George Hradecky is a former editor in chief of Pharmaceutical Representative magazine.

George Hradecky

As pharmaceuticals and medicine in general become increasingly politicized in our digital media age, sales reps are beginning to see new types of objections when they call on physicians: objections based on industry reputation. These objections occur not only in doctors' offices, but also at family gatherings as aunts, uncles and cousins ask reps questions based on media portrayals of the industry. Enter Philadelphia-based GlaxoSmithKline. Three years ago, in response to the declining public trust in the industry, the company decided to go on the offensive with a program that would help spread the word about the lives the industry saves and the reasons drugs cost what they do. Because of their presence in doctors' offices around the country and their natural enthusiasm, the company's 8,000-strong field sales force was the natural place for GSK to begin the program. 

 spoke with Mike Pucci, vice president of external advocacy at GSK and the head of the Value of Medicine initiative, about the company's success in improving the industry's image and what reps at other companies can do to become advocates for the industry. 			

PR: In the past, the pharmaceutical industry has been slow to respond to its critics. What was it that made GSK want to go on the offensive in dealing with these issues?

It came about as a result of the continuing decline of the industry reputation, as measured by the Harris Interactive audit that's done every year on industry reputations. The first people affected when the public perception of the industry goes to the depths it had gone to are employees nationwide. They're hit with it by customers, by friends and family, by people in their social network. When someone found out you worked for a pharmaceutical company, you got an earful. So right upfront, we felt the most important thing was that we needed to develop the capability for our employees to respond to some of these issues and also to be proactive in going out and telling our story in social settings. We wanted to be able to spread the word about the value of medicine, why we do what we do, the cost of research, the importance of innovation and why in many cases – especially in the treatment of chronic disease – prescription medicines are the solution to rising healthcare costs. That message is very powerful, and delivering it in a grassroots way does two things: It helps us get the word out, and it also restores the faith and spirit of our employees – that they work for a great company and a great industry, and we do have a story to tell.  

What is it about sales reps that made you see them as your frontline industry advocates when you started this program in 2003?

It's a natural fit, if you stop to think about it. We trust our sales representatives with skillfully handling conversations with the smartest people in the world: physicians, pharmacists, nurses, people involved with healthcare delivery. And we give them thousands and thousands of samples and a company car and a lot of responsibility, and yet in the past, we haven't given them the license to speak about these industry issues. That's kind of silly, isn't it? These are expert communicators, they're smart, they're very well trained and they know how to handle objections. And for the most part, the questions they get on the value of medicine are no different from any objection they run into in the course of the sales call. You apply the same methods to responding to these societal issues about the industry. You convert the discussion from the issue to a value discussion, and that's what we train them to do. And they pick up the language very easily. 

Are all GSK reps trained on the value of medicine?

We're only training people who want to be involved. We don't make it mandatory, although it's unavoidable that reps will deal with these issues at some point. But really, the people I train are the ones who look at the material and look at the initiative and say, "Wow, I really want to be part of this." I take those people and I train them to another level and they become advocates.  

What is the process for someone who looks at the material and says, "This is great! It would really help me in my territory"? 

The first level of engagement is to be able to handle a discussion with your family and your neighbor and your friends. That's just a matter of being conversational with the information and being able to respond to informal questions that you happen upon. We've got a book that's called "Beyond the Basics: The Value of Medicine," and it can be read in about an hour, and it's tabbed by issue. Once you understand the facts, it's a matter of verbalizing [them] and learning how to position the answers with the information. The second level of engagement is being able to present at a local nursing association or a rotary club or something like that. And if you're going to get up in front of a group and handle questions, we'd like you to sit down with me for a couple of hours and go over the questions you're likely to get and the best way to respond. The third level is representing [the] region. The training we put the third level through is about a day, and it's usually one-on-one with me. 

What is the number-one "Value of Medicines" objection sales reps might come across while they're interacting with physicians and the public?

Pricing generally is number one and probably constitutes about half of the comments. It usually takes the form of a comment like: "Why do 13 [osteoporosis] pills cost $153?" It's people focusing on the price and not thinking about what that drug's doing for them and what it's preventing. That is the first and foremost objection we teach everybody to handle.  

How do you train participants to handle that objection?

If [you're] dealing with somebody who has insurance, who's playing the devil's advocate, you remind them of the value. In the statin class – and 10% of prescription drug spending is for statins today – you remind people that for less than $3 per day, they can reduce a major risk factor for a heart attack. It's cheaper than a fancy cup of coffee at Starbucks. Now if someone is saying, "It's $153, I can't afford it, I don't have insurance, I'm having to choose between my groceries and medicine," the answer is very different. The answer is immediately to acknowledge and say, "You're right, I understand these things can be expensive, let me show you how we can help." And then we talk about patient assistance. The most immediate thing we can do is acknowledge that issue and connect them back to their doctor's office to maybe get some samples. Whether it's my drug or my competitor's drug, we're reminding our sales reps that when they're presented with this issue, they've got an opportunity to help somebody. Even if the patient never goes back to the doctor to pick up the samples, it shows that you care.  

So the reps are trained to answer the question differently depending on who's asking it?

[The representative has] to qualify that comment. Who's it coming from and what's that person's perspective? If they truly are advocating for someone who can't afford their medicines or if they are truly in need themselves, the answer is to go right to the support networks to get them help. When we started out three years ago, we would answer that question, "Well you know, it takes 15 years and $800 million to develop a medicine." Nobody cares about that answer. Basically, the listener hears that and they say, "Well that's fine, but that's your problem. All I know is I can't pay for your meds." Even though statistics on the huge risks and costs associated with [research and development] are true, the only time that answer would be appropriate is in an academic environment where someone is really trying to understand your economic basis for your cost structure. To the general public, it's a non-starter.  

What is another typical objection sales representatives might get?

The second most common issue we get today, especially in the medical community, is direct-to-consumer advertising. That question usually comes in the form of a comment like: "If you just stopped doing the television advertising, you could lower the price of your medicines." The physicians will also say that advertising drives people into their office and those people demand the advertised drugs even if they don't need those drugs.  

What are your reps trained to do when they encounter that kind of comment?

We train our reps to remind people why we're advertising in the first place. We're trying to let the public know that there are treatments out there, and if they've got these symptoms or are not satisfied with their current therapy, they should talk to their doctor because there might be something that will help them. I think the problem of overprescribing is a myth compared with the volume of people who have undiagnosed conditions and whose condition is progressively getting worse because they're not being treated. That's the response and that tends to work. If you need to get deeper into the price structure, the industry spends 2% of sales on television advertising. If we stopped today and lowered the price of drugs by 2%, would that help access for people who can't afford medicine? I don't think so. You basically can put it into context and remind people that we aren't spending as much on advertising as Coca Cola is – and by the way, this is about your health, not about selling sugar water.  

Recent news stories on drug safety are leading reps to see more physician objections to their study reprints. The objection is usually based on a physician's claim that the study is biased. How are you training your reps to deal with this objection? 

You have to say upfront that that bias is fully acknowledged and understood. However, we're applying the standard of care in the design of our studies that the Food and Drug Administration requires of every company in the business. There are people with a large body of evidence before them who are looking at the entire basis of this research to come to their conclusions about the labeling, the risks and the benefits. But we really can't go much deeper with that discussion, because we're not that close to clinical development. That's where you stop and say, "If you want to have this debate, let's sit down and let you talk to a researcher." We're in the process of making sure we have people in the R&D organization that are capable of responding to this type of question. 

Is the concept of empowering reps as industry ambassadors catching on with other pharmaceutical companies?

Yes, Pfizer was a fast follower and immediately began experimenting with what we're doing. At Eli Lilly, they're kicking off a four-state pilot right now. Purdue Pharma picked up our material and developed their own version of it and launched a campaign to their sales force. Allergan has used our training materials and has also sent all the material out to their sales force. The uptake has been very gratifying to see, because the more people who are out there doing this, the better. This message is not about GSK; it's about the benefit of medicines and the industry, and ultimately, it's about taking care of patients. 

For reps whose companies have yet to train them on the value of medicines, what advice would you give for improving the industry's image?

We provide our information to people regardless of who they work for. It's nonbranded material and the answers are universal. So we can provide our material to anybody who's looking for help. We're in an election year, and the issue of affordable medicine is not going to go away. We've got to be out there with proactive messaging, and we've all got to pick up the kind of language that makes a difference with the audience. The difference is to talk about prevention, better treatment of chronic disease and, finally, the need for innovation to treat diseases we don't treat today. We can all carry that message. 

Articles

GlaxoSmithKline is empowering its sales representatives to act as industry ambassadors. Will other companies follow?

The value of medicine

Starting on October 15, 2002, long-term care facilities across the United States will begin reporting data on 10 quality measures (see sidebar on this page) as part of a quality initiative from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The data from the measures will be reported at www.medicare.gov/nhcompare/home.asp. Though nursing homes have always reported quality data, the new initiative is a "particularizing and focusing of a system that's already in place," in the words of John Gillan, director of community relations at the Washington-based American Health Care Association. "When Tommy Thompson came in, he was talking right away about getting a better handle on quality care, payment for care," says Gillan. "So he came at it very broadly and it just seemed to particularize itself in these quality initiatives." 

The initiative was announced in November 2001 and met with considerable support from the industry. "Quality matters, and because we know that performance differs among nursing homes, it is essential that we identify true measures of quality care that, uniformly applied and easily understood, can be used as a tool both for improving nursing home performance and educating consumers," said Larry Minnix Jr., president and chief executive officer of the Washington-based American Association of Homes and Services for the Ageing, at the time of the announcement. "It is time for the public to have reliable, meaningful data to help make informed long-term care decisions, and it is time for nursing homes and government to come together to give the public that information." 

Industry support for the initiative has continued from the launch of the six-state pilot program in April to the present, but associations have raised concerns about how accurate a picture of care the indicators provide consumers. Some fear outside factors could give people the wrong impression. "Patients in one nursing facility may be older and sicker than patients in another facility," says Gillan. "If your facility has many more people with complex conditions, it's going to exacerbate the whole thing. For example, those people are going to be more solidly bedridden than others, which increases the chance for more pressure ulcers, which is one of the measures. So the average person on the street reads this and they say: 'This facility doesn't take care of people, look at the pressure ulcer incidence. Boy, that sure tells you they aren't doing a good job.' It's a complex thing today, to comparatively evaluate long-term care facilities, because of that acuity level, because of all sorts of things that the average person on the street doesn't understand."

Minnix advises consumers not to base their entire decision about care on the quality numbers. "AAHSA encourages consumers to view the published measures and ratings as a starting point for asking further questions about a nursing home's quality of care," he says. "It is important, for example, to ask the older person's physician about the type of nursing home that would be most suitable. Then, ask around. What kind of reputation for care does the home have? What do doctors, clergy and other families think of the home? Is the atmosphere clean, pleasant and inviting? Does the staff make you feel welcome? What kind of interaction do you see between the residents and staff? Is the staff open to answering all your questions?"

To address concerns about quality measures being unfairly weighted, the CMS has included risk adjustments in three of the measures (residents with pressure sores in the chronic measures, and residents with delirium and residents who improve in walking in the post-acute measures) that take into account a faculty admission profile that considers patients' condition when they are admitted to a facility.

But even still, the quality initiative as it is formatted when it launches in October is not likely to be the absolute, final configuration. Gillan sees the project as a work in progress. "We have been supportive of the CMS program from the beginning and will continue to be, but will continue to work closely with them on measurements," he says. "That's the key - if the measurements can be made as complete and well-based as possible, and reported as well as possible to the consumer, we can't ask for much more than that. But a lot of folks are looking at October as a silver bullet time as if CMS is going to roll out the program and say, 'OK, this is it, this is intact and this is the way the program is going to be forever.' Not even they believe that. We certainly don't believe it. It's going to be a continuing involvement to arrive at optimum care for patients in nursing facilities."

Because medications play a huge role in treating elderly populations, the quality initiatives can present selling opportunities for reps calling on either long-term care facilities or the doctors who work in them. When it comes to the quality initiatives, medications can either be the primary method of treatment (as with infection and pain management), or have an indirect effect (as with delirium and improvement in walking).

"Any change in a patient or resident's condition should first be considered as a potential medication adverse effect before anything else," says Mark Sey, a principle in the Woodbridge, CA-based pharmacy consulting firm Mark Sey and Associates. "There's a significant potential for medications to contribute negatively."

Keeping an eye on medication side effects can go a long way toward managing a facility's quality measures. Often, the side effects of a drug being used to treat one of the measures can have a negative impact on one or more of the other measures.

Concern about the impact of side effects on quality measures should not be used to reduce treatment that is otherwise working. "The challenge is going to be to manage the patient's pain or conditions with medication on the one hand, but on the other hand, try to avoid producing the serious adverse effects or side effects that are going to inhibit functioning or contribute to other issues," says Tom Clark, director of professional affairs for the Alexandria, VA-based American Society of Consultant Pharmacists. "It can only be done by looking at each patient on a case-by-case basis."

One danger facilities face in dealing with quality scores is to look at the overall data and use it as a guideline for treating an entire population of patients. "What we don't want to do is treat the facility's scores instead of looking at the information and then applying it from a population base into individual care," says Sey. "Constant reminders are necessary to move away from that and say 'OK, this is population data and now we need to filter that out and look at the individuals who are contributing to that population data and make sure we are treating these people appropriately.'" 

Despite the importance of looking at patients individually, nursing homes should also have facility-wide programs in place for dealing with each of the quality initiatives. "A system-wide strategy needs to be in place for things like education, tracking, monitoring, revision of facility protocols or policies, and procedures in response to weaknesses or problems that have been identified," says Clark. "So there is a role for both the system-wide approach as well as the individual patient basis for more in-depth customized evaluation or treatment to balance the disease in that particular resident."  PR

Now long-term care facilities must report quality data to the public.

Under the microscope

 "What do my doctors want from me?" is a question every rep has probably asked him or herself at one time or another. And while there is no one answer to that question that fits every doctor, Pharmaceutical Representative recently polled 336 doctors to find out what they want from the sales reps they see every day. Our poll was conducted through our sister publication Medical Economics, a monthly magazine that goes out to over 150,000 doctors, the majority of whom are family practice, general practice or internal medicine physicians. Some of the responses make perfect sense and others may surprise you, but at the very least they will provide you with some general guidelines to help you serve your often difficult-to-read customers. 

Our poll found that most doctors (89%) see between one and five reps per day and base their decision to see these representatives on several factors. If the representative is new to the doctor, 54% of doctors said they base their decision on whether the rep has a new product. Though that may sound discouraging to representatives selling a product that has been on the market for a while, the next most popular criterion doctors based their decision on (tied with company at 14.8%) was rep personality, so representatives can influence whether doctors will see them.

Assuming a rep does not have a new product, 52% of doctors said their main reason for seeing that rep is "to get samples." Twenty percent of doctors responded that it is "to discuss relevant clinical data or concerns" and 19% said it is "to get information on the products they sell."

Regarding samples, in most offices (58%) the doctor has the most involvement with the sample closet, followed by the nurse (26%).

It will come as no surprise to most representatives that the majority of doctors (37%) said they most prefer to have representatives visit their office at lunch. "We have a very busy practice," remarked Steven Shook, a family practitioner in Sioux City, IA. "Probably four days out of the week, a rep will have lunch, and that will give me a little more time to discuss with them, maybe five or ten minutes." Midmorning and midafternoon were the next most popular times (23% and 22%, respectively). The least popular times for representatives to visit doctors were early morning (10%) and late afternoon (8%).

The poll also found that the standard industry assumption that most reps are given only two minutes to detail their products to doctors is correct. When asked, "On an average day, how much time will you allow a rep to present information to you?" 44% of doctors said two to three minutes. "I just don't have the time to give, and there are so many of them," commented Noble Ballard, a family practitioner in southwest Oklahoma. "You get 15 of them a day, and there are just too many."

The next most popular response was five to nine minutes (29%). Not surprisingly, the least popular response was "as long as it takes" (7%).

When discussing clinical data, most doctors want reps to present the data to them using either product summaries or clinical reprints (each with 40%). Only 11% of doctors said they want reps to discuss clinical data with them using company-provided marketing material. 

Though most doctors ranked hearing about indications, contraindications, efficacy, dosage, adverse reactions and cost during a detail as very important, the majority felt dosage and cost are slightly less important than the other four choices. "I want to make sure it works for the patient," said Robyn Jackson Flagg, a family practitioner with a solo practice in Calumet City, IL. "Patient care is my number-one priority."

When detailing their doctors, representatives might want to think about including pharmacoeconomic information regarding their drug. Forty percent of doctors said it is equally important as data about the drug's safety and efficacy, while 25% said it is slightly less important. Sixteen percent thought it is not as important, and 13% said it is much more important.

Our poll found that most doctors (49%) are attending one rep-sponsored educational or informational program per month. Thirty percent are attending one program every six months, and 9% do not attend rep-sponsored programs at all.

Having their spouse/partner or children involved in rep-sponsored programs means a great deal to the doctors who attend those programs. The majority (67%) said it is very important or somewhat important that their spouse/partner and children be involved, while 19% said it is not important at all. "If there's something that has an entertainment component or a meal, I take my meals with my spouse," said Flagg. "He's a physician, so it's relevant for him."

The majority of doctors who responded to our survey are not greatly influenced in their prescribing by information supplied to them by HMOs. When asked, "To what extent are your prescribing decisions influenced by cost information provided by HMOs?" 52% of doctors indicated either little or no influence. Twenty-eight percent said they are moderately influenced, and only 4% said they are always influenced by this information.

As for efficacy information provided by HMOs, 69% of doctors responded that this information has little or no influence on their prescribing. Twenty-two percent said this information has moderate influence on them, and only 2% said it always influences their prescribing.

"I don't pay any attention to it," said Flagg. "[HMOs] exist for the cost and managing the care for the cost."

These results may also be indicative of the fact that many offices do not fall under the influence of HMOs at all. Several doctors contacted for this story said their prescribing decisions are not influenced by HMOs because their patients are mostly members of preferred provider organizations.

On the issue of doctors' perceptions of rep trustworthiness, our poll revealed some good news and bad news. The bad news is that when asked, "In your experience and opinion, do you feel reps provide you with information that is 100% accurate?" 75% of respondents said no. Fortunately, out of those respondents who answered no to that question, 57% said they thought only 29% or fewer representatives are providing them with inaccurate or misleading information.

Of the doctors surveyed in our poll, 39% said a rep had acted inappropriately in their office. This inappropriate behavior ranged from being rude to office staff to badmouthing their competition. Aggressive behavior was particularly frowned upon.

"One rep removed our clock in our break room and replaced it with his company logo clock without permission," wrote one respondent. "The same rep removed my calendar, replaced it with his company calendar, went into my office and covered my desk with his product information. He was not invited to return to my office." 

When asked what the office did to correct the behavior, most doctors said they called the representative's manager or banned the rep from the office (either permanently or for limited periods of time). 

"Two reps were pushing their product and insisting we write more scripts or they would not leave samples," wrote one doctor. "They then proceeded to talk to and follow every staff member at least five to ten minutes before the office manager asked them to leave."

The responses weren't all negative, however. Said one doctor, "I would rather see reps than get info any other way."  PR

An exclusive survey by Pharmaceutical Representative.

What docs really want from you

An inevitable fact of life over the past 10 years has been that technology finds a way to make many of our daily tasks simpler. The Internet has made library research almost obsolete, electronic toll collectors have made searching for spare change a thing of the past, and now personal digital assistants, like Pocket PCs and Palm Pilots, have made bulky organizers seem almost archaic. Letting go of comfortable, familiar ways can be a difficult thing to do, and the decision to switch to a PDA may not be an easy one. But, given a PDA's tremendous potential to simplify the life of a busy pharmaceutical sales rep, switching over should be a no-brainer.

"I definitely think someone should have one, whether you are literate in computers or not," said John Schwarz, an oncology sales specialist with Mountain View, CA-based Alza Corp. "Just because you're not good at it doesn't mean it's not going to be valuable to you; it's something you need to learn, just like you need to learn to use a computer, because it makes your life easier, just like you need to learn to drive a car because it makes your life easier. These are things worth learning."

The perceived reasons not to get a PDA extend beyond a simple fear of new technology. Schwarz, who has been through three different PDAs in the last four years, often hears people say that because a PDA is so small, it has the potential to get lost, an argument he dismisses outright. "Well, it's the size of my wallet, so that's no excuse," he responds.

In the event that a PDA is lost, replacing the information is remarkably simple. Unlike a standard planner, information entered into a PDA is backed up daily on a home or office computer. With a touch of a button, this information can be instantly inputted into a replacement organizer.

Ease of replacement isn't the only reason for pharmaceutical reps to switch to a personal digital assistant. "Having something that is going to keep you on track to make your appointments is key," said Beau Chatham, a productivity consultant with Eagle International, Rochester, NY. "I can pull up a list of telephone numbers for key customers and I have quick access to not only just my key customers, but all the rest of the names that are inherent in that office - the receptionist, the nurse, the office manager and all that data."

The speed with which users can access the information they input is also a critical difference between standard planners and PDAs. "I always challenge those who don't believe me," said Schwarz. "OK, you have a big old Dayrunner or Franklin Planner. Can you find how many times you went to the VA hospital in your territory? You can't do it. I can do it in five seconds - do a search for 'VA hospital' on my Palm Pilot and it comes up right away. It's incredibly fast to look up information. And what good is information if you can't access it?"

Even with all the great reasons to switch, there is one thing a standard planner can still do better than a PDA: "Note-taking," said Chatham. "A person who is brand new to this, they're going to want accuracy and they are going to want speed, and there's still no replacement for the pen and the pencil."

To solve this problem, Chatham recommends purchasing a three-ring binder with a slot for a PDA adjacent to a notebook, so notes can be quickly jotted and entered into the PDA later. "When it come to my ideas and my notes, when I need to quickly jot down telephone numbers, ideas or what somebody's telling me, I need speed and accuracy," he said.

Though the decision to switch to a personal digital assistant might be an easy one, choosing between the different models and operating systems can be a bit more complex. 

Currently, there are two primary operating systems available in the United States â the Pocket PC operating system and the Palm OS. According to Stephen G. Bush, editor and founder of Brighthand.com, an online magazine dedicated to PDAs, the Palm OS holds roughly 80% of the market, with the Pocket PC making up the other 20%. This alone might be reason to choose a Palm-based PDA, due to the fact that there are so many additional applications being developed for the Palm OS.

Though Pocket PC PDAs and PDAs running the Palm OS may look similar, the differences in price, performance and features are actually quite distinct. "[Palm devices] run very fast, the devices are small, and they're very simple to use," said Busch. "But their strength may be their weakness in that now, as they want to move to more and more functionality, the question is whether they can still keep it simple with that operating system. On the other hand, Microsoft has Pocket PC OS. They want to have as much functionality in their device as possible, so they have very fast processors and they have a lot of memory - a Palm device might have up to eight megabytes of RAM, and [Pocket PCs] have 32 megabytes - but again, their strength might be their weakness in that by having all these wonderful, highly functional devices with incredible color screens, they use more battery power. And they also can be not as simple to use and bulkier."

Major differences can also be seen in the pricing of devices using the different operating systems. According to Bush, while a basic Palm OS device can be purchased for $149, an entry-level Pocket PC can run upwards of $400.

According to Bush, both operating systems may be different, but eventually both manufacturers hope to achieve the same middle ground. "Both want to get to the point where they have a small, lightweight, highly functional color device that can interact with a telephone or have wireless communications features in it, and has a long battery life, but they're coming at it from different angles."

Chatham advises that, if a rep wants to use his or her PDA for general organization, the Pocket PC is not as useful. "If you're looking for additional applications, then yeah, that's probably the way you want to go. But if you're looking at it in terms of a pure productivity tool, Palm continues to have about 75% of the market, because they kept it simple and they made it a productivity tool."

There are certain things to consider before running to a store and buying a PDA. "Battery power is one thing," said Bush. "Get the battery power that fulfills your needs. Think of the time between charges for you. If you're an office worker and you are going to go to your office every single day and pop it  into a charger like you do your cellphone, it's not the same consideration as if you're a salesperson on the road for a long weekend and you don't want to run out of battery power."

Memory is also important to consider before purchasing a PDA. The entry-level Palm-based models come standard with two megabytes of memory, while the upper-level models have eight. Two megabytes of memory may be fine for contacts, a calendar and expenses, but if someone is thinking about growing into his or her device, two megabytes simply won't cut it. "If an average person wants to buy one, buy an eight megabyte one definitely," said Schwarz. "If a person is insistent on not spending too much money, they can get the two-megabyte, but if they get to like it they're going to have to upgrade. Otherwise they are going to get into a dead-end where they can't add any applications onto it. I'm in that situation, frankly. I bought two megabytes and I really wish I had bought eight."

Job requirements also play a part in deciding one's memory requirements. "[If] I'm a rep out in the field and I'm just getting started, maybe a low-end model with not as much memory is required," said Chatham. "But if I'm a senior rep and I'm going to put all my contacts in there, that might be substantially more than the rep that is fresh out of college and might have 100 people they interact with."

Some PDAs, like those manufactured by Handspring and Sony, have slots for expandable memory, so if a rep does grow into the device, he or she can purchase more memory without having to buy an entirely new PDA.

If a rep is looking for a personal digital assistant to make his or her life easier, some of the features touted by PDA manufacturers are not even worth considering. "Some of them have recording capabilities, where it works as a little digital recorder. I don't really use it." said Bush. "Handwriting recognition. I don't really see that that's that valuable right now."

Said Chatham: "Strictly speaking as a productivity consultant, all the rest of the things - having the ability to show pictures on there â yeah, that's great. Will it allow me to get more done in a day? Probably not."

Also, some add-ons may not be worth the expense, according to Schwarz. "There's some of the expensive modules like with the Handspring. Those are nice, but do you really think you are going to need to take photographs or anything like that? Probably not. I would recommend making sure that [a PDA] is robust enough to handle your daily activities and has enough memory for the future, and not worry about anything else." 

In all, a personal digital assistant may be just the ticket for a pharmaceutical sales representative looking to get organized in the digital age. Concluded Schwarz: "The people who may not want to get one are people who don't know how to do it or are challenged by it, but I suggest that you challenge yourself to learn it, because it's going to pay dividends." PR

Your paper planner is full to bursting. Maybe it's time to simplify your life with a personal digital assistant.

Author | George Hradecky

Articles

The value of medicine

Under the microscope

What docs really want from you

Upgrading to a PDA