Medical publication policies and guidelines offer a framework for best practices, but there may be situations when more than one approach seems reasonable. The primary purpose of “What Would You Do?” is to explore examples of such situations. With the limited information provided to interpret the scenarios, you may find yourself agreeing with one, more than one, or none of the proposed actions. And that’s the point ‒ you should debate, contemplate, and communicate (with a comment) before selecting your “best” answer.
You are leading the strategic publications and data communication portions of business planning with your medical affairs and real-world outcomes teams. Your marketing colleagues have requested a seat at the table during these discussions, which would be a first, and your medical affairs/real-world outcomes colleagues do not feel comfortable but defer to you on how to proceed.
What Would You Do?
- Recommend to the marketing colleague that they follow-up individually with the medical affairs and real-world outcomes teams prior to the meeting to provide input that can be discussed in the meeting, but the marketing team should not be in attendance at the meeting
- Reassure medical affairs/real-world outcomes colleagues that it is appropriate for marketing colleagues to attend this medical affairs business planning meeting and provide input into the discussions
- Explain to the marketing colleagues that while it is appropriate for marketing to hear and provide input into the medical strategy from a strategic point of view, marketing colleagues should not be involved in guiding the publication plan or reviewing the content of any publication
- Hold a separate meeting with the marketing team to present the strategic publications and data communication portions of the business plan for their information only
Poll results are planned to be shared in late February 2021.