First, I would like to applaud the folks at Pfizer for their new MAINTAIN (Medicines Assistance for Those Who Are In Need) program. Yes, it’s a little bit of stretch to get to the acronym, but pharma’s got to have them. For those not familiar with the program, basically, it provides one year of free drugs if you’re unemployed at no cost. A couple of important caveats: you have to have been on the Pfizer drug for three months prior to losing your job and have no other healthcare coverage for drugs. Essentially, this is the Hyundai Assurance program for pharmaceutical products.
As we all know, big pharma could always use a bit of good PR and this is some of the best it’s had in a while. Some cynics might mention the limitations of the program or that it’s tied to losing your job instead but does not include those with jobs who still can’t pay for their medications. You could also note that higher cost (and higher profit) oncology products aren’t included in the program according to Ad Age’s review of the program. However, the cynics seem to not be making a big splash this time around as most of the buzz is positive.
Overall, this has got to be a positive PR coup for Pfizer. At the same time, I’m going to guess that they’ll actually not have that many people who fit the requirements for the program. You need to be on branded Pfizer products for three months and then lose your job. Yes, many people have lost their jobs recently, but the employment rate is still (historically-speaking) relatively low and job losses seem to have slowed. The other piece that limits the number of people who might qualify is that patients have to have been on treatment for three months. Assuming people tell the truth, with adherence rates dropping dramatically in the first three months, most patients never make it to month three. My point? This program might not cost Pfizer that much at all. Compare that to the PR value that they are getting (and could never have bought) and overall it seems like pretty smart move.
Let’s also remember, Pfizer has a lot to gain from this program. People who lose their job may cut back on medical treatments along with everything else. Those on Lipitor may ask their doctor for something that’s almost as good but much cheaper and they end up on generic Zocor. Pfizer gets nothing. However, when the patient gets his job back, he’ll probably continue with what was working. Pfizer would rather make sure that their drug is the one the patient is taking when they get insurance coverage once again. So, instead of losing them forever, Pfizer basically loaned them some money until they can get back on their feet and start paying once again.
As an aside, Ad Age included this in their article: “A former high-ranking pharmaceutical company executive said the cost to Pfizer for this new push may not be as high as people think. ‘Most of the money [drug companies spend] is in [research and development],’ said the former executive, who asked not to be identified. ‘It doesn’t cost a lot to manufacture the pills or package them.’”
Perhaps this comment explains why he/she is a “former” executive. If this were the pharma business model, then they could be selling every pill for 3 cents. Technically, I guess they’d have to sell the first pill for $800 million and then the next one could be 3 cents. The point of the higher prices is to re-coup the investment in development throughout the life of the product. Giving them away doesn’t have a high costs of goods sold, but it has a tremendous opportunity cost (or sacrificed revenue “cost”). So, seriously with this quote? But, I digress…
The point of this post isn’t supposed to be a Pfizer-lovefest, so I’ll get to it. My challenge to Pfizer is how they could have (can?) bring digital (and relationship marketing) into this program to make it even more valuable and actually turn a profit on it later on. It’s pretty clear that this program isn’t going to be advertised (which also keeps the number enrolling down) and I’m not suggesting that Pfizer advertise it. There also are some rules around offering enticements for getting someone to use your products and free samples (which is what this basically is) can fit in that category in some cases. So, I know that they have to be careful with how they tie this program to current and future sales and marketing.
That said, there’s an opportunity here. On the application form, Pfizer asks for the patient’s email address. I would guess that people would readily turn over this piece of personal information because they feel that they are getting some value in return (my take on this value exchange). But the question is: what can/should Pfizer do with these email addresses? Again, keep in mind that they’ve offered something very valuable in return for information and have people who are likely to be willing to accept some offers in exchange for these free drugs. So, is Pfizer asking each of the people in the program to opt into one of their product-specific CRM programs? For example, an applicant who is taking Lipitor should be offered the chance to enroll in My HeartWise, the product’s CRM program. If Pfizer believes in the value of these programs, then why not try to get more people enrolled?
Since those who get accepted for program are likely to have a very positive attitude towards Pfizer (and rightfully so), why not leverage this while you can? Perhaps they’ll agree to share their story for use on your website. Maybe they’ll write a blog post about you (or send a tweet). Maybe they’ll tell their friends about how great of a company you are. You can help them do all of this by providing them with simple talking points about the program and the company. Let them be your ambassadors while they’re willing and have a great opinion about your company.
Maybe now’s the time to start collecting product reviews for inclusion on your site later on (when you can sell it to your regulatory team). Surely, these people would be more likely to give you a positive review (or any review at all). All of this is very common in other industries where they do a much better job at finding, energizing, and supporting their biggest brand advocates. They look for the right people through a variety of channels (social media being the big one now). They get them excited about what they can do and the difference they can make. Finally, they give patients simple ways to spread the word to others. It’s not a quid pro quo, as you’re not making their participation in the program contingent on their agreeing to help. Pfizer can follow this same model: find, energize, and support.
How? The find part is really easy. They’ve got the names, street addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses of those that should be the biggest advocates for the company (i.e., those that were accepted into the program). Energizing is hard regardless of the industry, but it can be done here for sure. Let those in the program know the value of what they are getting, how the drugs are going to help them (i.e., they made the right choice to find a way to stay on treatment), and how many other people could benefit, but aren’t. Yes, a little bit of a guilt-trip, but I think fair. Support is the final part of the model and that could be as complex as mailing a PR kit to every member of the program who is interested or as simple as adding a ShareThis button to every product site. Either way, you have to make it very easy for people to share your story otherwise they won’t.
So, hats off to Pfizer for taking on this ambitious program, it’s a 7.5 out of 10. My challenge to you is for you to figure out how you can make this even better and bring it to a 10 out of 10.
Join Dose of Digital on Facebook for exclusive content and sneak previews.
Ready to hire the folks behind Dose of Digital? Contact us.
Possibly related posts (auto-generated):
