Killing the myth of the big pharma cash cow

Today a brief rant about the quickest way to turn me off to a relationship with a vendor.

Treat me like I am nothing more that a potential short term revenue source that needs to be exploited.

The reality is that champions within an organization are your best "sales person", but often the initial explorations of the relationships can quickly become so inflexible and accountant driven, that I find myself wondering just why I am bothering to make the fight. 

Second, pharma companies are looking to be efficient in every aspect of their operation.  Every initiative needs to be able to show value, if not hard ROI , and telling me that "this it the way we do it", does not cut it.  Especially when we are talking about relatively immature  technologies and marketing channels and companies that did not exist  more than  a few years ago.

My perspective is that large companies run on momentum.  The ability to do _something_ even on  a modest scale  and then elevate that success is critical in convincing skeptics that new  ways of thinking  are  _possible_ and that new channels can and should be an important part of the mix.

If you are unable to be flexible and look for a win-win, then just say so and walk away.  I respect that. 

Just realize that you have just fired your best sales person.

 

Comments?

------------------------------

Disclaimer:  I work for a large Pharma company, but the thoughts here are my own.   

Comments

[Rob Lytle]

Thanks for the great comments Wendy. I agree that large companies often use size and the potential for future business to get what we need short term from vendors. That said, I personally _do_ try to stick with the people and relationships that I have come to trust and I do try to throw a little work their way when it is appropriate. I think most of my colleagues do the same.

Often your internal allies have their hands tied by internal politics or factors that you as a vendor can't be aware of (such as simple organizational inertia as in "this is the way we have _always_ done it"). That is why it is even more important to help your internal allies develop the clout and resources they need to make an impact in the organization.

I am not saying you put all your eggs in one basket or that you spend an inappropriate amount of resources. I am just saying that if you are lucky enough to have someone "inside" that is excited about you (and has demonstrated that with their persistence and energy)- try to find ways, within reason, to help the

[Wendy Blackburn]

Great commentary and it's a complaint you don't often hear openly from the client side, but I am sure it is prevalent. As someone on the agency side, I covet our champion clients and truly realize how valuable they are to our successes. And personally, I would never ever try to offer something to a client that I didn't truly feel would benefit their brand.

You are right - if at the beginning of a vendor relationship, you have the feeling they see you as a cash cow and can't be flexible to your needs, they are probably not the right partner for you.

It's a difference I've seen first-hand between big agencies and medium-to-smaller sized ones. In the big agencies owned by the large holding companies (think Publicis) ... "sell, sell, sell" is ingrained in their culture. Inexperienced account managers are rewarded for how much they can sell in, because those agencies are beholden to their forecasts and stockholders.

Whereas, the small-to-medium independent agency may have the same level of expertise or more, but have different motivational drivers. They are looking for long-term relationships that will pay out in the end. They are more willing to be flexible to get that first project, and are likely to be more efficient and flexible in the long-term. Their success is your success. It's a partnership.(Full disclosure: I am biased b/c I've been at a medium-sized agency for five years. But I've also worked with - and even for - the big agencies so I feel I'm qualified to compare.)

All that said, I leave you with this challenge:
It's a two-way street. I've seen large clients dangle the proverbial carrot in front of smaller or medium-sized agencies because they know they can move quickly. They hire them for cheap and they get the job done. But when they have bigger products, bigger projects, bigger politics ... they go back to their "big" agencies and leave the little guys behind.

In business and in agency relations, isn't a long-term relationship better than a short-term gain?

[Rob Lytle]

Test to make sure comments are working correctly.