In my last post, I established that a stringent regulatory environment is no excuse for not making an emotional connection between your brand and its target audience. Too often, however, pharma marketers mistakenly assume that physicians will “get” a brand’s benefits if they are presented the same way they get information from medical textbooks. This is a weak approach that never effectively motivates an audience to take action or make a change.

Remember this: You have to engage
healthcare professionals in a conversation.

That’s not always as easy as it sounds, particularly when you have a brand for a disease or condition that healthcare professionals don’t want to hear about, let alone talk about.

For example, we had a client that has a product for tinea pedis, which is more commonly known as athlete’s foot. Unsexy and not life-threatening, so it was no surprise that podiatrists were apathetic about it. However, we found evidence that uncontrolled tinea pedis can lead to more serious problems that would interest podiatrists, including onychomycosis and bacterial cellulitis. Now we had an excellent place to start a compelling conversation.

But you can’t just talk at healthcare professionals. You must always engage them in a conversation that directly benefits them. All healthcare professionals really want to know is: “What’s in it for me or my patients?” The way to succeed is by inviting them into a discussion about your brand that leads to the answer.

In our case, we brought together key thought leaders in the podiatric community and let them do the talking. We set up a dedicated website, allowing podiatrists to view the educational presentations at their convenience. Healthcare professionals are often very receptive when you incorporate peer-to-peer communications into your marketing mix, so it’s an excellent approach. It’s more than just adding professional credibility: they’re talking the same language to one another.

One word of warning before I close: a big misstep I often see is when a brand promotes innovation for innovation’s sake. It’s self-serving. You’ll be more successful if you can isolate a problem — or even a potential problem such as in our case — and then offer a solution, which is what I’ll be talking about in my next post.