Classified drugs, which are potentially dangerous and liable to abuse, have legitimate uses but also turn up on the black market. What does this mean for industry – and how has the internet affected this problem?

Take a look at any list of ‘drugs’ banned in the context of recreational use – or more accurately, abuse – noted by the Home Office, social services or avant-garde novels. They fall into three categories. Drugs made from natural sources – marijuana, opium and magic mushrooms. Synthetic drugs that have no medical function – ecstasy (MDMA) is the classic example. And drugs that have been patented by pharmaceutical companies and released for medical use – that’s all the rest.

Heroin, cocaine, amphetamines, tranquillisers, barbiturates – you name it, doctors have prescribed it and addicts have taken it, with or without prescription, and often with bad consequences. In the past, many psychoactive drugs were shifted from medical sources to the black market via theft or bribery. Today, they are more likely to be manufactured in secret labs in Latin America, the Far East or that odd little house in your street with the blacked-out windows. You might be surprised at how strong the UK pharmaceutical manufacturing base really is.

You may wonder why that’s a problem for industry. When you’re talking about drugs that affect the nervous system – killing pain, inducing sleep or keeping people awake – the subjective factor is important. If a patient knows the drug they get on prescription is also available on the street corner, they may react in various ways. They may decide, on the basis of news or hearsay, that the drug is too dangerous to take. Alternatively, they may decide they want more of it than their GP will provide – and their friends want some too. Either way, the drug’s value chain gets tangled up with barbed wire. It’s not your fault, but that doesn’t mean it’s not your problem.

Two recent events reflect the pervasiveness of this issue. Firstly, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs recommended that the painkiller tramadol should be made a Class C drug – with penalties of up to two years for possession and 14 years for supply. Tramadol has both opioid and antidepressant properties, making it a potent euphoric but increasing the clinical dangers of overdose.

Secondly, Roche took Valium off the market after fifty years of iconic status as ‘mother’s little helper’. Forty years after patent expiry, the black market had finally pushed the brand into the red.

The only chemistry

The UK’s classification system for ‘dangerous drugs’ is based on the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, which gave the Home Offie a role in drug licensing by defining the boundaries between legitimate and illegal use of medicines. The Act defined four types of drug crime: unlawful possession; possession with intent to supply; supplying, even if no money changes hands; and allowing your premises to be used for producing or supplying a controlled drug.

The Act also divided controlled drugs into three classes in terms of the penalties for illegal use:

• Class A – up to seven years’ imprisonment for possession, up to life imprisonment for supply

• Class B – up to five years’ imprisonment for possession, up to 14 years’ imprisonment for supply

• Class C – up to two years’ imprisonment for possession, up to 14 years’ imprisonment for supply

An unlimited fine can be imposed instead of, or in addition to, any of these sentences. The law is designed to come down most heavily on illegal manufacturers and suppliers – in other words, the people doing illegally what you do within a legitimate business framework. In practice, of course, it’s mostly the end users who get caught, tried and jailed.

Down at the doctor’s

What should pharmaceutical sales professionals keep in mind when working with controlled drugs? I won’t insult your intelligence by telling you not to break the rules. It’s the things that can happen that aren’t your fault you need to worry about.

Doctors and pharmacists have strict guidelines about using only legitimate suppliers. However – as the recent scandal of counterfeit cancer drugs being found in US pharmacies proved – the pressure to use cheaper suppliers means the audit trail of many drug supplies is extremely complex. If the drug is a controlled one, the threat of illicit sources to the supply chain is much greater.

It’s important to distinguish between ill-effects of drug abuse and potential side effects of legitimate drug use. The negative impact of abuse on a drug’s reputation is considerable – and, in addition, studies of abuse provide genuine insight into the risks and benefits of a drug. So be prepared for that side of things to make your discussions with customers more complex – maybe more difficult, but also maybe more fruitful if you’re well informed.

The internet has made the supply network for illegal drugs both more diverse and more immediate. The user can access a global black market without needing to hang out in dangerous places or carry cash. Every bedroom is a car park now: the black market in drugs has no limits as regards time, place or who is involved.

Be aware of security issues. Andrew Bolan at ABPI comments: “All activities related to the legitimate manufacture, distribution, supply and storage of controlled drugs are subject to the regulations made under the Misuse of Drugs Act. All actors in the legitimate supply chain will hold the appropriate licences and have the necessary facilities and systems to ensure the secure supply of these products to patients, and all these elements are subject to scrutiny and control by the appropriate authorities.

“While every effort is made via these systems to prevent the illicit diversion of these products, the issue of theft is a concern and, despite the best efforts of all in the supply chain, there will always be a risk of such events. The pharmaceutical industry is always willing to work with other partners in the supply chain to seek to enhance the already high level of security that is applied to the movement of controlled drugs.”

Blues run the game

One of the great blockbuster drugs, Valium (diazepam) helped to make Roche a leading global pharma company. While known primarily as a tranquilliser, it has also been used as an anti-convulsant, a muscle relaxant and an anti-depressant. The brand’s popularity among the general public as a means of coping with stress earned it the nickname ‘mother’s little helper’, and kept Valium on the market for forty years after its patent expiry.

However, the addictiveness of Valium soon became notorious, with some experts arguing that it induced serious physical dependency. This, combined with the emergence of SSRIs as more successful anti-depressants, led to diazepam being increasingly used only for short-term sedation, where branded Valium had less commercial traction over generic equivalents.

But users – in both senses – rush in where doctors fear to tread, and ‘blues’ are now a staple of the illegal drug world. Their widespread legitimate use has helped to fuel an illegal supply chain via many forms of theft and fraud. While Roche gave the long-term effect of patent expiry as its reason for taking the brand off the market, it would appear likely that a fuller explanation lies both in Valium’s dwindling legitimate market and in its rapidly growing online illegal market.

Diazepam tablets that look like Valium, thus retaining elements of brand appeal, are being marketed by MSJ Industries, a subsidiary of the Sri Lankan manufacturer J.L. Morison Son & Jones (Ceylon) PLC. Stamped ‘MSJ’, they are legitimate pharmaceutical products, but are being diverted to the black market – where they are known as ‘MSJs’, ‘vals’ or ‘blues’ – in large quantities.

As an example of the information available, Pf found an easily accessible online forum with a thread titled ‘MSJ blue pills (Vals?)’, featuring comments from people around the UK. One forum member offered to supply MSJs at the remarkably cheap rate of £20 for a hundred 10mg pills, or £80 for 500. Others commented:

• “I took two of them last night meaning it should have been a 20mg dose. But these two I took sent me well off.  It was like I had just taken 60mg or something. Couldn’t move.”

• “the msj are from sri lanka mate. they are the real mccoy. due to no standards and/or no quality control means that some msj tabs have 8mg-28mg per pill. i hope this helps you.”

• “msjs are the best valium about beat roche hands down”

 These words leave you wondering what ‘controlled drugs’ really means. For the pharmaceutical industry, that’s not a comforting thought.

When the melting pot of NHS reform is divided into regions for the purposes of constructive debate, suddenly it seems like a battle that can be won.

If Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker had sat down in a bar – perhaps the one in Mos Eisley – to discuss how
the Dark Side and the Rebel Alliance could work together, a great deal of heartache and destruction could have been avoided. The NHS and pharma find themselves in almost precisely the same predicament as those guys, except that this isn’t a galaxy far, far away – it’s NHS reform and it’s happening on planet Earth.

Pf Insights is a space-hopping force for good and, over the last few months, it has been travelling through the known universe, galvanising relationships between two very different civilisations – the NHS and big pharma.

Voices of the revolution

During the first Pf Insights tour of duty, one thing became quickly obvious – people wanted to open the channels of communication. There was a genuine feeling that people were passionate about getting healthcare transformation moving.

The trial gigs – including shindigs in London, Newcastle, Walsall and Bolton – were rolled out in order to find out how responsive the two parties were to constructive dialogue and whether such meetings could assist with the germination of effective joint working. It was also an exercise in establishing exactly what the best platform for these forums would ultimately be.

For these initial meetings, we combined speakers who had vast NHS experience – and who also understood the ambition, challenges and infrastructure of private sector companies – and a combative pharma industry audience. These tailored presentations were designed to trigger debate and, on several occasions, it worked. Representatives from the biggest pharma companies in the land enthusiastically seized the opportunity to air their questions, concerns and opinions about the biggest NHS shake-up in 50 years.

Many of the points raised were pivotal to the success of the reform bill, and those on the front line of pharmaceutical drug sales were anxious to hear about how their products could be integrated into an historically protective NHS, and what it would take to generate the cultural changes necessary for positive
partnerships.

Many of the audiences contained straight shooters who simply asked, ‘is it going to be easier to access
NHS decision makers?’

As these conversations unfolded, it was clear that the old rhetoric about public-private unisons had been
replaced by candid and passionate debate about making change a reality. This was about embracing
a brave new world in which a proud industry and a much-loved institution co-exist in harmony.

Path to glory

As the shoots of NHS reform appear the only way forward is to keep encouraging these galvanising
conversations – not virtually, or even over the telephone, but face to face. This is why Pf has decided to embark on a second tour of duty – bringing forums to people throughout the UK.

Ports of call this time include the East Midlands, Bristol, London, Bolton and Newcastle. The variety of locations will give everybody the chance to get involved, have their say and make a difference in the ever-evolving healthcare landscape.

The speakers will, again, provide a unique insight into the NHS, from both a national and a regional perspective. Take the Pf Insights trip and let the force be with you...

Novartis has warned the Government to reduce R&D bureaucracy to increase innovation or it will move its UK operations overseas.

Jon Symonds, Global Finance Director of Novartis, said that Britain is losing its competitive edge to emerging markets and called for the Government to streamline its R&D approach.

“One of the characteristics of the UK is a very low up-take on innovation. Sitting in another part of the business allocating my resources, if we don’t see the up-take in the UK resources will be allocated elsewhere,” said Mr Symonds.

To address the issue the pharmaceutical giant has arranged a meeting of scientists, NHS trustees and Government officials in London.

Novartis allocates around $10bn globally to research and development a year. Speaking in The Telegraph Mr Symonds said it usually costs a pharma company around $1bn to bring a new drug to market. However, he added there’s only a small window of opportunity to recoup this investment before products are exposed to generic competition.

Mr Symonds is expected to tell attendees at the crisis meeting that “the placement of research is increasingly globally competitive: we can and must make choices over where we invest.”

He will highlight how the Swiss-based company has chosen to invest in Shanghai, Russia and Brazil because the “one thing these markets have in common is that they have each recognised the need to shift from being a consumer of innovation to a generator of innovation.”

A withdrawal by Novartis would be another blow to the UK pharma industry. Pfizer cut 2,400 jobs last year when it closed R&D activities at its facility in Sandwich, Kent. Novartis UK currently employs around 3,500 people across eight sites.

Ana Nicholls, Healthcare Analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit, said that Novartis is right to warn the Government over its prolong R&D processes – especially at a time when emerging markets are making “determined efforts to boost innovations in their pharma industries.”

She added that the Government has tried to make the “UK more attractive for pharma R&D” through schemes such as the Patent Box and with its proposed changes to the Patents Act. But she warned “Novartis wants the Government to go further and streamline the whole trial and approval process – a push that will no doubt be supported by GSK, AstraZeneca and others.”

Why have employees kept a belief in company culture despite major structural reforms to sales forces?

If you cast your mind back to the mid-1990s you’ll probably recall tapping along to a song sang on screen by a warthog and a meerkat in one of the most memorable scenes in The Lion King. The moral of hakuna matata was that regardless of your surroundings you have to make the best of them. The same could be said for key account managers working within in today’s medical sales sector.

There’s no getting away from the fact that the way pharmaceutical companies conduct internal operations has changed and continues to evolve. The same could be said of their philosophies. A few years ago – in an era of feet on the ground before the patent cliff – pharma companies could rightfully claim holy values, visions, beliefs and habits. However, after widespread job cuts where thousands of people have lost their jobs can the same still be said?

It seems the answer may be a resounding ‘yes’ – and that’s coming from employees! Respondents to the Pf Company Perception, Motivation and Satisfaction Survey again highlighted the importance of company culture after it was voted the fifth highest motivating factor for more than 1,200 people working in the medical sales industry. However, its fifth placed ranking shows there’s still room for improvement.

Employees working for contract sales organisations placed less emphasis on company culture than those employed on a permanent basis within the pharmaceutical industry. Interestingly, it was younger respondents who felt more motivated than older colleagues. Respondents aged less than 25 voted company culture as their main motivating factor whilst at work. But those aged 54 or over said it was only the seventh most important factor to them.

But what have the sweeping job cuts done to satisfaction levels? Overall, 59% of respondents claimed to be satisfied with their company culture with slightly more than a fifth (22%) claiming to have concerns. Women (61%) were slightly more satisfied then men (57%), with a higher proportion of males (26%) saying they were disillusioned with existing policies. Despite ranking company culture as only the seventh most motivating factor, those aged between 25 and 34 were the most satisfied of respondents with 68% saying they were happy. But those aged 54 and over said they were the least satisfied with 27% voicing their opposition.

Leading the way
The importance of company culture has long been recognised. It forms the environment in which people judge the appropriateness of their behaviour and their actions. A positive company culture – one which staff ‘buy in to’ – will influence how individuals work on a daily basis and reflects their motivation and performance.

As the pharmaceutical industry strives to be more transparent the emphasis placed on company culture has increased. The importance of leadership where company culture is concerned cannot be underestimated. The leadership structure of an organisation almost drip feeds the principles it wishes to be known for. However, overall success usually results from effective leadership, an engaged workforce and good lines of communication between the two.

Yet open conversations only play a minor part in establishing and developing company culture. There has to a commitment by managers and their own leaders to act in a way which they would expect from those at the lowest run of the ladder. Training and competence, compliance with procedures and organisational learning also make up essential values.

While it’s not easy to establish and maintain company principles it’s even more difficult to change and introduce new methods. A cultural change can take several years to introduce. Humans are creatures of habit and employees are no different. Teaching old dogs new tricks really is a time consuming process – regardless of how much investment there may be.

Choosing the one
The website learnmanagement2.com says there are four main types of company culture. The first, usually found within small or medium sized organisations is power culture. Here, control is a key element. Decisions within a business are usually centralised around one key individual. That person usually has control over decisions and the power to enforce them. This allows efficient decision making. However, this method does have its problems. A lack of consultation between other members of staff can lead to a feeling of being undervalued and a lack of motivation. A high turnover of staff is also associated with this type of company culture.

Then there’s role culture – possibly the most common and logical in organisations across the globe. Here, businesses are split into divisions or groups where individuals are assigned particular roles and responsibilities. This has the benefit of specialisation where bosses can rely on individual skill sets and employees to highlight their worth to a company through performance measures.  

Task culture sees a team-based approach assigned to a particular project. Popular in today’s business society, task culture offers benefits both to staff and their employers. Individuals feel motivated when tasks are completed or achieved and a sense of value after being selected for projects by senior management. NASA is one high-profile organisation which promotes task culture through its missions into space.

Finally, there’s personal culture. This is more commonly found in charities or non-profit organisations. In this instance a focus is placed on the organisation without any thought for personal progress or gain.

Changing principles
Research has shown that the most successful companies all have a strong culture – whatever it may be. The two are interlinked. But it’s not a question of luck either bringing the two together. The CIPD says that evidence has shown that organisational success is dependent on having the “right mix” of human resources in place. Also, there must be an ability, motivation and opportunity for staff to support cultural ideologies. Firstly, companies must recruit the correct people with the ability to understand and promote set values. Managers must then ensure that staff are effectively motivated in the workplace and to provide them with the right opportunities to use their skills in well-designed roles. 

It’s in the initial stages of recruitment where company culture CAN be defined and discussed between employees and their bosses. During induction days it’s rare for company culture to be discussed, let alone a handbook given out. However, during the interview process, bosses can get the chance to assess whether those sitting in front of them will be able to meet and enhance set beliefs.

So there you have it. If you want to improve your levels of company culture it’s important to find an organisation with the same philosophy as yourself. If you can find a company whose values match your own you’ll soon be tapping along again to hakuna matata – it’s a problem free philosophy!

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...

A new quick-start reference guide to joint working to help address potential barriers to NHS/industry collaboration has been launched.

The ABPI guide maps the journey of identifying and establishing joint working projects, and offers guidance on how to implement, monitor and evaluate their success.

Stephen Whitehead, ABPI Chief Executive, said the guide aims to overcome “challenges whether you are an NHS or industry professional”.

The guide, Joint Working – A Quick Start Reference Guide for NHS and Pharmaceutical Industry Partners, was developed by combining materials published by the ABPI and the DH.

It was created in response to feedback from ABPI members and NHS partners to tackle typical challenges faced when developing joint working schemes.

The flowchart structure offers advice across the life cycle of a joint working project, from idea generation through to approval, recommendations and evaluation.

Mike Farrar, Chief Executive of the NHS Confederation, said the guide would be a “useful tool in helping build the foundations between the NHS and industry partners”.

Thousands of patients across the UK have already benefited from joint working between industry and the health service. The ABPI now hopes the guide will help stakeholders overcome any future obstacles that may prevent improvements in patient care as a result of joint working.

Maxine Vaccine, the pharma industry blogger whose body language is unprintable, issues a stern warning against pseudo-scientific cults posing as high-grade sales training.

While pharma industry professionals are usually sufficiently good judges of quality in a medication, they can sometimes be ever so slightly conned by people selling other types of product. As professionals we buy snake-oil that we would be ashamed to sell.

Years ago, I was sent by my company on a management training course. All but one of the modules on the course were relevant, purposeful and of value. The exception was a presentation on neuro-linguistic programming or NLP. The presenters advocated mimicking the speech patterns and body language of the person you are doing business with. Try that in real life, I thought, and you’ll be going home via the local A&E unit.

We were urged to ‘walk the talk’ in ways that reminded me strongly of Thunderbirds. Things got disturbing when a trainer suggested responding to a ‘dominant’ customer with a ‘submissive’ presentation, which he demonstrated on his knees. OK, he was slightly weird – but NLP is so locked into ideas about ‘personality’ that the line between practice and parody is easily crossed.

The core insight of NLP is that people have ‘styles’ of language that are either visual, auditory or tactile, and you will connect with a customer if you adopt their ‘style’. This is rubbish. What it means is that, instead of listening to what your customer is actually saying, you will listen only for those key words that give you a handle on them. Instead of doing your job, you will be indulging a power trip based in fantasy.

Medical sales is indeed about people. The people you are doing business with are intelligent experts with complex agendas. To work effectively with your customers, you need to understand their concerns, analyse their clinical, procedural and economic priorities and speak their language – not mimic their body language. NLP distracts you from doing business in an intelligent way by training you in egotistical mind games.

What’s going on here is that certain training companies know a nice little earner when they see it. Encouraging pharma firms to pay for some old nonsense that flatters their sense of being special, of having access to ‘secret’ knowledge, is both easier and more lucrative than researching and explaining how the pharma sales model needs to evolve in the demanding market of 2011.

The only thing NLP trainers are skilled in is parting fools from their money. If that’s what you think pharmaceutical sales is about, you’re in the wrong business.

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

Antibiotics are still over-prescribed and over-used in the UK, increasing the risk of antibiotic resistance, a new survey from the Health Protection Agency (HPA) has found.

The HPA survey of 1800 people in England found that a quarter of people wrongly believe antibiotics work on coughs and colds, and that 97% are prescribed antibiotics on request.

In addition, 10% of people keep leftover antibiotics – and half of these self-medicate with them. These numbers are significant as 30% of the population use antibiotics in a year.

Experts have warned that overuse and misuse of antibiotics, combined with failure of the pharma industry to develop new ones, could lead to a rise in drug-resistant infections – which currently cause 25,000 deaths in Europe each year.

The HPA said that doctors must resist patient demands for antibiotics to treat viral infections such as coughs and colds. In addition, patients must not use leftover medication.

“There is evidence that the more antibiotics you have, the more likely you are to develop resistance,” said the HPA’s Dr Cliodna McNulty.

“Despite many years of public health campaigns advising people that antibiotics don’t work against coughs, colds and flu, our research results show that these myths prevail.”

The Department of Health has issued fresh guidance on antibiotic prescribing, urging doctors and nurses to “think twice”.

Professor Laura Piddock of the University of Birmingham’s School of Immunity and Infection also warned: “The demise of antibacterial drug discovery brings the spectre of untreatable infections.”

Fast-blogging bundle of attitude Maxine Vaccine takes a look at key issues affecting the pharma industry – this week, some worrying evidence that UK employers have lost the trust of their staff.

UK company bosses have mostly lost (or never gained) the trust of their employees. That’s not just my view: it’s the conclusion of a recent report from the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development (CIPD). They also note that mistrust of your manager is a major driver of the decision to look for a new job. Finally, their results point to a regional trend: trust in senior management is lower in the North and in Wales than in the South.

The survey asked UK employees “Do you trust your senior management teams?” The overall response indicated that if all those team meetings are getting staff to sing from the same hymn sheet, the songs are mostly from Nick Cave’s Murder Ballads.

The ‘net agree score’ to the question was –26 in North East England, –25 in Wales, –16 in North West England and –12 in Scotland. Even the more affluent London (–10) and East of England (–6) showed signs of wanting to think outside the box – after putting their boss in it and burying it six feet deep. Only South West England showed a positive overall trend towards trust in management (+13).

Interestingly, no result was given for the West Midlands. Perhaps because the only answer to the question from that region was “Is the Pope a Protestant?”

CIPD also found that 47% of employees who strongly mistrust their senior management team are looking for a new job, compared with 8% of those who strongly trust their leaders. But then, a lot of sales and marketing employees fluctuate between the former and the latter category depending on the state of their bloodstream.

What lessons do these grim figures offer to managing directors, sales managers, HR managers and other movers and shakers in the pharma industry? One is that all that moving and shaking just makes you look like a cokehead. Another is that HR is an unenviable role: you spend your working life with your face towards management and your backside towards the staff, then wonder why it hurts when you sit down.

A third, more useful lesson is that trust is not gained by printing a staff handbook or by buying a round of drinks. If you’re a team leader, the trust of your team – whether their role is sales, marketing, R&D, manufacturing, distribution or even management – has to be earned by straight talking and by showing, on a daily basis, that you mean what you say. Even if they like you a bit less, they will trust you a lot more.

Maxine Vaccine is keen to receive polite feedback on these and other pharma industry issues. She is fully compliant with the ABPI Code – but not anything (or anyone) else. You have been warned.

In the pharmaceutical industry one of the biggest challenges is to manage large events which require certain levels of privacy, whilst also ensuring they are hosted in professional and accessible venues. Simon Hunter shares his knowledge on how to make the most of your venue and event.

A high profile venue is a prominent, well known, iconic space which has a range of facilities to offer, and a reputation for hosting annual industry exhibitions or summits for international brands.

Discretion and privacy are key attributes of hosting events at high profile venues. If there are well-known guests present or sensitive intellectual property being shared – a new scientific discovery or drug, for example, then this kind of venue is ideal.

Experience pays

Other advantages of high profile venues include a proven track record in hosting different sizes of events in-house. For example, Chelsea Football Club manages fixtures attracting 42,000 guests who need to be managed onsite and this translates to the events team and experienced in-house security. The higher profile the venue or the bigger the event brand, the more strategies will already be in place which can help.

With regards to security, trust the staff and the in-house teams; they will have the benefit of experience organising private events, managing arrangements for high profile guests, and advising on the best way to utilise facilities. A good venue will take you through all stages of the event and should ask in advance of any special requirements, schedules or VIP attendees.

Ensure that all channels of communication are left open during the event itself so that staff  know of any last minute alterations. This will also guarantee that event organisers look professional, with the additional help of the venue’s catering, service and after-care.

Deciding outcomes

Knowing your audience and the objectives you want to achieve from any event will be a great help in selecting a venue. It is therefore vital to outline these clearly before approaching any venues for suggested briefs. Following this, there are some useful points to bear in mind which will make selecting a suitable venue easier.

Consider the components of your event to make sure you select somewhere that can accommodate them all. For example, consider whether the event will be an annual conference with a gala dinner and accommodation; whether you need separate facilities for VIP guests; and the possibility of needing to bring in equipment for demonstrations or exhibitions.

Venues which offer numerous events spaces, like a music venue, accommodation, restaurants and an exclusive spa can be ideal for organisers wishing to combine many activities within one event. It will also reduce the need for a separate transport budget to transfer guests from between conferences and seminars, for example.

Every event organiser should be constantly focussed on how to get maximum results for minimum cost. Look for a venue that whilst impressive, offers a range of packages and choose the one that suits your audience and your budget.

Simon Hunter is the Head of Venue at Chelsea Football Club.