Fantastic Suggestions On The Real Metric Behind Customer Contribution
Looking at the issue of key account management designation, we need to focus on the customer contribution to the metric. A pharmaceutical consultant must impress upon senior management that traditional measures used to define a client’s contribution are no longer adequate. There certainly was a time when money was not as much of an issue as it is now, the business world was much more straightforward and management could just look at monthly sales activity, or the level of market share, to determine just how important a particular client was in the overall scheme of things. Quite simply, the more money that came through this particular client pipeline, the more money in terms of time, effort and resources could be placed into the pot by the pharmaceutical company, to make sure that that client was likely to stay around.
Whenever customer relationship marketing comes under consideration, we learn from that key account management is just one of several major areas that we need to focus on. The management of key accounts depends a lot on an analysis of a customer’s make-up, taking into account how much the customer is worth over a lifetime and this is increasingly important as we consider whether a particular lifecycle is dependent on the strength of a product, a certain scenario or other metric. A knows only too well that key account management can only be successful if an “appropriate” relationship is developed and that in this particular field, one size most certainly does not fit all.
The customer’s contribution can often be very difficult to calculate and determine. Can we assume that the customer is a strategic ally of some kind in the marketplace? This is far from a straightforward analysis, as industrial politics could determine that a particular customer be designated as “key,” even though they may be far from one of the leading contributors to the overall financial pot. When it comes to lobbying activities or other somewhat intangible measurements, the company could be well advised to pay particular attention to this client, elevating them to a position alongside those who contribute far more significantly in financial terms.
Pharmaceutical marketing training must be structured in such a way that the relatively diverse contributions of each and every client can be ascertained and we need to see how these subtle nuances can be manipulated in favour of the company. Does this mean that the must also be an expert in psychology and should seek to train all those who come into contact with these key accounts in the subtle nuances associated?
It appears that almost 2/3 of pharmaceutical companies are not really aware of this approach and consider that key account management is dictated almost exclusively by sales volume alone. Clearly, there is considerable opportunity for the pharmaceutical consultancy here, to step in and educate the company and its representatives. As it becomes ever more difficult to adequately communicate with the end user, it follows that the company should become ever more strategic in the way that it micromanages its existing client base. It’s no longer acceptable to use a broad brush when it comes to pharmaceutical marketing training, as specific attention has to be paid to colouring in the finer detail, as the world of key account management is reborn.
Alan Gillies is the CEO of L2L Consulting, a cutting-edge pharma consultancy firm which specialises in optimising productivity and performance within international companies by applying tailored organisational strategies.
