At a recent meeting of the Pharmaceutical Learning and Organisational Development  network, it was agreed that a change in sales training tactics could help address the challenging market conditions by  increasing motivation and resilience for those involved in the sales process.

To address this need, Sales-Motivations have partnered with Wellards to deliver cost effective e-learning based sales performance solutions to help pharmaceutical and medtech teams maintain and grow their motivation and sales performance in these difficult times, without the cost and inconvenience of traditional training. 

To find out more, please visit www.sales-motivations.com, or for a free trial of Sales Motivations, visit www.sales-motivations.com/free1day,  or contact us on +44(0)845 531 4125.

With jobs at a premium and the cost of living continuing to rise, job security has suddenly become a main priority for employees.

The global recession has affected each and every one of us in one way or another. Sweeping job losses throughout the medical sales sector – and in the pharmaceutical industry in particular – have seen even the most experienced personnel joining the queue at the job centre. For those lucky enough to have avoided the dreaded axe, it seems to have made us appreciate our job a whole lot more.

Last year was somewhat of a breakthrough year for as far as job security is concerned. Results from last year’s Pf Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey highlighted how job security had gone from a passing thought to one of the main motivating factors for respondents. Ranked behind salary, relationship with manager and work-life balance in the 2009 survey, job security was suddenly thrust into the top-two motivating factors last year.

It has maintained its position this year behind salary as the second highest motivating factor after pharmaceutical companies continue to introduce ‘efficiency’ plans in an attempt to sustain profits and counter bleak pipelines. During an uncertain last twelve months it would seem that satisfaction levels in job security have also improved. Job security moved from 14th position last year to 11th in the latest set of results. Are companies doing more to reassure staff their jobs are safe, or are employees learning to live with the fact that their week at work may be their last?

Moving on
Attitudes towards job security have also affected respondents’ outlook on where they’d like to be within 12 months’ time – see Figure 1. In last year’s survey, 15% of respondents indicated they were searching for a move away from their current employers with 56% content to stay where they were. However, this year’s results show a slight increase in those figures with 13% of people within the medical sales sector looking for a new job and 59% happy where they are. 

Its men that indicated a stronger desire to change companies with 17% wishing to move organisations and a further 24% saying it was a possibility. However, female respondents were less sure about joining a new organisation with only a tenth wishing to move away from their current employers.

The importance now placed upon job security may also arise from the fact that employees are still very mindful of a turbulent few years – despite a glimpse of light at the end of a very, very dark tunnel. Dr John Philpott, Chief Economic Adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) recently told a panel of directors from Yorkshire that modest economic growth in the UK would see unemployment levels stabilise this year. He also discussed the potential of a stronger recovery resulting in a sudden, sharp fall in unemployment levels and employers again going on the hunt for talented staff to meet increasing demand.

Job security works both ways. It shouldn’t be something that only staff on the ground worry about. Stability and medium to long-term assurance ensures employees are engaged and motivated enough to be committed to company goals and objectives.

Although job security may be a state of mind, there are ways of improving one’s mindset. If a company can ensure or encourage career development and progression, an employee will feel a greater sense of loyalty and commitment. With this in place a sense of dedication allows employees to focus on their individual skills and capabilities and become a consistent performer. In turn, an employer gets a happy and productive employee in the work place.

Trust levels
However, it’s not always that easy it? Memories of colleagues and friends being made redundant can last for a very long time. Geoffrey James, argues on the website inc.com, that job security is defined by who you are, what you do and who you trust. If you’re an individual who is happy going along with your job, undertaking everyday tasks and playing second-fiddle to other staff then you’re more than likely to receive your marching orders, James says. Individuals should strive to stand out from colleagues and be different to the majority of the workforce. “If you really want job security, there must be something about you that’s different, that makes you more relevant than anybody else who does what you do. More importantly, other people must perceive that difference and see it as valuable,” he says.

Then, of course, there’s the trust issue. Do you think you can rely on your boss not to put a red cross next to your name if there are further redundancies? James – who pens one of the world’s most-visited sales-oriented blogs – suggests a novel approach to assessing trust whilst at work or in the field. People that you speak with on a daily basis – be they family, friends, colleagues or business associates – should be placed into three categories: those who trust you completely, those who moderately trust you, and those who vaguely trust you. When these have been grouped together, remove the people in the final two categories – these are the people unlikely to return sales calls, James adds – and then calculate the number of people who you believe completely trust you. If, he says, you have more than 20 people on that list, then you have a greater sense of job security. If you haven’t, it might be time to start building some bridges.

So there you have it. Job security ultimately comes down to who you can trust and who trusts you. Can you hold on to trusted colleagues at work whilst the UK tries to climb out of a double-dip recession. Or, are the people who you believe you rely on merely providing a crocodile smile during work hours? It’s probably wise to start drawing up that list...

Maxine Vaccine considers the motives of politicians, clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry and concludes that no matter what direction you approach it from, health is never a simple issue.

My last blog, ‘Life in the balance’, provoked some interesting feedback. I had argued that the current government’s application of free-market principles to the NHS would encourage those doctors who saw what they do primarily as a business rather than as a service. An industry expert commented that a series of health policies over the past two decades, from GP fundholding to QOF indicators, have promoted the same mentality.

This of course is true. Not only are New Labour’s fingerprints all over the current phase of NHS reforms, but the medical profession has never been unified in its perspective on the relationship between health and financial priorities. Different doctors have different attitudes – or have various attitudes in different proportions. Where important decisions are concerned, most of us have mixed motives.

However, it’s rather in the nature of blogs, Twitter feeds, press releases and Parliamentary statements that we pretend otherwise. “Only one thing matters to me” is the opening clause (explicit or implicit) of almost any public statement. “I’m torn” would be bad business, bad politics and bad bedside manner... but it would, almost every time, be the truth.

So let’s be clear that when doctors say “We are motivated only by clinical priorities” it is not necessarily the pure truth. They are motivated to succeed at a professional and business level, and that may extend to practice finances. When the BMA decided to oppose the Heath and Social Care Bill it was not only on clinical grounds, but because the business proposition did not appeal despite its lucrative potential. Maslow’s ‘hierarchy of needs’ is a relevant concept here: the fear of losing control may override the desire to increase your income.

And when politicians say “Our priority is only to improve services” that is not necessarily the pure truth either. Most comment on the NHS reforms has focused on whether the Government is right to believe the new system will deliver better patient outcomes. But is that the only issue? Politicians are not doctors, and – as recent events have proved – they don’t even want to listen to doctors. It’s not cynical to see NHS reform in terms of wider political priorities for society and the economy: that is precisely how politicians see it.

There’s no doubt that Andrew Lansley would like to see patient outcomes improve. But his sense of what can achieve that does not come from expert medical opinion: it comes from the political ideology that assumed privatisation would make the rail service cheaper, safer and more reliable. At least as important, from his viewpoint as health secretary, is the priority of breaking down the national and public sector employment basis of health workers, so that local employers can set their own terms and conditions.

As for the pharma industry – well, it depends on who you talk to. Your CEO will tell you (and the media) that everything your company does is driven by a passionate commitment to making a difference for patients. The public largely believe that everything your company does is driven by the need to make a difference for shareholders. The truth is that even a humble field representative is motivated by a complex blend of factors: short-term targets, longer-term business growth, customer relationships, clinical success, public reputation and the need to laugh once in a while.

Like mixing a drink, medical sales is all about finding the right balance – and not losing your own.

Maxine’s views are not necessarily those of Pharmaceutical Field.

The UK pharmaceutical sales force and Daniel Bedingfield don’t seem to have that much in common on first inspection. Or do they…

It’s in our nature to want to succeed and develop. All of us have experienced a winning mentality somewhere along the way. While we might not always show it, all of us want to have a metaphorical gold medal around our necks. There’s nothing better than being the best.

Pf’s Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey celebrated its 10^th anniversary last year. From 2001 onwards, salary has always ruled the roost where motivation is concerned. It makes the world go round in the medical sales industry. But back then, closely on its coattails was personal development. Opportunities were there for employees, promotions were available and money was to be made. Even Daniel Bedingfield earned his first number one in the charts! A decade on, nobody cares about personal development anymore. Even Bedingfield can’t get thru this.

Last year’s survey results showed personal development was voted as the ninth most important motivational factor – participants admitted they appreciated a pat on the back more than improving their own skills. A year before that it struggled to get in the top ten motivating factors. Driving a nice car was more important.

So what changed in a decade? Why did employees within the medical sales industry stop wanting to progress with their own careers and be happy to sit and count their wages? When did they become content to stay on the same rung of the ladder? Standing still gets you nowhere in life.

A lot has to do with job security. After years of ‘streamlining’ and workforce reductions, why take the risk taking on a new position, especially at a new company? Everyone knows it’s last in, first out, right? Personal development has been pushed to the back burner in favour of putting food on the table – you can’t blame people for adopting this mentality.

However, it can’t stay like this forever. In the modern day healthcare environment there’s a requirement for sales executives to learn new skills to deal with very real challenges. Personal development has again got to take priority. Those standing still and happy to use the same techniques, which may have served them adequately over the last ten years, will quickly be overtaken by those aiming for that metaphorical gold medal. Yet it doesn’t have to be like this.

Personal development doesn’t have to take over your life. Online literature has made it easier than ever to learn new skills or techniques whilst you’re taking a break on the road or from the comfort of your sofa. Alternatively, convenient day courses provide timely refreshers. This month’s issue of Pf – out on 27 March – offers advice from experts on how to up-skill in the current environment. You’ll learn that personal development has never been more important.

One thing is for sure, the sales force cannot maintain its apathy towards training and development. In a changing market, we gotta get thru this.

The 2011/2012 survey is now open. Have your say on what matters the most to you here.

Dr R K Powar continues her series of blogs on management skills by looking at the application in the workplace of Maslow’s theory of human needs and their impact on motivation.

Most of us have heard of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, probably coming across it in training sessions, team building, management courses etc. However, it is something that is applicable to almost everything we do, including the working part of our lives.

Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs states that each of us is motivated by needs. Our most basic needs are inborn, having evolved over millions of years. Maslow's theory helps to explain how these needs motivate us all.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs states that we must satisfy each need in turn, starting with the most important: the basic needs for survival itself. It is only when the lower-order needs of physical and emotional well-being are satisfied that we are concerned with the higher-order needs for influence and personal development. However it must be noted that if the things that satisfy our lower-order needs are swept away, we are no longer concerned about the maintenance of our higher-order needs.

The Hierarchy of Needs as defined by Maslow is:

1. Biological and physiological needs – air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.

2. Safety needs – protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc.

3. Belongingness and love needs – work group, family, affection, relationships, etc.

4. Esteem needs – self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc.

5. Self-actualisation needs – realising personal potential, self-fulfilment, seeking personal growth, etc.

Levels 1 to 4 are deficiency motivators (we are driven by lack); level 5 is a growth motivator (we are driven to achieve growth) and is relatively rarely found.

Organisations spend a great deal of time and resources motivating staff, usually by offering training, and all too often it is thought that when employees have had training they will automatically become experts at understanding their own needs as well as those of their work colleagues. The two examples below show that the crippling of needs is usually a cause of stress, particularly at level 4:

• You can’t motivate someone to achieve their sales targets (level 4) when they're having problems with their marriage (level 3).

• You can’t expect someone to work as a team member (level 3) when they're having their house repossessed (level 2).

So while Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs can be useful in providing depth in understanding people, it can only prove useful if there are good listening and communication skills in place and the time and trouble is afforded to learn about the needs of staff in the workplace, i.e. using the softer skills of management.

Dr R K Powar has over ten years’ experience in the pharmaceutical industry and provides a range of tailored programmes to help staff improve on their Softer S’s skill base.

E-mail: r11osyconsultants@yahoo.co.uk

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/r11osyconsultants

Twitter: @ravipowar

Fearless pharma blogger Maxine Vaccine takes a look at some key issues affecting the industry – this week, a seasonal recommendation for anyone driven to drink by the pre-Christmas routine of motivational meetings and on-message corporate communications.

This week, in the festive spirit, I’m going to recommend something nice. (I’ll be carving the roast beast next.) It’s a small book of captioned photos, ideal for an office Secret Santa – especially if you’ve drawn the boss’ name. The book is Management Boll**ks by Richard Havers (Mirrorpix, £7.99).

As we’re not appearing on the shelves of W.H. Smith’s, we can safely inform you that the theme of Richard’s book is management bollocks. Otherwise known as empty jargon, business cant, doubletalk, Newspeak or just plain bullshit. The common language of all the piss-poor presentations, mind-numbing meetings and cretinous conferences you’ve ever had to get through by painting wide-open eyes on your eyelids – and afterwards, pretend it all had motivational value.

Management Boll**ks is as simple as its theme is tortured. It consists of images from old films and newsreels captioned with management-speak. There’s a night-club manager saying to three hostesses with identical skimpy outfits and hairstyles: “Good, I see you’ve all read the corporate identity manual.” And a butler saying to a despairing baroness: “I think we need to keep going forward in order to achieve a win-win, while not losing sight of our exit strategy.” And a very drab middle-aged man leaning over a terrified young lady and muttering in her ear: “Cheryl, I want you to be part of our ambitious change agenda.”

The beauty of this book is how it gently demonstrates the absurdity of office dialect by showing how far it is from any real experience. This is not the language of the street, the sports field or the home, however much your boss may pretend it is. This is the dead air of pretension and intellectual decay. It has all the spontaneity of a politician’s jokes, all the natural grace of a drunk trying to prove his sobriety by walking in a straight line.

Make it your New Year resolution not to think outside the box, push the envelope, identify the win-win, benchmark the blue sky or future-proof the bottom line. Because if you send out bullshit, you will undoubtedly get nothing but bullshit back. And you’ll deserve it.

Maxine Vaccine is keen to receive your feedback on these and other pharma industry issues. Be nice (but don’t be NICE)!

Despite huge investments into CRM systems some pharma companies still struggle to get all of their staff to embrace and fully interact with them. Pf’s Iain Bate explores why, and what the future holds for technology in the industry.

There’s no doubt that technological developments have changed the way we live and work from year to year – maybe even from month to month in the 21st Century. But has the world of healthcare been travelling in the slow lane of the intergalactic highway?

The potential that technology offers to pharma, and the general world of healthcare, is enormous. But is the pharmaceutical industry, and its staff in particular, using it to maximise the returns of billion-dollar investments?

It would seem that technology is the ‘buzz word’ on the lips of a few of healthcare’s major players at present. The DH recently invited people to nominate their favourite health-related mobile phone ‘app’ – be it for keeping fit, to locate a hospital or chemist, or helping to manage an illness. Creative minds were also asked to design their own health app with a panel of DH judges deciding on their favourite from the most popular entries.

Health Secretary Andrew Lansley says it’s the Government’s intention to give people better access to information using modern technology and the exercise is a “unique opportunity for the NHS and those who develop apps to not only showcase their work, but to bring to life new ideas and realise true innovation in healthcare”.

As part of the DH’s technology revolution, patients may also soon be offered online consultations with their GPs using programmes such as Skype. Clearly the Government is embracing the convenience technology offers to patients, but are other sectors in healthcare as interested? It would seem there is still some way to go.

 

In two minds

Pf ’s 2010/11 annual Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey suggests that not all respondents are completely convinced by the power of technology in the workplace. Although the Survey – which relates to 2010 and the early part of this year – found that nearly 90% of respondents have access to a CRM system, only 43% find time to use it in the field and more than a fifth of people fail to accurately record post-call reports with important clients.

Questions have to be asked as to why, despite multimillion pound investment and training by pharma companies, there remains a percentage of staff that still ignore the power and potential of the technology at their finger tips.

Results from the Survey reveal there’s no difference in uptake by key account managers, primary and secondary care representatives, those in primary care roles only, firstline sales managers and secondline sales managers and the use of CRM technology between differing age groups – although surprisingly 10% of respondents in these positions with less than two years of experience said they did not have a CRM system, compared to just 5% more experienced colleagues.

The launch of the iPad in March 2010 promised to revolutionise the way sales representatives, and those in similar roles, use CRM systems in the field. However, nearly three-quarters (70%) of respondents from the Survey are still presently sent out with laptops containing their customer-relationship systems.

When quizzed on what they’d change about the hardware which houses their system, the majority of respondents said that their CRM was too awkward to carry, with poor running systems an issue and that batteries ran out too quickly. Apple claims its second-generation iPad now enjoys ten hours of use away from a plug socket in the field.

Yet the switch to the latest convenient tablet devices may not necessarily be about high levels of investment, it may be down to maximising value for money as Paul Shawah, Vice President, Multi Channel Strategy, Veeva Systems explains. “I would say the life cycle of devices within the industry is generally about three years, sometimes a little bit longer,” he said. “When a company invests in new technology they typically depreciate that over that period, so they don’t want to replace it in the field for that time to maximise their investment.

“However, with the introduction of game changing technology like the iPad, this has changed. We see a number of our pharmaceutical customers are justifying the business case to move to the iPad even before their tablets are fully depreciated. This speaks to the business benefit that pharma expects to achieve from the iPad and the related applications only available on that device.”

A convenient shield

Despite technology eliminating mundane process in the workplace and offering the potential to assist employees and improve their efficiency at work, it has historically been used as a shield to mask poor performance and abused as a means to waste company time – a recent online survey by AOL found that nearly half of Americans (44.7%) rank surfing the web as their primary activity during the two hours they ‘waste’ each day at work.

But it would seem that a high number of respondents do value the opportunities CRM offers. Almost two-thirds (64%) said they always enter correctly the amount of customer sales they make into their CRM. But 21% admitted they fail to always report face-to-face meetings with clients. More surprisingly, over a fifth of participants said they do not always record the number of products they had sold to clients.

The lack of honest accuracy is surprising considering the amount of time spent using CRM systems each day. A third said they spend between one and two hours a day on their system with a fifth spending three hours or more on their CRM. During their time using the management system, more than half (55%) said that call reporting was the most useful feature.

Although respondents were less impressed with the KAM abilities of their software with only 19% believing it to be the most useful facility. When questioned about what they would change given the chance, 45% said they wanted an improved database, over a quarter (28%) called for their system to be overall more useful, and 18% said they would prefer their CRM to be easier to use.

 

The next level

But what of the future of CRM systems? Will they be easier to use and have improved customer databases? David Round, General Manager, UK, Cegedim Relationship Management, says the regular interaction we now have with technology means we’ve all come to expect the latest developments.

“End users are significantly more ‘technology-savvy’ than their counterparts of even five years ago,” he explained. “If anything, the challenge for companies is to ensure that they provide their end users with the types of technology that they use as consumers. It’s also important to focus on the usability of your software to ensure maximum use. Technology companies – and pharma – must work together to develop a better understanding of the interaction, to ensure it meets users’ needs in the field.”

One main reason that users have become more ‘savvy’ is down to the use and interaction with social media. Whether at home or at work, websites such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and most recently Google+ have driven an increased use of various forms of technology – especially on devices such as smartphones or tablet devices which reps are calling for in the field.

Pharma companies, both in the US and UK, have flirted with the idea of fully embracing the power social media harnesses, but at present are restricted by the PMCPA’s Code of Practice and by the FDA – who has again delayed the publication of its guidance.

The FDA says it is “difficult to provide a timeframe... due to the extensive work and review process, or ‘Good Guidance Practices’, which ensures that FDA’s stakeholders are provided well vetted guidances articulating FDA’s current thinking on a topic”.

Although the FDA may be unsure on how to direct healthcare companies, David Round believes the introduction, both professionally and personally, of social media has had an impact on staff and their expectations.

“For the modern professional person, much of their everyday life is conducted online – for example on shopping, utilities, insurance or booking a holiday – and many users then want the same level of capability from the tools they use in their job,” he added.

Dan Goldsmith, General Manager, Veeva Europe, agrees there has been a significant shift in the way we operate and interact due to our experiences online through tagged posts or hash-tagged searches. But although the 800 million users on Facebook – more than half which ‘log-on’ every day – and 175 million people on Twitter have no problem saying hello to friends, pharma finds it more difficult reaching out to people.

“Social media create a new avenue for healthcare dialogue and will only continue to pervade our lives,” said Dan. “Consequently, I believe that pharma faces two challenges. The first is to decide how to participate in the online dialogue with stakeholders and then to create those interactions through the channels we’re all familiar with, such as Facebook and Twitter.

“The second is to figure out how to leverage the model of social dialogue internally to support stronger collaboration and more focused communication among employees. Already, we see some companies taking advantage of the latest social business tools to connect employees with one another and to access and share information in real time.”

Clearly CRM solution providers understand the potential modern technology and social media platforms offer to companies. Whether pharma and its workforce get fully up to speed on the intergalactic highway sooner or later remains to be seen.

Are you lacking motivation and confidence at work? Do you feel anxious about the security of your job? As employment statistics continue to deteriorate, we could put these feelings down to the saddening status of the economy, but is that really a good enough excuse to work in a job you don’t enjoy?

Don’t get me wrong, we should always feel grateful for our job, especially in the current climate. But our jobs are what make us get up in the mornings. So, shouldn’t we make the most of our 40+ hours a week?

In any case, if you’re feeling down in the dumps at the moment and have realised that it’s not the economy, but actually, you’re not enjoying your job, it could be time for a change of scene.

Ask yourself these questions:

• How long have you be in your current job?
• Has your salary increased since your last job?
• Are your responsibilities at work increasing or decreasing?
• Are you involved in important decision making at work?
• Do you feel challenged by your role?
• Are you just hopping from one employer to the next staying in the same position?
• Have people hired after you been promoted faster?
• Do your colleagues seek out work advice from you?
• Do you dread going to work?

It’s pretty obviously which of these answers are good and which are bad signs of what you should do next.

It may be a case of considering other roles, as it’s true what they say: It’s much easier to find a job if you have a job. In which case, give an honest analysis of your career as it stands and assess your long-term objectives. Are you doing what you always wanted to? Is your current job a step in the right direction?

If not, or you can think of something better and more relevant to your personal career goals, no time like the present to sort yourself out. It’s only too easy to become too comfortable with your job and falling into a career slump.

But, it could also mean that you should think about discussing your feelings with your boss. Ask how you can contribute more to the company, and use your initiative to put forward some ideas to keep things fresh and involving. You’re more likely to enjoy your work if you’re doing different things and being recognised for your efforts.

A career rut is never easy and new opportunities can often feel out of sight. But if you’re feeling unmotivated and lacking stimulation in your job, it’s worth having a serious think about what you should really do.

Visit PharmaJobs for the latest vacancies in pharmaceutical sales.

A highly-skilled workforce is a must in today’s competitive business environment. But as many companies slash their budgets in the relentless pursuit of efficiencies, is employee training becoming yet another victim of austerity?

Companies that fail to invest in talent will undoubtedly learn the hard way that this is a short cut to failure. Chris Ross presents a crash course in the current market for training and development.

There are mixed views on whether companies’ training and development activities are taking a hit in the current global economy. Recent mid-year analysis in the US revealed that global spend on training this year has been around 7–9% higher than in 2010. But Training 2011, a study by UK market intelligence company Key Note, presents a different trend.

The report estimates that spending on off-the-job training by UK private and public sector employees fell by 3.2% in the year to April 2010 – and that spending on external trainers dropped by around 17% in the same period. The study reports that training investment most likely dropped further by around 2.5% up to April 2011, but forecasts a slight recovery of 1.5% by April 2012. These are worrying times.

Companies are desperately seeking to increase their capabilities as the markets in which they operate are changing; but to drive real growth, continued investment in talent is essential. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) says that whilst organisations will undoubtedly expect people to do more with less, they should not expect employees “to want to do more with less learning and talent development.”

Learning and Talent Development 2011, the CIPD’s annual survey report, revealed that resources and budgets for learning and development had decreased in two-fifths of organisations in the past year, whilst a third of companies had reduced their headcount.

The study showed that although most businesses have a training budget, in most cases these have not only suffered cutbacks, but are also expected to cover a broad range of activities and costs. Unsurprisingly, the majority of budgets cover items such as external courses and conferences (93%), hiring external consultants and trainers (83%) and books/training manuals (81%).

But for two-fifths of the organisations surveyed, the training budget is also expected to cover fixed costs and salaries for in-house trainers. Clearly, the battle to upskill the workforce is being played out in the most testing of circumstances.

 

The employment market

The employment market is certainly creating challenges for employers and candidates alike. Unemployment is rising as organisations continue to reduce their workforces – but those companies that are hiring are finding that many job applicants are not sufficiently skilled and are therefore unsuitable for employment.

Conversely, in a stagnant job market, those who are in employment appear reluctant to move. Talented individuals are staying put. But is enough being done to nurture and develop them? Or are they too likely to stagnate as opportunities fail to emerge?

Likewise, less talented but generally reliable employees –the ‘safe pairs of hands’ that populate every organisation – are in many industries failing to receive adequate skills development, leading to an uncomfortable paradox: they are safe in their roles, but as their markets evolve they are not ‘fit for purpose’ to perform them.

In difficult times, the need for increased investment in human capital is significant. Training and talent development is a major priority for businesses large and small. In a market characterised by growing shareholder expectations and shrinking operational budgets, what are the options for training and developing the workforce?

Learning and Talent Development 2011 says that most companies are continuing the 2010 policy of “switching to more cost-effective development practices”. This has seen organisations reduce their use of external training service providers and instead increase in-house development programmes, internal knowledge-sharing events and coaching by line managers. In addition, the use of e-learning solutions continues to grow.

Technology-led learning tools are becoming increasingly popular across Europe. Training today, training tomorrow, a present-day analysis of learning trends across Europe by Cegos Group, says that uptake of solutions such as ‘serious games’, mobile learning and online learning has grown considerably. This, it says, is driven by an emerging younger demographic in the workplace, and widespread corporate objectives to reduce costs yet maintain productivity.

Learning solutions that are delivered in a medium that is more familiar to this emerging user-group, and that mirror the new “social, global and mobile environment”, are not only easier to integrate into employees’ daily activities, but are also considered more engaging and effective. According to Cegos Group’s 2011 survey, half of those trained in Europe have used informal learning tools such as videoconferencing, wikis, blogs, forums and podcasts.

 

Old school still rules

So the rise of e-based learning solutions is tipped to continue. But, despite rhetoric to the contrary, not at the expense of traditional learning tools. Face-to-face training remains popular – external courses, seminars and conferences continue to play a valuable educational role.

In heavily knowledge-based and technical industries such as life sciences, traditional methodologies remain both popular and effective. In medical markets, despite the obvious growth of e-learning tools, tried-and-tested lecture-style learning still appears to be the preferred option, with many participants choosing it as their favoured route for CPD.

The CIPD study shows that external conferences and events are rated as being among the most effective learning methods for leaders, potential leaders and middle management. Despite this, more than a third of companies (34%) have reduced their use of external events in the past year.

In other areas, classroom-style lectures are being replaced by individual one-to-one sessions that enable more individualised, targeted training. There has been significant growth in activities such as coaching and mentoring, which are being recognised as important tools to encourage individual accountability and nurture talent.

According to the CIPD survey, coaching takes place in more than four-fifths (86%) of companies polled, with its main objectives being to support performance management, prepare people for leadership roles and assist learning and development.

A third of companies employ coaches, while two-fifths hand responsibility for it to line managers. Only one-fifth use external consultants for coaching. Group training – such as team coaching sessions and collaborative workshops – is evolving to become more interactive, customised and flexible – giving facilitators the opportunity to adapt training quickly, based on employee feedback and needs.

 

The need for speed

Speed is emerging as a key consideration in companies’ training and development strategies. Businesses are becoming more impatient. They want their employees to develop quicker and to become more proficient and productive faster than ever before. Such corporate impatience is, in fact, often mirrored by learners themselves. Employees want the fast track to success and, where it exists, will choose the crash course over longer-term learning.

As a result, multimedia and web-based training tools have seen a real surge in uptake. The benefits are clear, but the approach is not without its challenges. The dropout rate in self-monitored online training is apparently high, with too many participants failing to complete courses.

Developers need to work hard to ensure that online courses are engaging and exploit the opportunities for interactivity and connectivity that the medium provides. Critics claim that too many courses appear little more than traditional training manuals that have been uploaded to an online format.

Clearly, as the global business environment continues to evolve in challenging times, training models and methodologies are having to adapt to meet changing needs. The emergence of collaborative, interactive and dynamic learning tools, enabled by rapid advances in technology, have opened up new opportunities for training and development – but it only really completes the circle of learning solutions available to the market.

Training is, after all, demand-driven and should be designed to meet the varying, and often individual, needs and tastes of its end users. As such, training managers should continue to consider the full suite of learning tools open to them – in dialogue with learners and their line managers, to find the most effective solutions to meet organisations’ and individuals’ objectives.

Undoubtedly, however, the biggest demand from a business perspective is to nurture a skilled, talented and engaged workforce. To do this, companies must continue to invest in training and development, rather than chip away at training budgets for short-term efficiency gains.

The potential long-term impact of that approach is a disengaged, unmotivated and unproductive workforce that is not fit for purpose. And that really would be learning the hard way.

Data in this article have been sourced from Learning and Talent Development 2011, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development’s annual survey report. This is available for download from the CIPD website. Training today, training tomorrow, an analysis of learning trends across Europe and global comparisons, is available for download from the Cegos website.

There’s a lot of talk at the moment about getting in the ‘real world’. The ambitions of the NHS reforms, which this month survived a Commons vote and are now headed for the Lords, have drawn criticism from inside and outside the health service as not being practical in the real world of patient care.

In turn, the ABPI, along with countless others, has cited the reforms’ ambitions to deliver world-class outcomes as a major driver in the need to augment the current clinical trial model to make provision for the collection of ‘real world’ data. But, say commentators, developing real world data means the industry must ask its customers real world questions, rather than simply work to its own agenda.

For medical sales professionals, this is your selling environment – and the real world you face every day is clearly in a state of flux. But out of confusion can often come clarity. The messages that you take to market need to be shaped in the round. It is no longer acceptable for sales professionals to simply inherit brand messages from their colleagues in marketing – they must help inform value propositions and commercial strategies by sharing the important information they glean from the real world dialogue they have with their customers.

And by challenging the age-old customer perception that the NHS cannot and should not work in partnership with industry. The NHS must be made to realise that it cannot deliver the required improvements in quality and patient outcomes on its own. In this regard, NHS customers too need to get in the real world. And it’s the job of the pharmaceutical sales professional to help get them there.

Chris Ross, Editor

If I were a rich man
PS. The latest results of the Pf Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey show that, despite a median basic salary well in excess of the national average and annual total remuneration packages that make the profession among the best-rewarded in the UK, a high volume of medical sales professionals remain dissatisfied with their salary and want more. Of course, we all want more, it’s human nature. But in an era characterised by cuts, job losses and high unemployment, the Lionel Bart’s Oliver approach of requesting more seems relatively misplaced at the present time. Perhaps pharma’s sales people should consider getting in the real world too? It’s just a thought.