KY insight BLOG: (13) Segmentation, Easy to Say, Difficult to Use

Insight based Brand Plan

Segmentation has become so common knowledge in the pharmaceutical industry that it seems like there is no company that doesn't use it in pharmaceutical marketing. However, there are also cases where it is not used properly, or where it is just divided because it is said to be used. The purpose of segmenting is to "change key messages, actions, and channels to tailor an approach to customers with different thoughts, feelings, and resulting actions to achieve results." In the past, segmentation was commonly known as "medical department" or "doctor potential," and now the two are mixed together, which I think is the cause of confusion in the mind and the reason it is not being used effectively. I hope this article will help you organize your thoughts on this point.

Before getting into the main topic of segmentation, let's take a moment to summarize what I've done so far, organize my thoughts, and organize my materials. I have been thinking about how to change the current perception of key stakeholders at important moments in the Pts journey into the desired perception, but after much analysis and work, the points have become somewhat scattered, so let me start by summarizing them. Here again the axis is pts journey. What are the four moments of opportunity for us?

Seek treatment: If you feel symptoms, visit a doctor for hay fever.
Brand Choice: Doctor prescribes product X among antihistamines
Taking frequency: Number of times you take the medicine/hay fever season (once or twice)
Pts acceptance: Patient acceptance of product X

At each moment

A brief explanation of moment
Size of upside opportunity (number of patients, amount)
driver/barrier
Priority

I'll try to summarize it all on one page.

This summary method lacks insight, but it is a high-level summary document so don't worry about it. Looking at it this way, we can see that brand choice and Rx frequency are (as expected) high priorities.

Our key stakeholders are, of course, the "doctors who prescribe antihistamines" and the "patients who visit us for hay fever," but we have to consider whether it is okay to lump them together as "doctors" and "patients." It may be more effective to group doctors based on their thoughts, behaviors, and differences and then deliver tailored messages and actions to them. Segmentation is the process of dividing customers into several groups for this purpose. When creating the insights for Pts Journey, we also considered dividing doctors into two groups: those with a high intention to prescribe Product X and those with a low intention to do so. In that sense, you could say that segmentation had already begun.

Why did you divide doctors into two groups, "high/low intention to prescribe product X"? Let's say you created an insight for all "antihistamine prescribing doctors" in one group, instead of dividing them into two. The survey results show that only 40% of doctors are willing to prescribe antihistamines overall, but what we are aiming for is

How can we get more prescriptions for product X?
What is that driver/barrier?
What does the doctor really think?

Therefore, rather than consolidating all doctors into one set of information, dividing them into groups with high and low prescribing intention, creating two insights based on the survey results and contrasting them to consider the gap will allow you to gain a deeper understanding of customers' true feelings and clarify from gap analysis (current/desired perception) how customers' thinking needs to be changed, making it easier to plan strategies and actions. It will also make it clearer and more efficient to focus your efforts on the group of doctors with low prescribing intention.

Speaking of segmentation in the past

By specialties
By potential (by# of treating patients)

But I don't think this was a mistake. As for medical departments, if the insight (= current perception) of ways of thinking, feelings, etc. differs for each department, I think segmentation by medical department is also OK. However, I don't think it makes sense to separate them simply because it is easier to do so by medical specialty, when their thoughts and feelings are the same. (They are satisfied with dividing up, and they divided up because the Brand Plan template said to do so...) The purpose of dividing up by segment is to "achieve results by tailoring their approach to customer groups with different thoughts, feelings, and resulting behaviors by changing key messages, actions, and channels," so there is no point in blindly dividing up by medical department.

This is by potential (by existing patients and remaining patients), but it is efficient to allocate a large amount of activity to high potential customers, so it is reasonable to "split" them. However, if we divide patients "only" by potential, we will not be able to segment them based on differences in doctors' insight, feelings, and actions. Recommendations are organized like this, with segments based on feelings and behavior on the vertical axis (in this case, prescription status of product X) and potential on the horizontal axis.

Then, the following metric was created. The qualitative content of "communication" will not change if the "segment based on feelings and behavior" is the same, but if the doctor's potential is high (the number of patients is large), the doctor will visit more frequently, and if the potential is low, the doctor will visit less.

I think it's a good idea to use "By Potential" to prioritize visit frequency, like this: In this case, even if the potential is high, there is no need to visit doctors for whom product X is already their first choice, so the frequency of visits does not need to be so high. In this way, the element of potential is added while retaining the "segmentation based on feelings and behavior" that is important in marketing in the insight era on the vertical axis.

In the previous slide, we divided antihistamine prescribing physicians into three segments.

Product X Unprescribed
Product X prescription rate is less than 50%
Product X prescription rate at 50% or higher

This method of segmentation is similar to adoption ladders, and is easy for sales reps to distinguish and understand, but some marketing geeks (especially the big-headed consultants at Global) point out that this type of "segmentation by prescription behavior" "should be segmented more by feelings, insight!" What they're saying is true according to marketing textbooks! But don't just look at the surface - the names of the segments... Even if you segment by prescription behavior, isn't it OK as long as you properly capture the feelings and insights behind it, and there are differences between each segment? That's what I think. For example, if you segment doctors by feelings and insights (segment names),

Patient Outcomes First Priority Doctor
Doctors not interested in antihistamines
…

To be honest, this segmentation is difficult to distinguish and use in the field (sales rep). As a segmentation, it is "beautiful" and "the way it should be," but if it cannot be used, it is a building of cards, so I think it is better to avoid this kind of "beautiful but not practical" segmentation. The trick is to actually "separate them by prescription behavior", but I changed the name a little bit to reflect the insight.

Doctors with no interest in antihistamines (doctors who do not prescribe product X)
Physicians satisfied with existing drugs (doctors with a prescription rate of less than 50% for product X)
Patient treatment outcomes top priority physicians (physicians with a prescription rate of 50% or more for product X)

In fact, there were times when they managed to escape Global's notice by disguising their information in such a way. I think it's better to pick the fruit from there. I mentioned that the reason for segmenting is to "achieve results by tailoring an approach to customers with different thoughts, feelings, and resulting behaviors by changing key messages, actions, and channels." However, in order to "achieve results," it is difficult for sales reps to achieve results unless they can easily determine "which segment my target physician belongs to." Therefore, "being able to easily identify segments" is also a necessary condition for segmenting.

The Brand Team compiled the current/desired and key drivers/barriers for each segment that were "usable and easy to use" and compiled them on one sheet.

The way in which this is put together will vary depending on each company's brand plan template, so please create it based on an appropriate template. We also recommend creating one sheet for each segment that includes insights and even a persona.

This can also be created using the information you have gathered so far, and having this material will allow an image of the doctor in that segment to pop into the mind of anyone who watches the video. Once you create this for each doctor and patient segment, it becomes easy to explain the segmentation.

To summarize the important points when doing segmentation:

Segmentation based on feelings and behavior (insight) is important in the age of insight
Of course, potential is also important
It is a good idea to capture both insights on the vertical axis and potentials on the horizontal axis.
It would be good to have a slide that summarises the information for all segments.
It is convenient to create slides that summarize each segment for easy explanation.

Once we get to this point, the next step is to talk about strategy, or designing the path to reach the desired thing.

2025年3月23日日曜日

(13) Segmentation, Easy to Say, Difficult to Use

0 件のコメント:

コメントを投稿