With more than 30 years of experience working for pharmaceutical companies, Kevin Wilson is well-versed in the traditional approaches to life sciences market research.
Before joining BioSyent, he worked as a director of marketing for one of the largest global pharmaceutical brands. In this environment, he followed the standard procedures for collecting market research: Conducting large-scale quantitative research studies, qualitative interviews, and gathering physician insights through medical advisory board meetings.
But even back then, he questioned whether the value of the data collected was always worth the steep six-figure price tag.
For me, there were so many things I intuitively knew that I didn't need $150,000 of quantitative research to explain," said Kevin.
Kevin found himself working with a vastly different marketing budget after making the decision to join BioSyent. While the company had a strong vision for future growth, the costly market research tactics he relied on in prior roles weren't a feasible option.
In the early days, decisions on spending money meant choosing between market research or samples. I couldn't do three surveys a year and spend $150,000 on each one," said Kevin. "But as our company and revenue grew, we could begin investing more in research.
As BioSyent grew and expanded its portfolio to include more products, the team knew gathering physician and pharmacist insights could help inform strategic product, sales, and marketing decisions. But even when the budget was available, Kevin struggled to see the value in traditional methods. Because not only was this type of market research expensive, but the process of collecting results took three to four months.
Traditional research wasn't just cost-prohibitive. It didn't deliver value for what we were spending," he explained. "Traditional quantitative analysis can take four months to get results. Typically, you need answers before then – and by the time I did get results, there were other questions that need to be answered.