not make promises of a brand remake over night. A good agency will highlight the risks of engaging in social media and have a plan in place to mitigate those risks and deal with them when they arise. Most importantly, a good social media agency will say “no”. They won’t be afraid to tell you if your strategy is off base, or if your line of thinking will fall down when engaging with a community online. If your social media agency is afraid to tell you “no” I can almost assure you the program will fail. False promises are a quick way to the unemployment line and only makes the job of legitimate agencies that much more difficult.

Unreasonable Expectations of the Pharmaceutical Company

The message I have been trumpeting recently, along with others, is that social media does not shovel problems under the rug—it rips the rug off the floor. If a company walks into a social media engagement thinking that it can distance itself from product problems or damaging messaging it is sorely mistaken. The more likely result is the social media community will expose that problem quicker than you ever thought was possible. And not only will it be exposed, it will run rampant until you step up and offer a solution. The thing people often forget about social media is that it acts as one giant neighborhood watch. Phonies are uncovered, bad products are rooted out and shifty salesmen are pinpointed. It’s not a comfortable place to be if you have skeletons in the closet.

Unfortunately, some pharmaceutical companies are willing to throw caution to the wind and hope social media can work miracles. When those miracles fail to materialize, the social media takes the fall. Sure, it is the job of the agency to steer the client in the right direction and set appropriate expectations, but sometimes it is not enough. In those cases, the pharma company is bound to fail because it simply demands too much.

The Lesson?

The new marketing model increases accountability on both the vendor and client side. The days of arm’s length relationships are coming to a screeching halt. In order to truly succeed in social media, you better have a true partnership. Afterall, if you can’t master that relationship, you can forget about the new ones you will be forming through social media.

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Pharma social media Pharmaceutical PR Social media for pharma Uncategorized

Social Media: Pharma’s Sandbox

January 20th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

The portion of conversation dedicated to social media among pharmaceutical marketers has recently reached a fever pitch. The constant analysis, banter and coverage has resulted in a disproportionate amount of attention being paid to social media—despite the fact that it represents only one small piece of the marketing mix.

Why is that? It’s due in part to the fact that social media represents the new shiny object on the block. It’s something different that is a far cry from the marketing techniques that are beginning to fail pharmaceutical companies. With this understanding, pharmaceutical companies are showing a greater sense of urgency to engage in social media. Of course, wherever pharma goes, the FDA is sure to follow and social media is no different. The recent public hearing on pharma has raised the profile of social media for pharmaceutical companies. Add all of these industry dynamics with the fact that social media advocates tend to be vocal and passionate evangelists (I’m exhibit A) and it’s not difficult to understand why social media is dominating the conversation.

And while I am all for raising the profile of social media among pharmaceutical marketers; we need to be sure it is done in an appropriate manner. The problem that is beginning to develop is some people selling social media services are selling pharma companies on a bag of goods they can’t deliver. Namely, these companies are making empty promises that social media can reverse a poor brand image, evangelize brand advocates over night and drive people to buy a product in droves. While these are all worthy goals, the fact is that social media cannot accomplish these goals operating in a vacuum. It has to be part of an integrated marketing communications plan.

The mistaken belief that social media should be isolated from other marketing functions is damaging. Many agencies selling social media services are driving this belief. If you are selling such lofty promises, what happens when an engagement goes awry? What happens when the community unites in backlash against a company? If you have sold a pharmaceutical company on grand promises, you are likely going to be looking at the business side of a door on your way to the curb. This type of relationship only damages the industry’s chances of successful, authentic social media engagement and is fueled by people chasing the quick buck rather than creating sustained value.

Instead, as agencies, we should be selling pharmaceutical companies on the real value provided by social media—a chance at authentic, transparent and meaningful engagements with key stakeholders. This is a marketing vehicle that has never before been available on this scale. However, there is no guarantee that those engagements will be one hundred positive. Any agency that promises you otherwise is blowing smoke up your ass in an attempt to win your business. If your product is bad, social media will expose it. If your brand is damaged, the community will further poke holes. If your outreach strategy is broken, social media will tell you why.

Scared yet? You shouldn’t be. One positive about social media is that it is a sandbox of sorts. It has the ability to weed out, expose and provide feedback on areas you may never have considered. It’s a real-time feedback loop. The trick is how you react to that feedback. A pharmaceutical company that has been set up on empty promises has been set up to fail. It has not been prepared for the possibility that a social media engagement will not consist purely of positive feedback. The negative interactions can be just as valuable, if not more so, if a pharmaceutical company has been counseled on how to respond.

Pharmaceutical marketers: social media is your sandbox—are you ready for that?

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Uncategorized

Don’t Write Off Traditional PR Entirely for Social Media

January 14th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

It’s no secret that social media is the trend of the day in pharmaceutical marketing. A combination of constant evangelism on the part of social media wingnuts (I mean advocates), an uptick in real-world examples from pharma companies and the FDA public hearing has vaulted social media into the limelight. Since attaining such prominence, social media seems to have a stranglehold on the marketing discussion (or maybe it’s that whole echo chamber thing I posted about). But the limelight can be so bright that it causes you to miss other things right before your eyes.

If you haven’t picked up on my thinly veiled metaphor just yet, social media is the bright light in this case. In recent months, social media has been relegated to shiny object duty. It’s the marketing tactic of the day being waived before pharma executives at every strategy session to increase patient engagement, raise brand awareness and break into new markets. That’s a good thing. The level of conversations that are occurring regarding social media is encouraging. It indicates that pharmaceutical companies are slowly but surely buying into its potential. But there is a fine line to walk between realistic potential and hype—we are getting dangerously close to the edge.

Social media enters into the hype zone when it causes otherwise level-headed marketers to write off alternative, viable marketing tactics. And if they are not written off, they are certainly placed on the backburner. As an aforementioned wingnut, I believe in the value of social media as much as the next guy. But social media CANNOT exist in isolation. It has to be conducted in the context of a larger marketing strategy that includes a broad range of tactics. I’m a PR guy. In fact, while I tout the benefits of social media on a regular basis, a large chunk of my work is dedicated to so-called traditional PR. That’s right, writing press releases, reaching out to editors and forming relationships with the main-stream media. Can you imagine?

(Warning, here comes a small commercial, bear with me, I think it is relevant).

At my agency, SHIFT Communications, we describe ourselves as a hybrid agency in the sense that we do both traditional PR and social media. I think that’s crucial. We do this not so we can sell both services, but because we firmly believe that social media, and traditional PR should happen in concert, not in isolation.

Social media is important. It will only grow in importance as companies become better at engaging with relevant communities. But remember, social media should not happen at the expense of the remaining parts of the marketing mix—even traditional PR.

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Pharma social media Pharmaceutical marketing Pharmaceutical PR PR for pharma Social media for pharma Uncategorized

Pharma Social Media Echo Chamber

January 12th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

One of the many smart people I follow on Twitter today Tweeted (the link to which I cannot find for the life of me) a question to the masses: “when is the last time you have read anything useful about pharma social media?”

While I do think there is a group of people putting out valuable content in this area, it is a question that warrants closer consideration. One of the issues I constantly struggle with is the idea of a pharma social media echo chamber.

While I am thrilled to have any and all readers to this blog, my hope is that the content ultimately gets into the hands of pharma marketers. Agency people, social media advocates and consultants are valuable resources because they contribute to the “think tank” we have created—but at the end of the day—we are trying to demonstrate the value of social media to pharmaceutical marketers.

Without question, the community that has started to form has moved the social media cause forward in the pharmaceutical industry. But is that progress stifled by our echo chamber? Are we often just convincing ourselves on the value of social media rather than tailoring our messages to the audience that matters most—the pharmaceutical companies?

There is evidence that suggests the pharma social media bandwagon is not confined to an echo chamber. Jon Rich of Does of Digital has chronicled the slew of pharmaceutical companies that have engaged in social media. Some examples are better than others, but the point is, people are taking notice and demonstrating varying degrees of success. The recent FDA hearing on social media is another prime example of the grasp social media is beginning to hold on the industry. Some may argue that the hearing was dominated by social media wonks and agency fat cats. They would be right in the sense that agency people dominated the podium, but the impact of that hearing was far more widespread then the four corners of the dingy D.C. conference room. Anecdotally, recent conversations I’ve had with pharma marketers and projects I have completed lead me to believe that the pendulum is swinging in the right direction. The pharma industry is showing an interest (we could argue the genuine nature of that interest in another post) in social media and its ability to enhance marketing efforts.

Returning to my original thesis: are pharma social media advocates part of an exclusive echo chamber? I don’t think so. But, I do believe that we need to do a better job of educating all stakeholders, focusing on the patients in our engagement strategies and demonstrating the real-world success that has been achieved through social media. Echo chamber…no. Need to press forward? You bet.

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Uncategorized

Pharma Social Media: There is No Easy Road

January 7th, 2010 by Chris Iafolla Comments »

Let’s get this out of the way: social media for pharmaceutical companies is hard work. There I said it.

Far too many people suffer from the misconception that social media is simple and merely a question of value. “How hard can Twitter really be—it’s only 140 characters?” “My daughter can master Facebook; surely I can make it work.” Or worse still, “All I need to do is come up with a few good corporate messages and then proliferate social networks with them—think of how many people will see it!”

The latter statement is the one that keeps me up at night. When engaging in social media, pharmaceutical marketers are faced with a choice—take the easy route or the longer, more difficult road. As I mentioned in my previous post, the easy route in social media is tempting. Instead of taking the time to form relationships, learn the landscape and provide meaningful commentary, pharmaceutical marketers can simply broadcast a canned message to the masses. Of course, this isn’t really social media but that may not matter.

We’ve reached an important, dare I say, tipping point in social media for pharmaceutical companies. We’ve moved passed the evangelism stage to a point where many pharmaceutical companies are actively weighing and pursuing some form of social media engagement. As they do, will they be tempted by the lure of the easy route in search of quick hits? Or will they take the methodical, strategic approach?

The answer to the question depends on how the social media marketer approaches the medium in the first place. It is important to remember that social media is not a silver bullet. It cannot cure all the ills of the checkered marketing past of pharmaceutical companies. Social media is not a quick fix. Relationships in the real world are hard work (just ask my wife who has to deal with me). All relationships take commitments, dedications and honesty.

Social media is no different. And like any meaningful relationship—when it works—boy is it rewarding.

Comments »

Posted in Uncategorized

Tags: Pharmaceutical marketing Social media for pharma Uncategorized

« Older Entries

Tweet Blender

view more »
About PRforPharma
- The landscape for social media in pharma is littered with landmines—regulatory, culturally and tactically. On this blog, I will attempt to address the challenges facing pharmaceutical companies when it comes to effectively utilizing social media and public relations.
Powered by Postrank