Pharmaceutical Marketers Directory's Newsletter

High Climber

Peter Weissberg, group director of market access, Intouch Solutions

Peter Weissberg may be one of few people who can claim he's been exposed to the complexities of the healthcare insurance market since childhood.

That's because his father was one of the founders of Oxford Health Plans, which is now owned by UnitedHealthcare. Weissberg, the new group director of Intouch Solutions' newly launched market access business, said he has seen the role of market access ascend from the sidelines to a central component of the healthcare ecosystem.

"Earlier in my career, I worked directly with health plans, not pharma," said Weissberg. "Whereas many of my peers' perspectives come from the pharma manufacturer, my experience is grounded in the role of the payer."

Historically, the physician has been the sole decision maker when it comes to treatment decisions, he said. But with the rise of patient engagement and a move towards health outcomes-based decision making, there is no longer a sole decision maker.

"The market access stakeholder has one of the strongest voices today and I expect it will only continue to increase over time," said Weissberg.

Now companies are starting to measure the success of a therapy by how clinical data performs in the real world across large populations, he said. And payers are usually the ones who have access to that data, not manufacturers.

Weissberg most recently worked with AmerisourceBergen Consulting Services, as a commercial client strategist. Before that, he was a VP and management supervisor at Ogilvy CommonHealth Worldwide.

In his new role, Weissberg said he hopes to demystify market access and educate his clients, many who are experts in digital, communications, and marketing and see market access as a "black box."

"What comes from that education is that we're transforming the way in which manufacturers engage with their patient-, physician-, and market access or payer-customers," he said.

He's also enjoying the culture of an office that is diverse, open-minded, and casual, quickly realizing his usual formal business attire did not suit a technology company in Manhattan.

"I have to go to Bloomingdale's to buy four pairs of jeans," he laughed. "It's fun here. It's very invigorating to be around different perspectives all focused singularly on our clients."

Workspace

Jon Bircher, chief commercial officer, Cello Health

What was your biggest break?

The first was back in 2004 when I was working as a market research manager at Sanofi and was asked to project manage what turned out to be major organizational aspects of the Sanofi-Aventis merger.

It inspired me to look into consulting more seriously and led me to my next big break. I joined a boutique UK-based consulting firm focused on healthcare and marketing strategy called The MSI Consultancy (which is now Cello Health Consulting).

What's the best and/or worst part of your job?

Ultimately I love spending time working on our business, working with our awesome team, and identifying ways to improve what we do and what we offer our clients.

The worst part for me is working with clients who are going through the motions and you know you are essentially delivering to a tick box, rather than genuinely making a strategic difference to the business or the brand.

Who is the person you admire most in your area of work?

A friend of mine who has continued to reinvent himself throughout his pharmaceutical career. He could have easily been the Big Pharma primary sales guy who got left behind but he continued to invest, develop, and evolve and has now led specialist business units, start-ups, a small biotech, and rare disease companies.

What's the view like from your office/work area?

Some days I work from my main office in Farnham, a lovely little market town in the southeast of England. Other days I am at our headquarters looking over central London. Often I have the view of the Atlantic from a plane window or am looking across clients' offices as I still spend significant time in the depths of projects.

How long is a typical meeting with clients?

We run a significant number of workshops for our clients integrated into projects. I would say these meetings on average last 1.5 to two days.

Does your office have a favorite lunch and/or after-hours place?

The flavor of the moment appears to be anything as long as it is Mexican food. Whenever I come to the U.S. to be with the team that is what gets booked.

Where did you go to college? Did it help you prepare for your career?

I studied biochemistry at the University of York.

My degree led me into the pharmaceutical industry but didn't really prepare me for business, strategy, marketing, or indeed career development. I have learned these things through work experiences, courses, reading, and post-college education.

What books are you reading?

Currently I am reading Scaling up by Verne Harnish, Instant Motivation by Chantal Burns, re-reading Malcolm Gladwell's Tipping Point, and The Rosie Project by Graeme Simsion. I still try to read the Bible daily although I recently have switched to listening to audiobook versions.

What was your greatest professional challenge?

The project was complex, it stretched me and the team at the time, and the key stakeholders changed multiple times, with each person bringing a new perspective and set of objectives.

Where will you be in five years?

I have never been one to plan out my own career. I am ambitious, I work hard, I do what I say I am going to do, and I continue to look for ways to stretch myself or ways I can get involved or influence the business.

If you were to write a book, what would the title be?

20 Stories about Healthcare in 2040

PMD Insider

Conflicting polls highlight uncertainty about the public's opinion of pharma

Two recent polls paint a complicated picture of the public's opinion of the pharma industry after a year in which manufacturers were battered in the U.S. media over their pricing practices.

In the U.S. market, the industry faced a whirlwind of negative press in 2015 - most of it stemming from backlash and criticism of Valeant Pharmaceuticals' and Turing Pharmaceuticals' price hikes on old drugs. But the Reputation Institute, a research and consultancy firm, found that the industry's reputation globally has improved so far in 2016.

The global poll gauged reputation on seven factors - products and services, innovation, workplace, governance, citizenship, leadership, and performance - which add up to a composite score between 0 and 100.

Globally, the drug industry mustered a passing grade of 67.6 in 2016, a small but steady increase from 65.7 in 2015. Kasper Ulf Nielsen, executive partner and co-founder of the Reputation Institute, described the score as "average and improving." The industry's reputation in the U.S., too, fared well, hitting 72.7, and generally on a steady upswing, he said.

Bayer was the top ranked pharma company with Abbott, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Merck rounding out the top five for 2016. Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Pfizer finished in the bottom three of all the 14 ranked manufacturers.

In order to take the Institute's poll, participants had to be familiar with the 14 pharma companies: Abbott, AbbVie, Allergan, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. The drugmakers were selected for their size, familiarity around the world, and companies which were thought to already have an "average" reputation. 

Another survey conducted by Edelman implies that trust in pharma is heading in the other direction, however. Trust in the pharma industry decreased in 16 countries - including the U.S. - according to the 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer, which surveyed more than 33,000 people in 28 countries. Within the U.S. healthcare industry, participants rated pharma and biotech companies as the least-trusted subsectors of healthcare. Hospitals and consumer health companies (such as Procter & Gamble) were rated the most trustworthy.

The Institute's research suggests that the more people know about pharma, the more likely they are to trust it and in turn recommend their products, Nielsen explained, and that knowledge gap represents a clear opportunity for the industry to better tell its story.

To that end, the Reputation Institute asked participants how well drugmakers expressed their corporate brand in a number of categories and found significant room for improvement. Only 38% of those polled said that pharma companies communicate often; 46% said it provide a consistent experience; 40% said they supply sufficient information; 38% said manufacturers welcome an open discussion; and just 43% said drugmakers delivers on their promises. --Kevin McCaffrey