By Sven Larsen (@svenplarsen)

Watching the big game last night,  I was struck by the diversity of products being advertised. Domain name registration and e-trading as well as the old reliables like packaged goods and automobiles. But one category was conspicuous by it’s absence. Where were the Pharma Superbowl ads?

It’s not like big Pharma companies don’t have the marketing budget for a Superbowl spot. And Pharma agencies certainly have the talent to pull off something as compelling as bungee jumping cars or Danica Patrick in a jumpsuit. So why no creative or splashy spot advertising a big name OTC or prescription product?

I can understand not wanting to spend the money on giving over half an uber expensive Superbowl spot to Fair Balance. But I also think it’s indicative of the way we sometimes approach Pharma marketing.

Pharma agencies have struggled for years with the perception that healthcare marketing is a “creative ghetto”, a place where fresh and original ideas are smothered by regulatory review and conservative clients. Of course, anyone who has been to the Mannys or spent any time in the industry knows this isn’t true. But, at times, I think we do suffer from an inferiority complex. A belief that spots like “1984″ are for cool, hip brands like Apple and not for boring old Pharma.

It’s an attitude we need to shake off. Whether it’s digital media, social marketing or more traditional outlets like television and print, Pharma needs to stand toe to toe with any other type of product and service and we need to use all the weapons in the marketing arsenal. Because, at the end of the day, our message is just as (if not more) important than Coke or Toyota’s. What car you drive or what soda you drink may enhance your life. But what drug you take or what healthcare behavior you modify may save it.

And if the message is that important, isn’t it time we got as creative as possible when it comes to spreading it?

By Sven Larsen(@svenplarsen)

Who’s doing it right?

That’s a question we’re often asked since we’ve routinely challenged Pharma to embrace social media and an expanded dialogue with their customers. So it’s gratifying to find a prime example in our own backyard.

P & P’s parent company, digital agency Zemoga has worked with Weisscomm, EMD Serono and Pfizer on their MS Voices project for over a year now. We’ve written before about the MS Voices Facebook page and the industry leading approach that this partnership has developed to handle comments and questions from consumers. But Facebook is only part of the outreach efforts being made to the MS community.

At the heart of the project is the MS Voices call center, a remarkable customer service operation that has answered over a million inbound calls from the MS community. How’s that for starting a conversation? The call center includes patient enrollment specialists, patient support specialists, nurse support specialists and reimbursement specialists. Whenever someone in the MS community needs to speak to a live person, support is available toll free at 1-877-447-3243. The Ms Community can also visit MS Lifelines online at www.mslifelines.com or on the MS Voices Facebook page.

The call center it truly devoted to providing the highest level of service to it’s callers and this week they announced that they received certification from the JD Power and Associates Call Center Program (the firs time JD Power has recognized a Pharma call center for service excellence). Certification requires passing a rigorous audit of service practices and receiving positive feedback from customer surveys and it’s a major recognition of the great work being done by the call center.

The MS Voices program is a terrific example of how two Pharma companies embraced a community and created a win-win situation for all involved. It’s also a great example of what the future of our industry may look like.

What do you think? Who else is doing it right and putting the customer first?

by Jason Brandt (@jasondmg3)

Mad Men protagonist Don Draper works in the show’s fictional advertising agency, but the challenges he faces are real, and not much different than what many healthcare marketers face on a daily basis – meeting deadlines, incorporating new technologies, managing perceptions, and influencing behaviors all while ensuring personal growth.

The pharmaceutical industry and Mad Men’s advertising world have a lot in common: both include vibrant and competitive industries, have major players that influence standards and rely on a targeted audience to boost their business. What can pharma learn from Mad Men?

The devil is in the details. Producer Mathew Weiner pays meticulous attention to every detail from casting to the story line as well as ensuring the props and the set accurately reflects the time period. Creating an authentic and engaging experience with every dialog, interaction and visual is why fans flock to the three-time Emmy Award-winning series. Pharmaceutical companies looking to create that same level of customer loyalty should incorporate that same attention to detail, whether that’s using an authentic voice when communicating on social networks, creating intuitive, customer-friendly applications and services or delivering outstanding customer experiences.

Pick a job and then become the person that does it. Bobbie Barrett delivered this little pearl over cocktails with ex-lover Don Draper. Explaining how she became her husband’s manager – a man who wouldn’t have a career without his wife’s revealing bust line and shrewd wheeling and dealing – she tells him she invented the job.

Ten years ago there was no need for an HTML5 programmer, social media strategist or elder care services coordinator – those jobs didn’t exist. With technology and increased access to information changing everything, companies need to have their pulse on what skills will be needed in the future and recruit a workforce with the right skills to support growth. Individuals also need to develop skills that continue to add value and take control of their internal career path.

Don’t overlook the value of reinventing yourself. Don Draper is a chameleon. Born Dick Whitman, he’s no stranger to reinventing himself, whether it’s changing his name or leaving an established New York advertising agency to launch a start up.

Pharmaceutical companies may find themselves needing a reinvention with the expiration of drug patents expected to affect drug pricing, marketing and patient usage. Surviving patent expiration will require pharmaceutical companies to refocus their marketing messages to ensure they don’t lose significant market share to generic competitors. Shifting the strategy from brand loyalty to one that includes a more life-cycle branding and consumer education emphasis can deliver a competitive edge.
If you don’t like what’s being said, change the conversation. When a New York City developer didn’t like how he was being treated in the press, Don Draper suggested changing the conversation.

Brand management today is a two-way engagement with consumers often having louder share of voice than company-issued messaging. Putting processes in place to monitor online conversations is no longer a nice-to-have but a business necessity. Before things go south, develop strategies for how you’ll respond to negative or inaccurate information. Changing the conversation doesn’t necessarily require hijacking a thread, but paying attention to what is being said and offering truthful information can help consumers maintain a positive perception of your brand.

While we may not wear the narrow ties or hair pomade of Don Draper, we can still follow in his footsteps by keeping track of the details, owning the conversation and being unafraid to innovate when reinvention is the best option.

Like my image? You can get yourself one over at Sterling Cooper.

Last week Pixels & Pills’ editor Briana Campbell had the pleasure of sitting down for a Skype chat (so the quality is a little lower than our normal, professional videos) with Dr. Darshan Kulkarni (@FDALawyers) of the Kulkarni Law Firm in Philadelphia. And while the questions answered in the conversation don’t constitute legal advice and should not be constructed as such, we were very happy to get the thoughts of a lawyer on the recent FDA draft guidance. And to have him address some questions that you all had put forth on Twitter.

Further information on some of the things Darshan touches on can be found in the following sources:

The Park Doctrine

Par Pharmaceutical versus the FDA

FDA’s Cease and Desist to Triple Flu Defense

One more time, Jonathan Richman’s handy flow chart

He also mentioned to us, after we’d turend the camera off, that the FDA uses draft guidance as a way to express their thoughts on certain issues without the rigor of regulations. There is much draft guidance out there that never becomes finalized. To us, this means that we should take the guidance for what it is – all we are getting on emerging electronic/social media platforms at this time. And maybe ever.

Do you have questions for Dr. Kulkarni? Thoughts on this conversation? Leave them in the comments and we’ll continue the discourse.

We’ve entered conference season and there are a lot of great ones on the horizon in the next few weeks. Our friend John Mack has a fairly comprehensive list over on his website, but he’s missing one that we’re particularly excited about.

The Life Sciences Innovation Forum, from Microsoft and our friends at ExL Pharma, promises to addresses how to excel in this shifting global climate, with the rise of the emerging technologies in the healthcare and pharma world, along with globalization and shifts in demographics, we’re seeing a change from the traditional model – and doors being opened to previously unthought of opportunities.

This is the first time this forum is being held and we’re happy that we’ll be there, interviewing attendees and speakers alike, bringing in as much information and content that we can, for you, our readers.

The forum will address questions like:

• What is the role of eHealth in clinical research?

• FDA is encouraging technology solutions to capture source data electronically – what does eSource really mean?

• How can we enhance collaboration by having the ability to access, share and analyze data more efficiently?

There will be presentations from Johnson & Johnson, Sanofi, Microsoft Health and Life Sciences, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and more.

Will we see you there?

Date: January 26 & 27, 2012
Location: Marriott Forrestal Village Conference Center, Princeton, NJ
Website: http://www.lsinnovation.com/
Discount Code: C210PPS

This post is part of a series of point/counterpoint arguments proposed by different members of the Pixels & Pills staff. We’re strong believers that healthy arguments can yield the best solutions, and we hope that you enjoy our series. Feel free to add your own arguments in the comments section below!

by Krissy Goelz (@krisgoelz)

In The Godfather Part II, Michael Corleone lambasts a Mafia crime family member following an attempted hit on his life.

“In my home!” he rages. “In my bedroom, where my wife sleeps! Where my children come and play with their toys.”

Even in the mob, business doesn’t belong in personal quarters. The same is true for how professional communicators should handle their social media presence. If your business role requires you to participate in social media, you need to lock down your personal profile, tailor privacy settings and keep what you do on the off hours separate from your job.

In my father’s day it was easier to compartmentalize work. You left the office at 5 p.m. and your personal life was your own. In the digital age, segregating personal details from professional ones is harder, and it takes a great deal of diligence. But, it’s worth it if you want to build an image as a thought leader, trusted advisor or esteemed professional.

When participating in social media you have to enact the grandma rule. In the fields of Behavior and Psychology, this is known as the “Premack Principle.” What it means is conduct yourself properly and never post anything that you aren’t willing to shout from a rooftop or say in front of your grandmother. This is true of all social media users, but especially those who post on behalf of their organizations.

To borrow again from The Godfather, when participating in social media you also have to keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. There’s always danger of putting information into the wrong person’s hands – whether that’s competitive details, revealing personal health information or posting personal messages on Facebook during business hours. Even messages that are meant to be private sometimes find their way into the public arena. If you share too much of yourself, you may be surprised when it comes back to haunt you.

Blurring the lines between work and personal life can cost you reputation or financial damage. Just because you qualify something you post with the caveat “the views reflected are my own and not that of my employer” doesn’t mean that a reader is able to maintain that separation. In fact, the more the lines between work and leisure blur, the harder it is to separate our identities.

One way to manage a clean division is to use different platforms for different purposes. For example, keep business relationships and professional content on LinkedIn or Twitter. Use Facebook to connect with college roommates, neighborhood or childhood friends or other personal connections. If you want to use platforms like Facebook or Google+ for both purposes then make sure you create two profiles and work the privacy settings.

While you could argue that we’re all multidimensional human beings and everyone knows people have a work personality and an after-hours persona, there’s still no reason to mix them together.

We’re at work to work and do great things on behalf of our employers. How and when we socialize needs to be kept separate. Also, judiciously parsing information is never a bad thing. It’s good to keep a little mystery about yourself.

There’s no way to know how even the most inane things will be perceived by an outsider, whether it’s having a bad day or not being able to relate to your training for the New York City Marathon or sharing feelings about the NRA. Connecting with others online is critical, but as with anything, perception is reality. Shaping and controlling how you’re received requires a disciplined approach to managing your digital profile.

How are you handing your online presence?

This post is part of a series of point/counterpoint arguments proposed by different members of the Pixels & Pills staff. We’re strong believers that healthy arguments can yield the best solutions, and we hope that you enjoy our series. Feel free to add your own arguments in the comments section below!

by Jason Brandt (@jasondmg3)

As Egon Spengler told us in “Ghostbusters”, “crossing the streams” was a horrific tactical error, one which would create a terrifying explosion of undreamed-of power and destruction. “Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light,” he explained.

That’s how a lot of people feel about mixing business and personal personas. Nothing comes of “crossing the streams” except chaos and disaster. Social-media professionals – those of us in the communications and marketing fields who work largely in social digital venues -cross the streams” between personal and business social networking at our peril, and that of our brand. As a result, some people, in representing their brand to the world, put on a brand hat so big that they hide underneath it completely.
In my opinion, all that gives you is a boring hat. I want a hat that’s walking around with a living, breathing, interesting person underneath it. This is what makes the company real: a warm fuzzy personal face. That’s the whole point of social media. It’s social. It has personality and feeling and humanity. If all I wanted to see was the brand hat, I’d go to Wikipedia or to your website.

There is, of course, inherent risk with the personal nature of social-media marketing. If you tie the online brand to one person, you risk losing your whole brand if that person leaves. Or, perhaps worse, if they disgrace themselves somehow, they take the brand down with them.

That simply reinforces why it must be done astutely. Social media is a delicate mix of informal conversation and careful consideration. Deliberation and silliness are never a more necessary couple than when trying to conduct yourself in social channels. Your brand is represented by a person, but your brand isn’t just one person.

One great example of this? Tony Hsieh. He is the Zappos dude, but Zappos’ culture and customer service is bigger than him.

One example to watch? Apple. Is their drive and idealism and vision the company’s, or did that die with Steve Jobs? The next few years will tell us.

To return to the “Ghostbusters” metaphor, do you remember what happened at the end of the movie? (If for some awful reason you haven’t seen this cinema classic, I’ll wait here while you go and do that now.)

The state of affairs had gotten desperate. The old ways weren’t working. People had made mistakes. Nothing they were trying was stopping things from getting worse. As a last resort, they crossed the streams. This new way of doing things, taking their individual energy and combining it in this new and scary way, was finally enough to save the day.

Should you take all your life lessons and business acumen from Ray, Winston, Egon and Dr. Peter Venkman? Well, maybe not. (Although, if someone asks if you’re a god? Say yes.) But in this case – go ahead. Cross the streams. Dare to be yourself as well as your brand.

by Briana Campbell (@MsMatchGirl)

By now, you’ve all had time to review the FDA’s draft guidance on Responding to Unsolicited Requests for Off-Label Information About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices. And you’ve had time to read the multitude of responses that came after (if you didn’t, Fabio Gratton has compiled many of them for you). And, as this is something we’ve been talking about for over two years now, you’ve probably been waiting for our response.

We were disappointed in Advertising Age’s write up calling this Social Media “Guidelines.” While this draft guidance should clear some things up for pharmaceutical companies surrounding responding to unsolicited off-label inquiries via electronic media, without being the definitive guidelines that we’ve been waiting for since 2009 (head’s up, those are not coming anytime soon, if at all), it should be used as just that – a guide. We’re not lawyers (we’ll be getting you insight from one ASAP!), but we’d guess that keeping social media responses in line with these guidelines should keep pharma companies out of hot water for at least the near future.

As recently as December 2011, we posted a piece, “Shoot First, Apologize Later: Why Pharma Needs to Proceed Without Social Media Guidelines,” that offered up the idea that, with a bit of thoughtfulness behind it, pharma could easily embrace social media platforms, not only for the benefit of their own brands, but the patients that are searching the social web for answers.

Companies that want to change, lead or influence need to take calculated risks and proceed even without formal guidelines. Often, a permissible approach results in delays, obstacles and stagnation. For companies waiting for permission, by the time they get it, it’ll be too late. Someone else will lead the pack and they’ll again be reduced to playing catch up.

That doesn’t mean to proceed without caution and strategic foresight, but it does mean the time to act is now – not at some undetermined point in the future. Consider how the U.S. Navy has embraced social media for recruiting. Realizing that conversations are happening online, with or without guidelines, they chose to not fight it and instead promote social media usage throughout the ranks.

There are loads of heavily regulated industries joining in online. Why shouldn’t pharma be amongst them?

In lines 338 through 351 (on page 10) of the draft guidance, the FDA lays out some of the thought behind the draft guidance release, writing that “the Internet has revolutionized communication” and that it has “spawned a variety of social media tools that host online content primarily created and published by users other than the intellectual property owner or product manufacturer.” Given the nature of online communities and the public’s growing reliance on the social web to gather information about their personal healthcare via internet communities, web pages, social platforms and discussion groups, it makes sense that the FDA should offer some thoughts on how their already stated policies for responding to off-label inquiries (first laid out in 1982, and restated many times after) can be applied to trends in emerging electronic media. From lines 207 through 209: “This draft guidance sets forth FDA’s current thinking on this topic consistent with Agency’s past policy statements about responding to unsolicited requests.”

Many have mentioned, and we agree, that the language, as laid out in this draft guidance, seems a bit confusing. Our friend Jonathan Richman at Dose of Digital has you covered, with a handy flow chart explaining what pharma can and cannot do in responding to these requests. We’d recommend printing it out and hanging it eye-level, for easy reference.

The internet, web sites and the social web as we know them are constantly changing, evolving and growing. This draft guidance, while maybe not the set-in-stone policy so many marketers and the pharma companies they work with – so many of whom are terrified to dip a toe in the water of social media, for fear of drowning in misunderstood or mis-handled regulations and red-tape – were hoping for, are a nice step forward in clarifying how pharma can respond to inquiries, public and private, via the web.

So. Next steps?

Let’s keep moving. Let’s keep innovating, building, growing and pushing forward as the social web continues to do the same. With an eye to this guidance, and some strategic thinking before jumping on the bandwagon, there is no reason that pharma companies can’t join finance and insurance in finding out the all the good that can happen from participating in social media.

We say, listen to the conversation, develop a plan around it and go forth. Stop running scared. Be smart and you’ll be okay.

by DJ Edgerton (@wiltonbound)

The question seems almost nonsensical at first – your Twitter followers may be really outstanding people, but they’re not organic chemists or researchers. And your Facebook fans, while devoted, probably do not, generally speaking, know how to move a new drug through the FDA approval process.

Just the same, it’s a mistake to discount your social audiences as a source for insight and innovation. In fact, a wide range of category-leading companies do just that. While social media is not as planned or controlled as a focus group, there’s potential in polling the audience when it comes to research and development – and along the way you can even benefit the very people you’re polling.

Doing it right requires a three-step plan:

Understand what you want to accomplish. In this regard, social media is no different than traditional R&D research: Don’t ask existing or potential customers anything without a clear purpose behind “the ask.” What do you want to accomplish? Are you looking for feedback on a service (such as when consumers call into the customer care center) or improvement on a product or direction for a new advertising campaign? What about new products: Are you exploring the potential for one or looking at whether your customers have a need for a product that you have not thought of?

A solid roadmap will have goals covering what you hope to accomplish and clear indications of which social channels are – and are not – appropriate. Need to demo a product? You Tube makes sense. On the other hand, Twitter may be a better fit for simple questions requiring quick feedback. And tools like custom Facebook apps offer ways to bring customers and fans into the content creation process.

Be relevant in your questions and rigorous in your data collection. A solid roadmap lays out needs and expectations, but even the best plans can go astray if your research questions don’t balance your needs with the realities of social media, which often boil down to: Don’t be boring.

Tweets sending people to a 50-question survey or requests that Facebook followers sit through six sample commercials in search of the one they like best are unlikely to go anywhere. Instead, keep things short, clear and – most importantly – be ready to monitor and take feedback from the conversations that grow out of your public questions. They can be the source of tremendous insight.

Crunch the data and don’t leave the audience in the dark. One of the unique aspects of social media is that a lot of silos get knocked down – people have a great (and sometimes unreasonable) desire to peek behind the corporate curtain and know what’s going on. This is a powerful force and can jump-start your social-driven research – people love to be treated like insiders, and promising to give them a first peek at a new innovation, a new campaign or even just a slight change in how your company does something will motivate participation in your research.

The key is: You have to deliver on your promise. If you tell participants you’re working on a new way to talk about an established product and want their input, give them a peek before it’s rolled out to the public. Not doing so is bad form in the social landscape; promising to do it and then not delivering is an even bigger faux pas.

Whether it’s a one-drug boutique company or a global powerhouse, research and development is a constant part of pharma’s product and service lifecycles. While social media isn’t a substitute for formalized marketing research, it can be a powerful, low-cost augmentation to the toolbox.

by Briana Campbell (@MsMatchGirl)

We’ve spent a lot of this year (and last) talking about how pharma is running scared of social media. And we’ve spent some time telling them to just suck it up and do it anyway. And we’ve spent a bunch of time (two years, at least!) talking about how we’re waiting for guidance from the FDA, and maybe, just maybe, once it comes, then pharma companies can jump on the social media bandwagon.

And it’s true. If we wait for guidance, it will be too late. The next big thing will have come along. And pharma marketers will have missed the boat. But let’s talk about something else for a minute.

Let’s talk about some pharma companies that are doing social and doing it right.

Let’s talk about the companies that did not put their heads in the sand when Facebook changed the rules.

Let’s talk about the companies that are putting healthcare out there on social networks, who are using internal guidelines and tools, and are going to end up ahead of the game because of it.

And though there are a lot that people are talking about (J&J, GE, and Boehringer all come to mind), we thought we’d reach out to our Twitter community and see what they had to say about it.

So we sent out one simple Tweet:

What pharma companies are doing social *right*? Who stands out in your mind?

— Pixels and Pills (@pixelsandpills) December 20, 2011

And within seconds, Allison Blass tweeted back at us, with her response.

@pixelsandpills @toddsiesky and Roche Diabetes! — Allison Blass (@AMBlass) December 20, 2011

Unprompted (we were on the subway!) she went on to say that the team at Roche Diabetes had spent three years cultivating relationships, being honest with their community and letting people speak their minds.

And that means a lot to an e-patient.

What we see Roche doing right is starting an open and honest dialogue with the patients who rely on their products. We see them answering questions, getting involved and reaching out to e-patients who are blogging and sharing their personal diabetes stories. Going so far as to host their own social media summit in June of this year.  They know that their consumers are sharing stories, tips and moral support on social platforms and instead of shutting down and shutting them out, they launched forums for those conversations to continue. And they became part of the conversation.

For a comprehensive list of pharma companies/brands on social media (the infamous deathwatch), head on over to Dose of Digital for Jonathan Richman’s wiki. Are any of them doing social right? Share your stories and thoughts in the comments.