1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
62C81CB5299219EE565257DB60042A69F
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/optimizing-managed-markets-function-roles-structures-resources-activities
18
19
2018.97.9.168
21
22
23best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




» Products & Services » » Market Access » Resource Benchmarks

Optimizing the Managed Markets Function: Roles, Structures, Resources and Activities

ID: PSM-312


Features:

21 Info Graphics

24 Data Graphics

150+ Metrics

3 Narratives

4 Best Practices


Pages: 57


Published: Pre-2019


Delivery Format: Shipped


 

License Options:


Buy Now

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS
The growing payer influence within the pharmaceutical sector has pushed the managed markets function into an increasingly important role. This makes it vital for pharmaceutical organizations to optimize the operations of their managed markets function.

Best Practices, LLC undertook this study to assess the operational performance of managed markets functions within small and mid-cap pharmaceutical companies. The study benchmarks the budget and staffing levels, organizational models, role of clinical specialists, and compensation structure of managed markets functions within pharmaceutical companies. The study will enable managed markets leaders to optimize the performance of their functions while continuing to operate on lean resource levels.


Industries Profiled:
Pharmaceutical; Biotech; Health Care


Companies Profiled:
actavis; Purdue Pharma; Galderma; Shire; Actelion; Upsher-Smith; Horizon Pharma; United Therapeutics; Eisai; Jazz Pharmaceuticals; Daiichi Sankyo

Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 11 commercial leaders from targeted small and mid-cap companies that align well with one another in terms of size, market position and resource levels.  These 11 companies completed online surveys, which were used to identify innovative as well as efficient “outliers” that were also engaged in interviews to expand on their survey responses.

Key Findings

When comparing the span of control of area directors to account managers, it is clear that most companies feel they can run leaner than they are currently- with a full additional account manager FTE on average reporting to each area director.

  • All participants noted that bonus targets for area directors and account managers focused on a combination of Management by Objectives (MBO) and sales plan attainment. The weighting of MBO vs. Sales Plan Attainment for account managers was approximately 50/50. For area directors, the weighting shifted closer to an average of 60/40 in favor of MBO.
Table of Contents

Budgets and Headcount
  • Structure: Overview
  • Structure: Organizational Charts
  • Compensation
  • Clinical Specialists
  • Efficiency and Performance
  • Appendix: Benchmark Participants

List of Charts & Exhibits

Managed Markets department budget and Staffing
  • Allocations of Managed Markets budget to each sub-function
  • Annual revenue and products supported by the Managed Markets function
  • Allocations of Managed Markets staffing resources
  • Critical support functions for Managed Markets operations
  • Current and ideal ratios of account managers to directors
  • Managed Markets model and reporting functions of participating companies
  • Bonus structure for area directors
  • Bonus structure for account managers
  • Percentage of bonus structure tied to MBO and sales plan
  • Additional perks for high-performers exceeding the bonus cap
  • Clinical specialists supporting Managed Markets
  • Reporting relationships for clinical specialists
  • HOL and MSL staff supporting managed markets
  • MSL and HOL engagement activities
  • Revenue supported per Managed Markets FTE
  • Managed Markets department budget as % of revenue supported
  • The billion dollar company model