My ace ACE-inhibitor
I came back from a meeting yesterday to find that our big pink sofa had finally arrived. Naturally, this was a sign to put the kettle on and get comfy. Naturally, we got round to talking about what makes prescription brands “engage” with people.
Engagement stretches from a transient coupling of user and product to a loyal relationship rich in mutual benefits. This depends on how much emotional value is delivered. The most successful brands in the world, like Apple, appeal to our most highly evolved values. Healthcare brands with a life-changing reputation (Seretide, Herceptin) come closest to this.
Most Rx brands however, don’t inspire much in end users. We take them for short term relief, or because the doctor/pharmacist said so, and never develop more than a functional relationship with them. Medicine is not something we buy because we want to.
But even though we’re largely indifferent, we can still forge long-term commitments with treatments because “we probably should”. Millions stick with a daily hypertensive because their physician has confirmed that their lifestyle hasn’t done them many favours. Changing brands only happens thus, when the doctor sees fit. There’s no dialogue going on here, but while there is forced engagement, does it really matter? We believe it does matter.
As preventative medicine becomes more of a priority, competition will drive prescription brands into more emotionally accessible areas. Certainly they will have to compete for prescriber loyalty.
For patients, new ways of engaging might go further than driving revenue. Putting a friendlier face on those boring old blood pressure pills might make people more adherent to their medication and perhaps think about taking more control of their health in other ways.
I have to say as a marketeer and a blood pressure pill popper, I would love to have a friendlier relationship with the anonymous pills that keep my ticker calm everyday – after all they do a big job, but I have no relationship at all with them as a brand – its just what my doc advised. There is a real opportunity for these brands to bond more with me and help me understand what they do and what else I can do to help myself. I would much rather feel like there is a 3rd person in the whole thing, not just me and the doc and those anonymous pills. The pharmacy brands can take that space and be someone who could take me by the hand and advise me because they know how I feel. I would have loyalty and a friendly appreciative relationship with that brand instead of the functional transactional relationship I have today. Bring it on I say!
February 7th, 2008 | 10:11am
by Tash
Tash, you make some great points and as a marketer you clearly are looking for engagement vs a transactional relationship. This is what we like to hear because it’s relevant to the agenda of personal responsibility for health management.
The potential for brand relationships will always be influenced by a community of influence that affects the way treatment is prescribed. For hypertension that will inevitably involve guidelines, evidence base and payers as well as you and your doctor.
But if most patients feel as you do – that you would like a better relationship with your meds – we need to keep trying to shift the starting point of understanding to you. We can tell doctors that patients want to know more about how their blood pressure pills work. This will create better engagement between the brand and the end user (you). Very importantly, it will encourage this climate of self care. Thanks for the comment. Ian
February 7th, 2008 | 12:36pm
by Ian Busby