How healthy is your digital engagement strategy? World-class ‘olympian’, or ‘gasping for breath’? We’ve put together a quick and fun tool for you to self-diagnose the health of your digital engagement. Just answer the seven questions below and see how your score adds up.

We recommend that you take this simple self-diagnosis check whether your focus is on product development, policy, corporate communications or marketing, and whether you are in prescription-only or over-the-counter medicines, medical devices, patient treatment or care. You will discover just how healthily you and your organization are engaging through digital.

A healthy digital engagement strategy allows you to connect with patients, healthcare professionals and other health stakeholders in a way that is relevant to each of them, and to achieve results aligned with business goals. Not only that, it allows you to discover which activities achieve the best outcomes so that you can continually improve effectiveness.

7-Step Self-Diagnosis

Simply answer these seven questions, and add up your score. Each question is worth up to 2 points. Find the closest response and score yourself accordingly. It’s entirely subjective and just for fun, so you can keep it to yourself or feel free to tweet me your score or comments (@EngagementStrat)!

1.

Who are the key stakeholders you want to engage? Patients, carers, healthcare professionals, government? Do you have a strategy in place to engage each of them online?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2) I know all stakeholder groups and we have strategies for engaging each of them online.
(1) I know who our stakeholders are, and we connect with some of them online.
(0) I don’t know whether our stakeholders are online.

2.

Are your digital engagement activities and campaigns aligned with specific business goals? Are you able to measure the extent to which these goals are being achieved through digital activities?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): I understand our business goals; we have digital engagement strategies closely aligned with them. I am able to identify digital outcomes and their contribution to specific business goals.
(1): Our digital activities are designed in line with business goals, but I am unable to identify specific business goals that have been achieved through digital engagement.
(0): Our digital campaigns are not set up to demonstrate results against business goals.

3.

Is your digital engagement strategy an integral part of a broader business, communications or marketing strategy? Are you integrating digital engagement with your offline marketing or engagement activities such as advertising, sales, policy activities, clinical trials?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): Our digital engagement strategy is fully integrated with our business, marketing  or communications strategy. We plan for the online impact and opportunity with every offline activity and do not operate ‘digital strategy’ distinctly from non-digital engagement.
(1): Some planned integration exists between our online and offline engagement activities.
(0): We have a digital strategy that is completely distinct from our other engagement, marketing and communications strategies.

4.

Thinking about your key therapeutic areas, do you know what topics or words Internet users in your territories are searching for? And when they do, do you know what they find?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): We proactively analyse search activity and keywords around our key therapeutic areas, and I know what online resources we compete with for Internet users’ attention. We have a strategy to use search to connect with the right people at the right time.
(1): I know who are competitors are online, but we do not proactively analyse search behaviour or develop strategies based on search.
(0): I do not know what people search for around our key therapeutic areas or what they find when they do.

5.

If your digital engagement strategy includes a website, do you know how and why people find the site? Have you included clear goals you want visitors to achieve, and are you monitoring user journeys that achieve these goals?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): Our websites have clear outcome goals, we track user journeys and use this information to improve outcomes.
(1): I have access to key analytics data for our websites, but I am not able to align this data with tangible outcomes or goals from user journeys.
(0): We do not measure user journeys on our website.

6.

Is your approach to social media proactive or reactive – are you deliberately starting social media conversations, or listening and responding? Whichever approach you choose, do you have a plan in place to monitor and respond to social media events in a timely way?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): I know why we use social media; we engage in dialogue and we have an approved plan in place for managing conversations and outcomes. We are able to identify the results of social media engagement in terms of business goals.
(1): We use social media to connect with people, but we do not proactively listen to conversations outside our chosen channels of engagement.
(0): We use social media channels to make announcements; or we do not get involved with social media.

7.

Think about internal stakeholder engagement. Are your colleagues from legal and medical departments envisioned about your digital engagement strategy? Are you talking with company employees about social media and how to use it responsibly, in professional as well as personal capacity?

Award yourself between 0 and 2 points:
(2): Colleagues across all relevant departments understand the role of digital engagement in achieving our objectives, and we have a clear policy on social media engagement that colleagues understand and find helpful.
(1): We work with colleagues in different departments to plan proactively for social media engagement.
(0): We do what we have to, to gain approval from legal and medical colleagues before launching digital campaigns.

How did you score?

OK, add up your scores from the above and see which category you fit.

11-14: Olympian

Congratulations! You have pioneered, envisioned colleagues, and have a healthy approach to digital engagement. You understand that it’s a competitive environment, and you have measures in place to engage in a way that is continually relevant to stakeholders. You are achieving demonstrable business results, and you know exactly why.

You already know that in the world of digital, new platforms for engagement constantly emerge and user behaviour is unpredictable. When you need a partner who you can trust to give you independent advice about keeping your digital engagement strategy in top shape, contact Creation Healthcare. Like you, we care more about your outcomes than your digital agency.

6-10: On the mend

It’s likely that there are some areas where you are very strong. Your overall digital engagement health might be hindered by one or more areas of weakness. You probably know what needs to be done to change things for the better and you are close to having a digital strategy that delivers continually improving results.

By addressing those areas you know need work, you will move on towards Olympian level. At that point, your digital engagement activities will enable you to compete effectively online, achieving planned outcomes against business goals. To get you to that next stage, you might want to speak with an independent consultancy who can help you to make those improvements. Contact Creation Healthcare to discuss how we could help.

0-5: Gasping for breath

First, the good news: from the questions above you will probably have identified the areas you need to focus on to improve things. From a healthcare point of view, you are either in very poor health, or you are newborn – just starting out in digital engagement.

Look at the areas where you scored lowest, and select one or two to focus on. Don’t try to change everything at once. When you feel that you need extra help or advice, Creation Healthcare will guide you through the steps to healthy digital engagement. Contact Creation Healthcare at any time for a confidential discussion.

If you would like an ally in the ever-changing world of healthcare engagement, or a second opinion on your self-diagnosis, talk with Creation Healthcare.

When it comes to supporting patient care in a relevant and engaging way through digital technologies, there is a huge amount of potential yet to be exploited. Last year we wrote about ’serious games’ for health, and Creation Healthcare’s Susi O’Neill outlined how technology can be used to make healthcare fun.

Serious games can provide a refreshing change for patients with long term diseases when it comes to their treatment, which could be especially effective in treating children with chronic diseases. That’s the thinking behind Bayer’s DIDGET™, a blood glucose meter designed for children with diabetes. As Sandra Peterson, Head of Bayer Medical Care explains:

“Up until now, blood glucose monitors have been created with adults in mind. This product was inspired by a parent of a child with diabetes, to directly address the challenges facing kids with diabetes and their parents. Bayer’s DIDGET meter offers play with purpose to encourage kids to regularly monitor their blood glucose and begin to view regular testing as fun.”

Connecting with games systems

The DIDGET™ system connects directly to Nintendo™ DS and DS Lite gaming systems, awarding points for good testing habits. After testinjg, children can transfer points to their Nintendo™ games devices and redeem them for new characters, costumes or mini-games.

Bayer’s DIDGET website includes a demonstration of the product and how it works

John Gregory, Professor in Paediatric Endocrinology at Wales School of Medicine, Cardiff University explains why this is important:

“One of the biggest challenges facing parents of children with diabetes is the constant struggle to instil the habit of regular blood glucose testing…”

“Bayer’s DIDGET meter can help ease the parent/child tension that testing often creates by adding an element of fun and rewards to the routine. Because it is designed with children in mind, Bayer’s DIDGET meter can transform a child’s blood glucose testing experience from something they have to do into something they want to do.”

Initially available only in the UK and Ireland, DIDGET was launched in Vienna at the Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) last September and is expected to be available in the US, Croatia and Slovenia shortly. In the US, the FDA (the US regulator) cleared the product last December.

What patients are saying

The launch of DIDGET in the UK has generated much industry and media interest, and a great many blog and social media posts mentioning the product. We carried out some simple research into social media conversations about the product, and found most of them to be from observers in technology companies and industry observers.

What we really wanted to know was what diabetes patients using the product thought of it. Naturally, with the product aimed at children aged between 5 and 14, we didn’t expect to find a highly active community of UK bloggers amongst target users. We did, however, find discussions amongst parents of children with diabetes based outside the UK expressing disappointment at not being able to obtain the product in their markets.

Amongst UK social media activity, it was interesting to learn that the product is not only being used by children. Analysing social media conversations amongst UK diabetes patients, we found comments such as this one, from a 23-year old diabetes patient living in England:

“The other meter I’ve been using at work for a few month now is the Bayer Didget. This meter is similar to the contour (uses same sticks) and I like it as you have the option to mark each test with a pre-meal, post-meal and small book marker on the system. Tests are quick (5secs) and don’t need much blood, so I prefer it to most others.”

The same user also comments on the game:

“The didget works with the Nintendo DS, it comes with a game and the tester can be plugged in the DS and good test results will reward players. The game is average, but I reckon it’d be good for getting kids to control their levels.”

An interesting observation from these comments is that it is the tester’s ease of use that appeals to the adult user of the product. Perhaps there’s a lesson here for medical equipment manufacturers: design for children, and adults will appreciate your products too.

When we announced the Healthcare Engagement Strategy Award winners in January, we awarded PatientsLikeMe the ‘Changing Healthcare Award‘ for having the engagement strategy we felt was most likely to change healthcare. Speaking with PatientsLikeMe co-founder Ben Heywood, it was clear that there was much more to come from the team behind what must be the world’s largest and fastest-growing set of specialist patient communities.

This month we’ve taken a look at new developments at PatientsLikeMe, including some exciting partnerships with pharmaceutical companies.

Novartis gets closer to patients

Earlier this month, PatientsLikeMe announced a new collaboration with Novartis to create a community for organ transplant recipients. It’s a brand new community and already includes over 600 patients.

Novartis CEO Joe Jimenez outlines why connecting with patients online is important for shaping the way Novartis works:

“We need to be closer to patients to understand their experience and their needs. An online experience allows patients to open up and share in a more personal and frank way.

“Our commitment to supporting this transplant community will shape the way we do our work, and ultimately help improve transplant patient outcomes now and in the future.”

This is the 12th disease community for PatientsLikeMe, and the second PatientsLikeMe community supported by Novartis who have already been actively involved in the multiple sclerosis (MS) community. In 2008, Novartis were amongst the first pharmaceutical companies to use social media for clinical trial recruitment when they engaged PatientsLikeMe’s MS community to boost registrations for a study.

UCB looks for adverse events amongst epilepsy patients

On the day we named the Healthcare Engagement Strategy Award winners, PatientsLikeMe announced a new epilepsy community in partnership with biopharmaceutical company UCB. In its first two months since then, the community has already grown to over 1,000 patients.

The partnership includes an interesting proactive patient safety initiative designed to capture adverse events associated with approved UCB epilepsy therapies, and report them to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. regulator).

Iris Loew-Friedrich, UCB’s Executive Vice-President, Chief Medical Officer says that the partnership with PatientsLikeMe will help UCB to understand patient needs:

“We believe this community will be a source of information that will allow us to better understand people living with epilepsy and may help us design clinical programs that incorporate real-world patient needs and experiences in a measurable way.”

Pharmaceutical companies: how to connect with patients

Pharmaceutical companies have many reasons to engage patients – for clinical trial recruitment; to learn about the needs of patients; to learn about use of their products; to educate patients about their treatment options – the list goes on.

Working in partnership with existing or emerging patient networks can be an excellent way to rapidly reach thousands of relevant patients online.

If you are looking to make the most of the Internet to engage patients, Creation Healthcare can help you to identify and develop suitable partner relationships, plan for their success, measure results and understand the strategic impact of the partnership.

Contact Creation Healthcare if you would like a confidential discussion about your patient engagement needs.

Information about regulation is at the top of pharma marketers’ wish list when it comes to digital marketing, according to research conducted by the organisers of DigiPharm Europe 2010 amongst delegates of last year’s conference.

Planning Europe’s largest pharma marketing conference

Creation Healthcare is working with the organisers of DigiPharm Europe 2010 conference, which takes place 28 September – 1st October in London and is set to be one of Europe’s primary events for digital engagement practitioners in pharmaceutical companies. We’re working together to plan a conference packed with highly relevant and current content, where new insights are shared and ideas are stimulated.

Surveying past delegates

As part of the research and planning process, delegates from last year’s successful DigiPharm Europe conference were asked about what matters to them most right now.

73% of respondents came from pharmaceutical and biotech companies, so the responses provide a good snapshot of what is on the mind of people in these industries.

Regulation is the biggest challenge

The outstanding majority of challenges faced by participants are in the area of regulatory, legal and compliance issues. Specific regulatory challenges identified included:

• Concerns about lack of regulatory guidance
• Fears about compliance issues
• Uncertainty about what is possible within regulations

Other areas participants highlighted amongst their current challenges included envisioning internal colleagues about digital; measuring return on investment; and enabling two-way engagement through platforms such as social media.

Most admired pharma companies

Respondents also identified organisations they considered to be taking an innovative approach in digital marketing and online communication, that they would like to hear about. Amongst these were some of their peers in healthcare and pharmaceutical companies, including Johnson & Johnson and Pfizer.

Insights from outside pharma

Respondents also indicated they would like to hear insights from outside of the world of pharmaceuticals. This request certainly rings true with our own experience at Creation Healthcare, where we are seeing an increasing interest in lessons that can be learned from the strategies of other brands and organisations that are pioneering digital engagement.

Could you share your experiences?

We’re looking for people in pharmaceutical companies who are solving the challenges faced by pharma marketers, to speak and share their experiences with peers. If that sounds like you, why not get in touch and find out more about how you could get involved?

For over a decade, not-for-profit organisations and governments have worked to close the so-called ‘digital divide’, a term for the gap in access to information and education between those with access computers and the Internet, and those without. This has largely been a gap between the rich and the poor, with the rich able to afford computers and Internet access. In the developed world at least, this divide is closing thanks in part to the work of such charities and governments, and partly to the increasing ease and reduction of cost of access. There’s still a long way to go and we’re privileged to have worked with some of the people making a real difference in this area.

Meanwhile, the concept of a ‘health divide’ between nations in the developed and developing world has been a well-documented reality for many years. In 2001, the British Medical Journal quoted Canadian bioethicist Peter Singer who argued that most of the sickness in the world is in the developing world, but most of the health care is in the developed world.

Explaining the background to the health divide, the British Medical Journal went on to point out that poor countries are deprived not only of drugs but also of scientific information:

The digital divide (measured by access to information on the internet) is more extreme than any financial or health divide [between rich and poor countries].

More recently in an interview with the World Health Organization, Dr Denny Vågerö, Scientific Advisor to the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, said that health outcomes in Europe are linked with social patterns.

“People in high-income and high-education groups have better health”, said Dr Vågerö.

The Internet empowers health consumers and patients

Today, a digital health revolution is taking place in the developed world. Patients and consumers are empowered to self-diagnose, research their conditions, share experiences with other patients and carers, discover learn about treatment options and clinical trials. People carry out research about their health using Youtube, and then go on to change their healthcare professional. Members of online patient networks discover that they have been misdiagnosed and their lives are dramatically changed as a result (for examples of where this is happening, see some of our articles on healthcare engagement).

It’s easy in English

From an English-speaking, Internet-connected viewpoint it is easy to celebrate the digital health revolution that’s taking place. A huge amount of information is available from all over the world in English. Research from Hitwise, for example, shows that UK Internet users favour certain US-based medicine websites amongst their most-visited health sites. Local country constraints placed by regulators on medicine information communication are effectively irrelevant to health consumers searching the entire world of English-language health information.

But what if you do not speak English? Search for health information in your preferred non-English language and you will be limited to information in that language. In many cases that information will come primarily from your own country.

The most successful social media initiatives, for example, have been launched first in the United States. Patientslikeme, for example, is proof of the impact of connecting thousands of patients together to share information and experiences.

A new digital health divide

Social media initiatives in English are able to engage a huge worldwide English-speaking population. So there is a risk of assuming that the English language – for many the primary language for international business and science – is able to bridge every international boundary and reach everybody in the developed world. The truth, of course, is that there are many people who are not able to understand English and for these, the vast wealth of online health information in English is effectively invisible.

The effect of this is that whilst the ‘digital divide’ separating the rich and the poor may be closing in the developed world as more people gain access to the Internet, there is a significant risk of creating a new ‘digital health divide’ between those confident in the English language and those not.

Evidence of the effect of language barriers on healthcare engagement can be seen in Europe, where there are very few successful healthcare social media initiatives amongst the 50 countries speaking an even greater number of languages. Some may consider that the primary challenge in Europe is lack of guidance from regulators. However I would suggest that the single biggest barrier to successfully connecting patients online in Europe is language. Cultural differences must surely play a role too, but without solving the language challenge, these will be insignificant.

The poor lose out once more

Now let’s consider the difference between those who can and cannot speak English. My understanding is that non-English speakers in the developed world include two, sometimes overlapping groups: the poor, and the aged.

The aged, who grew up in an era before the Internet, may never have learned English because it did not seem necessary. The poor, of all ages, are widely less likely to have accessed education at the same level as the rich and are generally less likely to speak English.

So, whilst the digital divide continues to keep the poor from accessing the Internet, even where this battle is being won, the digital health divide caused by language barriers keeps many of those who do get online from accessing resources that could result in better health outcomes. Once again we see Dr Vågerö’s point about high-income and high-education groups having better health.

What is being done?

The challenge of language barriers online is not a brand new concept. Tudiabetes.org, the online network for diabetes patients launched in the US and with an international membership, discovered early on that Spanish-speaking users were unable to use the website, so launched a Spanish-language version estudiabetes.org.

Google have also been successfully innovating in the area of languages, providing tools like Google Translate which will detect the language of a website and translate it to your preferred language. Covering 52 languages to date, this service has gone a long way towards breaking down the language barriers online.

Innovation required

There is much innovation still required to break down the digital health divide created by language barriers. And the prize is great – better health outcomes for everybody, regardless of education, wealth, language or nation.

New technologies or tools may be required, or new paradigms. The answer may be in existing digital platforms like social networks as we know them today, or in something entirely new. Google are currently working on automated voice translation – perhaps this will play a role when it emerges?

If you’re planning an international digital health strategy and want to avoid increasing the digital health divide, consider some of these ideas for connecting people across languages:

• Manual translation: translate content manually for use by other language speakers. This can be impractical for a dynamic, ‘web 2.0’ website or tool.
• Automated translation: encourage user to make use of tools such as Google Translate to read content in their own language
• Community translation using ‘crowd-sourcing’: encourage members of the community to translate content into their local language.
• Allow for language-specific resources such as language sub-networks in a social network, so that people in single language groups can at least connect easily with each other
• Make use of language-independent media such as photos, movies, and music

Finally, employ the services of a global healthcare engagement strategy consultancy like Creation Healthcare. Our international team of consultants means we have people located near you, who understand your culture and speak your language and the language of your patients. Why not get in touch to find out how we could help you.

During the 2010 ePharma Summit in Philadelphia, I used my time in between sessions to speak with a variety of pharmaceutical companies and pharmaceutical marketing consultants to interview them using a pocket Flip Ultra video camera (which I picked up at the airport as an afterthought).

Being a member of the judging panel for the recent Healthcare Engagement Strategy Awards, my immediate interest was in understanding their definition of ‘healthcare engagement’. I also tried to uncover common perceptions or vision for healthcare engagement for the year ahead.

I would like to encourage you to not simply add a comment to the Creation Healthcare YouTube channel page, but to be bold and post your own video response to the two questions. Let’s open the discussion through video, or if you would like to tweet your thoughts please use the hashtag #hcengagement

You can view these videos directly on our Creation Healthcare YouTube Channel, or at lower quality on the page below.

The many self-professing ‘Social Media Gurus’ remind me of the heady days when I first began teaching students how to be a ‘WebMaster’ in the mid to late nineties. Back then, a salary of $150,000 for a WebMaster was a good possibility, even for a novice who could ‘talk the talk’.Of course in our modern times an elementary-level school child can design and build a website – for nothing! Companies and individuals that simply build websites are very much in a commodity-based industry now. Then there was the ‘Y2K expert’…

My point is that the proliferation of ‘social media gurus’ are surely also destined to become a commodity, if they haven’t already. As with any channel, it is so important to understand that social media simply plays a role within the complete integrated communication channel mix.

During 2009 it was clear that social media was the ‘shiny new toy’ for late-adopting sectors such as government and healthcare – yet this concept of gathering around and gawking at the latest technology is surely detrimental to long-term engagement.

Imagine if I recommended that we define an “iPad Strategy” – you may think I was a little over-zealous.

Healthcare organisations and pharmaceutical companies are looking to us as engagement strategists, to think about how we can help them connect the right people, information and ideas in a meaningful way, for the long-term, via whichever emerging channels people choose to use in the coming years.

‘eHealth’ is not the same thing as ‘eMail’

I suppose we are only human, therefore we cannot help trying to label and compartmentalize every new technology for communication. Whenever a new technology is introduced, we seem to put an “e-” on the front of it. To be fair, this does makes sense in some cases. Take e-mail as an example. Most certainly we are talking about an electronic version of mail. Perfectly acceptable.

But what about ‘eHealth’? Are we really talking about “Electronic Health”? In my opinion it seems a little strange to talk about an entire industry sector which is fundamentally about life, cells, pharmacology, breath, and so much more as being electronic.

Indeed a speaker at the recent ePharma Summit was bold enough to suggest from the podium that all people with an ‘e-’ in their job title should resign before their position is absorbed back into ordinary business operation.

“After all, e-business is really just business”, they argued.

I’ll admit I smirked from the dark recesses of the room. So now I would like to discuss the latest “mHealth” fad in earnest.

mHealth is not the ‘next big thing’

During, and subsequent to, the ePharma Summit there have been a lot of people speaking and writing about ‘mobile’ as being the next big thing. Let me explain why I think it would be a mistake to put all your eggs in the mobile basket.

Firstly, I do not deny that mobile and portable devices are permeating society and that applications for these devices are creating a whole new level of engagement with brands and services. It is a fact that both the power and reach of these devices is growing exponentially. It is also true that these channels create exciting new possibilities for healthcare as an industry.

My problem is with the mindset that focuses on a device or a platform.

Focusing on content, not channel

As long as we continue to focus on technologies or channels, we miss the potential of the Internet – to make lives better through real-time communication and right-time, right-place information.

We have decades of experience incorporating and adapting to new channels. Yet there are simply not very many campaigns that truly focus on full integration and continuity of the customer journey regardless of the entry or exit point, or whether online or offline.

The still elusive ‘Holy Grail’ for commercial enterprise is to better integrate CRM and the Internet – to learn from the customer journey. It requires a lot of planning and organisation, a luxury which is rarely freely available, therefore demanding a conscious decision to make time for an overall cultural change.

Here are some practical concepts to focus on instead of ‘mHealth’ or ‘Social Media’.

• Anywhere
• Anytime
• Any device

Thinking this way brings the core of the initiative in line with the needs of the people who will engage with your campaign or message.

The real world and the vision of the future

I personally do not believe it will be too much longer before technology itself is transparent. This means that we will not think about whether we are connecting to the Internet, we will simply be connected. We are living in an age where 92% of all scientists ever born in the history of the world are alive right now. Likewise, 82% of all engineers.

A lot is happening behind the scenes, such that a technology avalanche is around the corner. It is exciting, but fickle. You only have to pause and think about how many mobile phone models you have had in your life so far – and that the pace of change is speeding up.

We may not even think about our ‘mobile phone’ or our ‘computer’ or our ‘television’ in the next few years, but these devices will simply be part of our life. Perhaps so-called “wearable computing” is just around the corner (i.e. clothes which are connected to your communications network). I hope that doesn’t mean we are going to see a new breed of ‘Wearable Computing Strategy Gurus’.

In any case, I have a metaphor which I use to illustrate the emphasis which is important in engagement strategy:

It is not the pipe itself that needs an engagement strategy, it is the plan for the people at either end of the pipe and what goes through the pipe that needs consideration.

So to all healthcare organisations, pharmaceutical companies, marketing professionals and communications teams planning an upcoming campaign, I encourage you not to be distracted by the shiny ‘Social Media’ piece, or the apparently even shinier ‘mHeath’ piece.

Spend some time talking with your Strategy Team about information needs, knowledge management, creating semantic information, bridging verticals, aligning channels with customers, and ensuring that return can be measured tangibly though all touch-points.

‘Engagement’ was a hot topic at the ePharma Summit, then again a few days later in New York where I presented the award winning engagement strategies from the HES Awards at the Hilton Times Square. [Note: For our readers in Europe, we have an Engagement Strategy event in London during April.]

Some of the thought-provoking questions which arose in discussions about engagement:

• Where does ‘engagement strategy’ sit within an organisation?
• Should each country have one, or each brand?
• Who should be involved in defining it?
• Is it an output of the marketing department, communications, IT, PR, brand teams, legal, policy, or perhaps a new division that we need to form?

The answer is potentially much more difficult, and yet fantastically rewarding for those companies that dare to embrace the future. Here it is;

“Healthcare engagement strategy sits above all functional departments of an organisation.”

Engagement Strategy affects the entire business

Think of it in this way. At the most fundamental level, an engagement strategy defines the idealized relationship between the company and the people who distribute or buy the company’s products and services. It will be a defining characteristic of the parent brand.

It is true that global change has introduced a paradigm shift for communications teams to consider, thanks to the advent and uptake of social media. The concept of engagement in a digital world absolutely requires ‘two-way’ connections, by default. Thus a challenge.

Regulated industries with established organisational structure and procedures are simply not yet in a position to move quickly enough – for the moment. Notwithstanding this, we know that we can help individual brands and departments to do their best in pushing the envelope within the constraints of the organisation, or country legal framework.

For the most significant result, there is only one way that an organisation can change en mass. From the top. Such a statement creates another more complex problem: Where is the top? Is it the global headquarters, a brand leadership team, or perhaps an individual territory or divisional head?

‘The top’, in my opinion, is the person or persons who have ultimate responsibility for the face of the brand and the relationship with the customer – globally.

The Internet nation

By now we should all know that the Internet has no rigid or territorial boundaries, according to established legal or geographic definitions. A semblance of difference exists in the use of top-level domain names such as .co.uk, .it, .eu, or .com, although these hardly define or limit the area of reach and operation.

This may be a hard pill to swallow, but it is the unavoidable truth.

The Internet is actually a single globe-wide ‘nation’ of information providers and information seekers. There is no governing body, no single law enforcement, and no passport to become a citizen of this nation. All that is required by an individual or group is a data connection and a computing device.

In our experience, the boundaries of this nation are lingual, not legal. Creation Healthcare research across many languages and countries has shown us that online health consumers do not look for information based on where they live. They seek answers based on their own personal health symptoms, using the language vocabulary that they have available to them.

Successful community platforms such as patientslikeme.com and tudiabetes.org are testament to the perceived value that patients experience when they are able to find another person, anywhere in the world, that has the same healthcare needs as their own.

For those who have only one language and are non-English speaking, there is a tremendous disadvantage for in terms of their possibilities for obtaining health information. Many of the best sources of health information online are still predominantly in English. We refer to this social injustice as the ‘Health Divide’, a phenomena affected by other larger issues such as culture, digital inclusion, literacy, economics, age, and more. You can read more about this in Daniel Ghinn’s article “Language barriers create a new digital health divide“.

.

Global Engagement Strategy

An engagement strategy will truly work with continuity and consistency when it has global definition. At Creation Healthcare we talk about “Global strategy, local knowledge”, because we know that rolling out a global strategy requires knowledge of the local legal and cultural context.

My quiet prediction is the first pharmaceutical company that gets this right will be the world leader in product sales within five years.

Seriously defining a global engagement strategy requires overcoming a few challenges. These needn’t be overwhelming. As with any corporate transformation it may take a lot of planning and hard work, but may be the determining factor which gives the winning competitive edge.

Internal considerations

Knowledge on how to do it

One of the most common obstacles to defining and implementing a global strategy is the lack of knowledge in the first place on how to even approach the subject.

Few companies have a global engagement strategy in place, even outside of pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers. They may have a strategy for global logistics, sales and research pipelines, core functions necessary for a global business, a global employment policy, a global outsourcing policy, yet what we are talking about is quite different.

In principle, the guiding question for defining global engagement strategy is, “how will our brands interact with people and be perceived by people all over the world?”. Note, this is not about any particular channel (social media included), it is a guiding principle.

Independent global strategic consultancies such as Creation Healthcare aim to understand the nuances of culture and language and how to navigate the differing legal frameworks, so that executive teams can workshop these issues in a fully informed way.

Designated budget

Budget for a lot of pharmaceutical initiatives are usually assigned by a brand team and may only be sufficient for one territory based on the cost-centre. There is little reason for such a team to think on a global scale, unless the corporate culture is modified to include motivational incentives. Alternately, the control of budget can be changed so that the purse strings are released only when a suitable global engagement strategy is in place.

Training

An international company may have very little time available for new initiatives, culture change, or training relating to new concepts.

Yet the most dynamic companies of this age are committed to company wide training every week. Employees of Google spend 4 hours each week on individual and group training, simply to keep up with the changes in their own product suite. How much more so do companies need to up-skill and become aware of the enabling technologies and platforms which could be simplifying and contributing to their own global engagement strategy?

A misinterpretation of ‘global’

For some organisations, any job title with ‘global’ in it means that the person is part of the “others”. That is, they are not in the principal territory for the company, but are in the ‘rest of the world’ division. In this situation there is an internal cultural change required, which can sometimes even necessitate organisational structure change too.

Centricity

If your company is based in the United States, or France or Asia, it is easy to be predominantly focused on that landscape in that territory. Often this territory garners the most sales. We call this ‘centricity’ i.e US-centric, Franco-centric etc.

Creation Healthcare has found that unless a company headquarters is actively interested in learning about the differences and inputs of other territories, any effectiveness of engagement strategy will be limited to the ‘home’ country.

Lawyers

Again a product of centricity, the corporate company headquarters will usually have the principal internal or external legal advisors. If these legal advisors are predominantly corporate lawyers based in (and experts in) the home country or are not strong in international law, there will not be a comprehensive understanding of the needs and legal constraints in other territories.

Lack of supporting infrastructure

Given that many companies have a heritage lasting decades and even centuries, it is no surprise that the corporate structure is less than nimble and is based on many years of doing business in the same way.

Infrastructure which can cause resistance to global engagement strategy includes; reporting structures, financial and accounting centres, communications teams, marketing teams, IT systems and so on.

I remember how a European company hired a new CEO from the US. When he started his first day he attempted to contact his family back in North America using Skype and Facebook. His computer network settings would not allow it, so he called up the IT Manager, who nervously explained that their corporate policy did not allow it – so that the company network was protected from danger and for the purpose of employee productivity. The forward thinking CEO instantly insisted that the ban be lifted and that he be given immediate access to these globally accepted industry tools.

It is an interesting story which makes a valid point. Perhaps no other individual would be able to bring about such a change so quickly. It is for this same reason that the only real hope of successfully defining a global strategy is when it is led from the top.

The acquisition and merger of pharmaceutical companies affords a unique opportunity to consider structural change which may lean towards globally-focussed leadership and global implementation.

Not thinking that a campaign can be global from the outset

If at the outset, a campaign is targeted at one territory, then it is no surprise that it may not ‘roll out’ particularly well on an international stage. Very few teams actually start with an expectation that a campaign or a strategy will be global, however this simple paradigm shift can make a massive difference to the operation and reach of marketing budgets.

One globally focused pharmaceutical company is ensuring that there are KPIs and bonuses for teams that think globally.

Ask yourself, “how readily useful in other territories is the work that you are producing for your own brand?”

Technology considerations

Geographic implementation challenges

If a campaign relies heavily on one platform which is state-of-the-art, there will automatically be many regions of both the developed and underdeveloped world that simply cannot take advantage of these assets.

Different preferences by language area

Creation Healthcare studies have shown that different language types have favored platforms for interaction. For example, it is very generally true that German speaking Europeans are more likely to engage using Twitter than Spanish speaking Europeans. Also in some therapeutic areas Spanish speakers use blogs and wikis as a source of healthcare information, whereas French speakers spend more time on forums. In many areas of digital engagement, the United States is approximately 12-17 months ahead of Europe in adoption trends.

Silos of information

A problem which exists in many corporations, not only within the pharmaceutical industry, is that there are usually a number of locations where information is held. Poor knowledge management and information systems are still holding back efficiencies. Such disparate silos of information mean that the possibility of discovering trends is very difficult, and the guarantee of consistent global communication unlikely.

This cascades down to inevitably create a disconnect between the various steps taken by a patient or healthcare professional as they experience the brand.

At the most basic level, media itself is not global

Aside from internal and technological constraints, it is an unfortunate fact that the media and communications industry are themselves not truly global in their reach or ability to roll-out global initiatives. A person buying a media package, or a license for one territory, may be confounded by obstacles when trying to reach into a different territory.

Health Divide

As mentioned previously; ageism, language, financial circumstance and many other factors mean that the provision and acquisition of healthcare services do not occur on an even playing field.

In conclusion

I’ll admit that this reads like a list of reasons why global engagement strategy isn’t possible. Perhaps this is a bridge too far for some. I am also aware that this is only an introductory list of items and that there are many other individual and unique considerations for every organisation.

In spite of this, we humans love a challenge. Many of the greatest and most significant legacies to the human race started with a problem or a grand vision of the future.

For those that are willing to embrace the changing globe, and the changing expectation of the people of the Internet nation – the world is yours.

If you would like to discuss these matters in a more confidential setting, please contact us.

If you have some thoughts which you would be happy to make public on this matter, tweet it out with the hashtag #globalengagement.

We’re looking forward to Health 2.0 Europe conference in Paris in April, where we will be taking part in a presentation of successful digital engagement by Pfizer.

The conference is set to be an exciting event showcasing innovation in healthcare taking place in Europe. As Denise Silber, president of Basil Strategies, Health 2.0’s partner for Europe, says:

“Health 2.0 Europe is a conference dedicated to how Web 2.0 and social media are transforming health care. Health 2.0 Europe will demonstrate that there is as much if not more to learn about what works in Health 2.0 in Europe, than from the single American market. We’ll be comparing theme by theme, success stories from 13 countries, hearing from 3 different national leaders, from patients, professionals, hospitals, payors, pharma….which will all make for some outstanding networking!”

I couldn’t put it any better myself! If you’re planning on attending, I look forward to seeing you there. If you have not yet booked a place, it’s not too late!

The conference takes place on April 6-7, 2010.

2009 was a year in which healthcare engagement took some giant leaps forward. By the start of the year, platforms for digital engagement had matured to the point where it was possible to reach and engage with a wider community of health stakeholders than ever before.

It was also a year of much challenge in healthcare engagement. At the start of the year, the US FDA wrote to no less than ten pharmaceutical companies warning them about the way they were using paid search. Some responded by becoming very cautious about their digital engagement, whilst others took the opportunity to find credible ways of engaging online. The FDA’s public hearing on social media in November brought together some of the most passionate debate about social media in healthcare, and the regulator’s role.

Outside of the United States, whilst some in healthcare complained at the constraints placed on them by regulators, others brought together their legal, medical and engagement specialists to find new opportunities to engage in the ever-changing world of digital media.

Today we are excited to announce the winners of the Healthcare Engagement Strategy Awards 2010. The selection process has led us all around the world, from Australia to Asia, Europe to the USA. Our international judging panel, to whom I owe a huge debt of thanks for their intelligent and constructive analysis, has reviewed and discussed campaigns from all corners of the healthcare landscape. It’s been an incredible journey of discovery that has led us to select the winners for achievements in improving healthcare through engagement.

Not surprisingly, it is in digital media that we saw the majority of nominations and finalists. But it’s worth noting that the most effective engagement – digital or otherwise – was from those who took a fairly ‘old school’ approach of honesty and straight talking. Credibility, it seems, never goes out of fashion amongst patients.

When we designed the process for the Healthcare Engagement Strategy Awards, we wanted to create a new kind of award. One that would recognise outcomes in improved healthcare through engagement, and would leave behind a legacy of insights for others to learn from. Our hope is that by identifying and sharing these strategic insights, we can inspire others to build on them and achieve even better outcomes through healthcare engagement in 2010.

For each of the winners below, we have written a brief report on what makes them special that I hope will serve not only as a celebration of their achievements, but as a guide for others to learn from. For those who wish to learn more in-depth strategic insights from analysis of our finalists, and to apply them to their own roles in healthcare organizations, we’re running a series of special events in the USA and Europe. It’s not too late to book your place at our New York or London events.

Finally, it is an absolute privilege for me to name the winners of the Healthcare Engagement Strategy Awards 2010.

Best Hospital or Clinic

Winner: Mayo Clinic

Best Patient Community

Winner: TuDiabetes

Best Health Issue Awareness Campaign

Winner: Skcin’s Computer Tan Campaign

Best Integrated Engagement Strategy

Winner: Get Real. Get a Prescription

Best Engagement Through Video

Winner: Johnson & Johnson Health Channel on Youtube

Changing Healthcare Award

Winner: Patientslikeme

People in Healthcare Engagement

We have also named four people who brought significant change to healthcare engagement in 2009. Watch these if you want to learn how to make a real difference!
Winners: Lee Aase; Manny Hernandez; Marc Monseau; Andrew Widger