For this month’s Advanced Strategic Marketing Journal Club, one of the articles we have chosen is by Itamar Simonson and Emanuel Rosen, “What Marketers Misunderstand About Online Reviews“ (Harvard Business Review) They provide us with a convenient and straightforward way to view and categorize the consumer influence mix in regards to accessing online user-generated content (e.g. online reviews) in their purchase decision making process. This influence mix is divided into the following three areas: “Their prior preferences, beliefs and experiences…(P), information from marketers (M), and input from other people and from information services (O).” For “habitual” purchase decisions, they say that consumers are more likely to depend on P and for less important decisions, consumers can be swayed by M; however, for more important or critical purchase decisions, consumers are seeking out O. To summarize:
With the growing importance of O (influence from others) and the lower impact of M (information from marketers), marketers need to make sure they know whether or not adjustments need to be made, and what those adjustments should be. Simonson and Rosen present an O continuum as a way to gauge how important O is for purchase decisions, and when where, “Others’ opinions [strongly] guide purchase decisions”. Ultimately, the authors recommend that when marketers are faced with purchase decision situations which are more O-Dependent then they should focus social media attention more on tracking “the sources of information their customers turn to [review sites, user forums, and other social media] and find the combination of marketing channels and tools best suited to the ways a consumer decides” versus “measuring individual consumers’ preferences, satisfaction, and loyalty” and relying on direct and more traditional marketing and advertising messaging.
This article is highly relevant and transferrable to medical decision making by patients. In academic circles, a great deal of research in healthcare decision-making is focused on the patient as an informed consumer. A most recent report by the Cochrane Institute reconfirmed the importance of patient “self-directed decision-making” as the key to a patient’s commitment to his/her treatment plan, improving compliance and adherence. (Unfortunately, there has not yet been enough research on self-directed decision-making demonstrating impact on clinical outcomes.) For the first time, this important report update also confirmed the significant and ever-rising impact of the internet and social media today on patient’s self-education and related decision-making, particularly when faced with acute or critical healthcare decisions (e.g. a consumer-as-patient may not use social media to find out the best way to treat a cold – where “P” and “M” will influence them the most, but will use “O” if diagnosed with a serious disease such as cancer).
We also can apply the above model to the doctor’s decision-making processes. P = his/her preferences, beliefs and experiences will guide the majority of his/her decisions about what treatments to use with the majority of his/her patients who are not acute. M = Studies conducted by Innovara and other companies confirm that doctors are less and less likely to be willing to accept the pharma or healthcare marketers’ information, but may be willing to try something different when not facing an acute or critical patient challenge. O = Doctors are increasingly depending upon the internet and continue to regard thought leaders in their fields when considering acute or serious healthcare decisions for their patients.
What should the modern day healthcare marketer do?
The authors suggest that companies in this situation should “focus on generating user interest in particular products and promoting an ongoing flow of authentic (and positive) content from O on the internet….”
In regards to patients, we have begun to see the emergence of the patient thought leader offering advice and information for other patients. This can be a risky situation for patients who may be too trusting of the internet and what is posted online. Telling patients not to look online is a losing battle though, they will look, and they will be influenced by what they are reading and talking about on social media sites. In regards to MDs, this might bring us back to familiar territory with KOLs. The channel may be new, the players may be shifting to a more technically savvy group, but the situation of influence by leading minds in medicine is still a critical factor.
A critical step in this process is making sure that you are following local law and company rules, such as the ones Roche has issued on their website. The FDA in the US has recently relaxed some social media rules with its January 2014 interactive promotional media guidance. Make sure that you are aware of your local laws and company rules, and make sure you do not miss any changes, which happen often enough to keep an eye out for them. Here is an example of company guidelines for social media form Roche – http://www.roche.com/social_media_guidelines.pdf.
Here are some questions that my colleague here at Innovara who leads our web-based initiatives, including eMarketing Essentials training for healthcare industry, Aaron Carpenter, would recommend you think through during this process:
We’ll be continuing to look at development of the industry and marketing know-how involving social media along with this concept of “patient’s self-directed decision-making” in the ASM Journal Clubs to come. Meanwhile, please do share your own experiences – positive and negative – with your colleagues who are meeting now. We all have much to learn and working together, can advance industry’s effectiveness to help shape disease management and serve the greater and collective healthcare needs of our populations, providers, policy and payers.
Review by Barri Blauvelt and Aaron Carpenter, Innovara, Inc.
