[I’m talking pharma here. But just swap in your industry and the argument will likely apply!]
Here in the highly regulated prairies of pharma-land, there is a fair amount of fear and trembling about drug companies getting involved with social networking.
Many of the discussions start and end with the perceived potential pitfalls (lots of which are actually red herrings). What if a patient talks about an adverse event with our drug? How can we “talk” directly to patients? What if there is off-label discussion? Is it a form of marketing? What’s the ROI? What will the FDA think? How do we know what we can or can’t say?
All the pitfalls come to the surface – which are convenient excuses to do nothing.
But what few realize is that the biggest danger is the pitfall of doing nothing.
Not being involved where the discussions are already occurring is choosing to be irrelevant. And people ARE talking about your drug and your company – and their conditions, and their needs, and their desire to know more. Why shuffle your feet on the sidelines when the game is being played at midfield?
Not learning to communicate using new media is choosing to get and stay behind the eight ball. There are many safe, shallow-end-of-the-pool proven ways to begin to use blogs, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube – and more importantly than any particular tactic or platform – there are straightforward ways to communicate and get involved. You don’t need a rulebook from the FDA to get started. You need to grow a pair.
Not moving forward when your competitors are learning the ropes is choosing to look regressive and out-of-touch. Social networking isn’t some alien passing fancy that will disappear overhead while your head is planted in the sand. It is now a normal and expected part of everyday communications. Some pharma companies are using it. Others…content to perch on the fence.
Doing nothing is not a strategy. It’s a cop-out. When discussing the potential pitfalls of social media, don’t forget the opportunity costs of the biggest one of all. Doing nothing.
———-
Subscribe to the Impactiviti blog via e-mail (which will bring you Impactiviti Daily – a brief of the day’s top pharma news)
Sign up for the Impactiviti Connection twice-monthly e-newsletter (see sample)
Connect with Steve Woodruff
If you move too fast then marketing will get ahead of legal. When legal reins marketing back in, it may be to the point of stopping the wagon completely.
A fast follower can learn from the mistakes of others and navigate around the pitfalls and come out ahead.
Burying your head in the sand like an ostrich is the wrong strategy. Watch from the sidelines, talk to the players and the coaches, and make sure you have the right equipment on and know the rules before you go out on the field. Let the other players teach you what icing and offsides are, then when you join the game, you can score without having the play called back. A career-ending injury or spending part of the game in the penalty box should be left to those with higher tolerance for risk.
Not making a decision is a decision as well.
Right on, Steve! Once again you have identified the later-adaptors among the pharmaceutical industry. I personally feel that every pharma industry consumer-support resident chip-head should be able to deliver to online consumers and online presence in DTP communications, which contributes vale-added benefit to the consumer for the product in question. The cost to marketing or project management would be minimal, but the rewards could be enormous.
Well said. I’m sharing this with my colleagues–though I am not in pharma, the same issues apply. I like the twitter headline ROI, return on ignoring…