Abstract:
A system and method for managing customer interaction activities of medical liaison personnel of a sponsor organization with health professional customers to achieve one or more desired business outcomes is disclosed. The system uses a customer relation database to record data regarding customer interaction activity of the medical liaison personnel and data regarding the business outcomes achieved or not achieved during the predetermined time period. The system correlates the customer interaction activity data and the business outcome data so that it can be used to conduct capacity and tactical assessments for future medical liaison activities. A method for targeting medical thought leaders or other health professionals who are most likely to achieve the business outcomes is also disclosed. In one embodiment, the system also provides a method for surveying the health professional customers to determine their level of satisfaction with medical liaison personnel and sponsor organization.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
         [0001]    This invention relates to a management system for the efficient management and evaluation of medical support groups in the pharmaceutical, bio-pharmaceutical and medical device industries.  
         BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
         [0002]    Virtually all major pharmaceutical companies have deployed field-based medical support programs. Medical liaison personnel have supported a range of customers, including medical thought leaders (MTL), investigators, and health care decision makers. The necessity of support will increase with technological advances, consolidation of decision making, and the increasing complexity of health care decisions.  
           [0003]    Field-based medical support programs were established as a result of the necessity for more knowledgeable personnel to support and advise the medical industry. Initially, a small group of technically-oriented sales representatives was formed with the goal of improving the image of the company with researchers, key opinion leaders, and investigators. These medical science liaisons (MSLs), as they were known, utilized face-to-face peer interactions to better understand what their customers needed and to leverage products into ongoing research activities.  
           [0004]    Today, professionals having advanced degrees constitute the majority of pharmaceutical company medical personnel. As a result of their advanced education, training, and clinical experience, field-based medical personnel are regarded as more knowledgeable than pharmaceutical company sales representatives and account executives and are favored by some customer segments in clinical peer discussions. The services offered by field-based medical personnel have evolved over time with the increasing complexity of marketed products and customer medical information and education needs.  
           [0005]    Due to the changes in patient treatment options today, field-based medical liaisons work with a continually changing mix of opinion leaders and decision makers. Although most health care providers are interested in traditional safety and efficacy information, some seek information on health economic/pharmacoeconomic analyses, outcomes, disease management information, and clinical programs (i.e. treatment algorithms, practice guidelines, and care mapping). Ultimately, they desire this data for their own practice setting or environment in order to reflect the clinical and cost structures unique to their patient mix.  
           [0006]    Until now, there has been little or no means available for assessment of the impact of MSL activity on the sponsor company&#39;s business objectives. Internal evaluation, if any, has been typically limited to merely recording the activities of the individuals on a MSL team.  
           [0007]    Consequently, there is a need for a system to optimize the management of an MSL team and establish business metrics (measuring elements) to accurately track the MSL team activities, track the time spent performing various tasks and in customer interaction, and measure the business impact of the MSL team.  
         SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
         [0008]    The present invention is a system that provides a means to generate business metrics that enable the MSL team to plan for and manage their activities, effectively allocate resources, and measure their accomplishments. The assignment of specific business outcomes toward a targeted MTL allows for the MSL team&#39;s efforts to be incorporated into the sponsor company&#39;s overall business planning process and business objectives.  
           [0009]    The methods of the present invention may be used by pharmaceutical company in determining the appropriate use of access channels to the customer. The metrics derived from the methods of the present invention enable executive management to optimally allocate resources across customer-interfacing groups within the organization in order to achieve vital business objectives.  
           [0010]    The methods of the present invention are organized into a cyclic process consisting of three phases: Planning, Executing, and Evaluating.  
           [0011]    The Planning phase provides methods for determining “real world” MSL capacity, MTL targeting and selection, incorporating MSL business objectives in support of the sponsor company&#39;s overall business strategy, and defining performance metrics.  
           [0012]    During the Executing phase, the system provides for the assessment of performance and documentation of MSL activities. This information is summarized to produce the targeted customer lists (TCL) and to efficiently focus the resources of the sponsor company.  
           [0013]    The Evaluating phase involves assessment of MSL impact through analysis of achieved business outcomes, MSL-specific surveys of targeted MTLs, impact on prescribing behavior of targeted MTLs and their influence network, and analysis of the value provided by the MSL&#39;s internal activities (training sales, reviewing protocols, etc.). The outputs of the Executing phase&#39;s activity assessment and Evaluation phase allow for refinement of future planning and execution, thereby providing a cyclic system for continuous business improvement.  
           [0014]    A system and method for managing customer interaction activities of medical liaison personnel of a sponsor organization with health professional customers to achieve one or more desired business outcomes is disclosed. The system uses a customer relation database to record data regarding customer interaction activity of the medical liaison personnel and data regarding the business outcomes achieved or not achieved during the predetermined time period. The system correlates the customer interaction activity data and the business outcome data so that it can be used to conduct capacity and tactical assessments for future medical liaison activities. A method for targeting medical thought leaders or other health professionals who are most likely to achieve the business outcomes is also disclosed. In one embodiment, the system also provides a method for surveying the health professional customers to determine their level of satisfaction with medical liaison personnel and sponsor organization. 
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0015]    [0015]FIG. 1 is a schematic of the relationship of the data structures, execution phase and evaluation output.  
         [0016]    [0016]FIG. 2 is a schematic of the planning, execution and evaluation phases.  
         [0017]    [0017]FIG. 3 is a flow chart diagram of a preferred embodiment of the method of the present invention. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
       [0018]    With reference to FIGS. 1 through 3, the flow path relationship of the activities of the planning, execution and evaluation phases will be based on the desired information needed to obtain a specific business objective. The activities of the MSLs in each phase and the evaluation of the information obtained by these activities is discussed herein.  
         [0019]    [0019]FIG. 1 shows an illustration of data structures, execution sub-processes and evaluation output. Block  10  shows examples of data types to be tracked in a customer relation database table from MSL timesheets. Block  12  is a sample data structure for and MSL Activity/Business Outcome table and block  14  is a sample data structure for data relating to Outcome Details. The data may be recorded in a relational database as is well known in the art. Circle  16  illustrates an overview of the sub-processes executed by the sponsor organization (or the consultants or outside advisers) of the present system. Data is collected regarding the MTLs, the activities of the MSLs, the business outcomes achieved or not achieved, and MTK satisfaction. This data is recorded in a database or databases and may be used for planning or evaluation of the impact of the MSL activities on the sponsor organization business objectives. Block  18  illustrates types of output from the databases that may be used by the management of the sponsor organization to analyze the results of MSL activities.  
         [0020]    [0020]FIG. 2 illustrates the iterative nature of the system. Block  22  lists sample factors for assessing the capacity of an MSL team for a predetermined time period such as a month, calendar quarter or year. Once capacity has been determined, it is correlated to desired business outcomes such as those set forth in block  24 . After the plan has been executed, the sponsor organization management can evaluate the impact of the MSL activity on the business outcomes as illustrated in block  26 . The measures of business outcome correlated with activity data can then be assessed and used by management as shown in block  28  and used to establish plans for future capacity allocation and tactical planning.  
         [0021]    A preferred embodiment of the method of the present invention is illustrated in FIG. 3. In step  30 , the sponsor organization&#39;s business objectives are established. Typically, these objectives would conform to generally accepted industry objectives. Desired business outcomes of the MSL activity such as those set forth in detail below are defined in step  31 . The types or attributes of MTL interaction activities to be carried out by the MSLs are defined in step  32 . In step  33 , management assesses the capacity of the MSL team to accomplish the desired business outcomes. To optimize potential success of the plan, specific MTLs are targeted for achieving the business outcomes in step  34 . More detail regarding a preferred method of targeting MTLs is set forth below. The MTL interaction activities of the MSL team and the business outcomes achieved or not achieved are recorded in the database for a given time period as shown in steps  35  and  36 . The activity and business outcome data are correlated in step  37 . In step  38  the business outcomes are evaluated relative to the activities performed. The targeted MTLs are surveyed preferably using the survey method set forth below in step  39  to determine MTL satisfaction with the MSL activities and other factors such as educational support or product. In step  40 , the impact of the business outcomes and/or the interaction activities are evaluated relative to the planned business objectives. This evaluation may be used to re-start the overall process as illustrated by arrow  41 . Optionally, if no new activity attributes are defined, step  32  may be omitted in subsequent iterations as indicated by arrow  42 .  
         [0022]    Planning and Executing Phases  
         [0023]    The system of the present invention begins with a planning and initialization phase wherein the desired objective of the sponsor company initiates an assessment method for a desired outcome.  
         [0024]    Time Tracking/Capacity Assessment and Workload Build-Up  
         [0025]    Time tracking is accomplished by implementing a system that allows time spent in a set of time categories to be documented. Generally, a set of time categories is established and each is assigned an activity attribute also known as an Activity Type. Examples of Activity Types and a corresponding activity code are set forth in Table 1.  
                           TABLE 1                                   Activity               Code   Activity Type                           BUSSOL   Business Solution - MSL helps provide a               solution that improves MTL&#39;s ability to               utilize the Sponsor&#39;s products.           MEDSOL   Medical Solution - MSL helps provide a               solution to MTL&#39;s disease management               practices.           KX   Knowledge Exchange - Interaction focuses on               the exchange of scientific/competitor               information.           RECRUIT   Recruit - Engage in conversation with topic               being the MTL participating in a Sponsor event/               activity (e.g., Investigator, Speaker,               Consultant, Author)           COACH   Coach - Coaching; helping prepare MTL               for talk, formulary presentation,               other presentation, etc.           REL   Relationship Building - Engaging and               nurturing relationship with knowledge               exchange not being the focus. Interaction               is more social/personal in nature.           NET   Networking - Activities that connect customers.               Allows MSL to become the hub for MTL to               MTL/other interactions.           ASSESS   Assess - Investigate potential clinical               investigational sites.                      
 
         [0026]    The available categories are not limited to those listed in Table 1, but can be expanded or deleted as necessary to obtain a desired business objective. If an internal tracking system is not available or unable to incorporate the MSL-specific time tracking categories, a computer-based system utilizing commercially available customer relation management (CRM) software for time tracking and resource allocation metrics can be modified for utilization.  
         [0027]    In order to determine the amount of time available for engaging in customer interactions, one must first determine the number of days that a MSL has available to meet with customers. Example 1 illustrates a typical capacity calculation for a MSL individual  
       EXAMPLE 1  
     MSL Capacity Calculation  
       [0028]    240 workdays per year minus  
         [0029]    15 days Society Meetings (3 mtgs/year);  
         [0030]    12 days Team Meetings (quarterly);  
         [0031]    4 days Sub-Team Meetings;  
         [0032]    4 days Departmental alignment meetings (Quarterly);  
         [0033]    10 days ad hoc project meetings with HQ staff;  
         [0034]    10 days Advisory Board Meetings (5 mtgs/year);  
         [0035]    10 days Professional/career development; and  
         [0036]    10 to 15 vacation days equals  
         [0037]    165 potential days (i.e. 33 weeks or 69% of their total time)  
         [0038]    Upon determining the number of available customer days, one must determine the time spent conducting tasks that take away from time spent in customer interactions.  
       EXAMPLE 2  
     Time Away From Targeted Customers  
       [0039]    0.5 day/week Travel;  
         [0040]    0.5 day/week Knowledge Acquisition/Management;  
         [0041]    0.5 day/week Project management (e.g., list activity, protocol review etc.);  
         [0042]    0.5 day/week Administrative activities (e.g., CRM data input, expenses, routing/scheduling; equals  
         [0043]    2 days/week away from customers  
         [0044]    Thus, by way of illustration, an MSL will have an average of three days per week available to interact with customers. If one multiplies the number of days per week by the number of available weeks, the days available per year to interact with customers is obtained, e.g., three days times 33 weeks equals 99 days with customers.  
         [0045]    Thereafter, the amount of time can be further broken down by the amount of customer interactions that can be conducted per day in the field and, on average, how many times per year each customer should be visited to achieve the sponsor company&#39;s objectives.  
         [0046]    Again, by way of illustration, experience in the industry has shown that an MSL can have approximately five face-to-face interactions per day on prospective MTLs. Therefore, an MSL could make approximately 500 calls per year (5 calls per day multiplied by the ˜100 available days. If the total number of calls possible by the MSL team per year was divided by the number of times an MSL member should meet with an MTL, for example, 6 meeting per year, that equates to interaction with 83 MTLs.  
         [0047]    Based on this information combined with the results of the systems discussed below (i.e. MTL targeting system, CRM, statistical analysis and survey), at certain intervals of time, for example, annually, the sponsor company may evaluate the MSL group to ascertain whether its desired objective have been obtained. If the objective has not been obtained, the time spent on the elements noted in the above example can be changed to produce a different outcome which is closer to or meets the initial sponsor company objective based on analysis in the evaluation phase.  
         [0048]    Establishing and Implementing Business Outcomes  
         [0049]    In the system of the present invention, the desired business outcomes are defined by their attributes. Business outcomes are defined so that they are objective, measurable, and obvious to stakeholders when achieved. The business outcomes are typically chosen to reflect the activities of the customer physicians that the MSL group is able to influence. Typical MTL activities include, for example, publishing medical articles, conducting clinical investigations, attending formulary meetings, and lecturing. Generally, each defined business outcome is assigned a business outcome attribute also known as a Business Outcome Type. Examples of Business Outcome Types and a corresponding business outcome code are set forth in Table 2.  
                   TABLE 2                       Business           Outcome Code   Business Outcome Type                   INVESTIGATOR   Investigator - MTL becomes a Sponsor           investigator.       FORMULARY   Formulary Supporter - MTL advocates Sponsor       SUPPORTER   product at formulary meeting.       SPEAKER   Speaker - MTL speaks on Sponsor-selected           topic.       CONSULTANT   Consultant - MTL serves as regional or           national consultant.       AUTHOR   Author - MTL publishes article favorable to           Sponsor product or disease management strategy.       PRESCRIBER   Prescriber - MTL prescribes Sponsor&#39;s product           to a predetermined level (e.g., market share,           prescription volume).                  
 
         [0050]    The available Business Outcome Types are not limited to those listed in Table 2, but can be expanded or deleted as necessary to obtain a desired business objective.  
         [0051]    Targeting Specific MTLs Using MTL Attributes The present invention includes a process for selecting and prioritizing MTLs according to a multiple attribute system that can assign specific weight to individual attributes to support the sponsor&#39;s customer management strategy to obtain a desired objective. The attributes measured are quantifiable and objective in nature. The MTL attributes can be categorized into measures of “voice” in the marketplace, i.e. publications, presentations, and relevant clinical investigation experience and measures of commercial potential/class prescription volume.  
         [0052]    The attributes in the market place “voice” category are crucial for increasing product/brand awareness in the relevant medical communities and also reflect the degree of influence that an MTL exerts in these communities. These attributes can be used to prioritize MTLs along the dimension of influence on the practices of physicians in their sphere of influence. Such influence by MTLs has a major impact on acceptance and market uptake of pharmaceuticals. Commercial attributes, such as dollar volume of prescription writing, can be used to target MTLs who may have a direct business impact via their prescription writing for FDA approved indications. By assessing these attributes, MTLs are targeted in a manner that supports the sponsor company&#39;s business strategy. It is the responsibility of the MSL to develop business plans that outline major goals set for quarterly or annual evaluation, for example, the number of MTL journal publications, presentations, clinical investigations and number in prescription written.  
         [0053]    Below is an example of an MTL prioritization process in accordance with the present invention. In this framework, quantifiable MTL attributes representative of “market voice” and commercial importance are identified and assigned a value. The value is then normalized by converting it into an Individual Component Relative Ranking Index (ICRRI) by the following equation:  
           ICRRI =value/((highest value−lowest value)/10)  
         [0054]    which will result in an ICRRI with a value between approximately 1 and 10. Each attribute is evaluated based on the same equation:  
         Publications=Value/(highest value−lowest value)/10= ICRRI    
         Presentations=Value/(highest value−lowest value)/10= ICRRI    
         Investigations=Value/(highest value−lowest value)/10= ICRRI    
         Commercial Measure/Prescriptions=Value/(highest value−lowest value)/10= ICRRI    
         [0055]    For example, the relative ranking index for publications may be calculated as follows:  
         Publications Relative Ranking Index=number of publications/((most publications by any MTL in the group−lowest number of publications by any  MTL  in the group)/10)  
       EXAMPLE 3  
     Using 10 Publications  
       [0056]    [0056]               Publication                 Relative                 Ranking                 Index     =     10   /     (       (     50   -   2     )     /   10     )                   =   2.083                                 
       EXAMPLE 4  
     Using 20 Publications  
       [0057]    [0057]               Publication                 Relative                 Ranking                 Index     =     20   /     (       (     50   -   2     )     /   10     )                   =   4.17                                 
         [0058]    This same approach for calculating an ICRRI for the other MTL attributes such as Presentations, Investigations, and Commercial Measure.  
       EXAMPLE 5  
     ICRRI for Evaluation of MTL During Different Stages of Product Development and Market Life  
       [0059]    Upon obtaining the index for each attribute as described above during the FDA approval process, e.g.,  
         [0060]    Publication RRI=2.083  
         [0061]    Presentation RRI=2.791  
         [0062]    Investigations RRI=2.622  
         [0063]    Commercial RRI=0 (note: since drug not approved, no prescriptions could be written)  
         [0064]    The final MTL Relative Ranking Index is obtained by multiplying each ICRRI by a weighting value (making sure all weights sum to 1; e.g., 0.2, 0.4, 0.3, 0.1) and then sum the weight-adjusted component indices for the prioritization. The assignment of the weighting value corresponds to the importance of a particular attribute at a particular time.  
                                                                     MTL Attribute   weighted component = 1.0   value                                Publication RRI =   2.083 × 0.4 =   0.83                       Presentation RRI =   2.791 × 0.5 =   1.40       Investigations RRI =   2.622 × 0.1 =   0.26       Commercial RRI =   0.0 × 0.0 =   0.0                  
 
         [0065]    This would then be evaluated by the sponsor company&#39;s goals as discussed above. Here, the amount of presentation would be found as the most prevalent attribute of the MTL targeted and should correspond to the goals set by the sponsor company at the particular time for a particular product.  
         [0066]    However, the weighting of the index allows for changing the weights based on product lifecycle stage, without having to do major recalculations i.e., commercial can be weighted as zero during product development, or can be weighted heavily i.e., 0.8 for late phases in the product lifecycle. For example using the number achieved above but making evaluating 1 year after FDA approval:  
               MTL                 Attribute     _               weighted                 component     =   1.0     _           value   _               Publication                 RRI           =     2.083   ×   0.1             =   0.2               Presentation                 RRI           =     2.791   ×   0.1             =   0.2               Investigations                 RRI           =     2.622   ×   0.0             =   0.0               Commercial                 RRI           =     20.0   ×   0.8             =   16.0                               
 
         [0067]    If the highest ranking attribute coincides with the goal set by the sponsor company, the MSL has succeeded in obtaining the required objective. At a time of one year after FDA approval as illustrated above, the most predominate attribute may be commercial productivity, i.e. prescription writing, having a value of 16. This value should coincide with the objective of the sponsor company at one year after FDA approval.  
         [0068]    Using sample data, Table 3 illustrates how a group of potential MTLs may be prioritized by ranking them according to the ICRRI. The attributes shown in this illustration are publications, presentations, clinical investigations, and commercial value of the individual prescription writing.  
                                                                                           TABLE 3                       Illustration of Prioritization of MTLs Using MTL Attributes                                                Total                                   Neoplasms   MM   Onc   ASCO   ASH Oral   ESMO   Total   Clinical       Last Name   First Name   Pubs   Pubs   Pubs   Presents   Presents   Presents   Presents   Investgtns               Barlogie   Bart   264   35   299   17   9   5   31   35       Alexanian   Raymond   145   9   154   15   6   6   27   25       Berenson   James   85   24   109   13   8   7   28   19       Blade   Joan   96   16   112   18   6   5   29   16       Ahmed   Tausee   97   1   98   9   4   5   18   20       Anderson   Kenneth   89   42   131   7   2   6   15   17       Attal   Michel   19   10   29   4   1   4   9   13       Akhtar   N   5   2   7   4   3   4   11   7       Alsina   Melissa   36   5   41   8   2   2   12   6       Bensinger   William   9   3   12   8   3   5   16   4       Besa   Emmanuel   3   1   4   5   3   3   11   3       Barrett   A   7   2   9   3   1   7   11   3       Agha   M   3   1   4   5   1   2   8   4                            Commercial   Pubs   Presents   Investigtns   Commercial                   Value ($   Ranking   Ranking   Ranking   Ranking   Prioritization           Last Name   MM scripts)   Variable   Variable   Variable   Variable   Index Value                       Barlogie   $2,789,369   10.136   13.478   10.938   7.158   11.161           Alexanian   $3,819,765   5.220   11.739   7.813   9.802   8.671           Berenson   $3,896,778   3.695   12.174   5.938   10.000   7.766           Blade   $1,907,222   3.797   12.609   5.000   4.894   7.031           Ahmed   $2,689,996   3.322   7.826   6.250   6.903   6.203           Anderson   $2,893,565   4.441   6.522   5.313   7.426   5.712           Attal   $798,007   0.983   3.913   4.063   2.048   3.200           Akhtar   $3,002,298   0.237   4.783   2.188   7.705   3.128           Alsina   $978,232   1.390   5.217   1.875   2.510   2.844           Bensinger   $478,563   0.407   6.957   1.250   1.228   2.791           Besa   $298,786   0.136   4.783   0.938   0.767   1.914           Barrett   $0   0.305   4.783   0.938   0.000   1.871           Agha   $1,000,277   0.136   3.478   1.250   2.567   1.827                                                                                              
 
         [0069]    The results obtained by the attribute system may serve as part of the basis for the planning stage of a second cycle in obtaining another business objective defined by the sponsor company. The results of the components in the Evaluation Phase and in the CRM discussed below will also serve as the basis.  
         [0070]    Customer Relation Management System (CRM)  
         [0071]    The system of the present invention requires that customer interactions be documented and that certain attributes regarding the nature, duration, costs and date of each interaction be captured for retrospective analysis. A mechanism for tracking MSL activities and their impact is incorporated into a Customer Relation Management System (CRM). MSL-specific activity attributes may be incorporated into an existing CRM (using commercially available software with modifications) for the purposes of providing the data for analyses. The CRM allows for the assignment of specific business outcomes (see types and definitions above) to specifically targeted MTLs and preferably will define an end point when an outcome is achieved. Each customer interaction is documented in the CRM and is classified according to an activity type (see types and their definitions below). The CRM is capable of providing queries by MSL, MTL, Business Outcome Type, and Activity Type etc.  
         [0072]    The present invention allows the information to be evaluated in order to provide for more efficient use of the time of interaction between the MSL and the MTL. This is based on the Customer Relation Management System (described below) which memorializes the interactions between the MSL and the MTL.  
         [0073]    The data obtained from CRM is available for periodic reporting of activities and outcome achievement. As illustrated in Table 4, the periodic reporting format may be in the form of a “Scorecard”. The Scorecard consists of territory, regional, and national level data (the resolution to be defined by the Sponsor&#39;s MSL organizational structure). Information that may be included is the number of activities by type and by duration, funds spent/track to plan, time utilization, and position vacancies. These categories are not limiting and may be modified as needed to meet the predefined business objectives.  
                                                                           TABLE 4                           CRM Data for MSL Dr. John Know by MTL       for Targeted Investigator Outcome                                Targeted   Outcome       Interaction   MTL Last   MTL First   Activity   Duration of   Business   Achieved       Date   Name   Name   Type   Interaction   Outcome   (Y/N)?                    Jan. 5, 2002   Adams   Joan   REL   30   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   25   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   10   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Adams   Joan   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Adams   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Adams   Joan   REL   120   Investigator   Y       Jul. 9, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   50   Investigator   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Adams   Joan   NET   45   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Aden   A   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Aden   A   ASSESS   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Aden   A   RECRUIT   120   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Aden   A   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Aden   A   REL   20   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Aden   A   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Benek   James   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Benek   James   ASSESS   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Benek   James   KX   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Benek   James   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Benek   James   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Benek   James   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Benek   James   REL   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Benek   James   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Benek   James   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Casey   N   REL   10   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Casey   N   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Casey   N   ASSESS   60   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   120   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Casey   N   REL   20   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Casey   N   KX   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Casey   N   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   50   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   ASSESS   20   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   25   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Emrick   Michel   ASSESS   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Emrick   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   25   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   10   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   120   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   NET   50   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   20   Investigator   Y       Jul. 20, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   20   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Gerber   M   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Gerber   M   ASSESS   60   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Gerber   M   NET   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Gerber   M   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   10   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   REL   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   ASSESS   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   RECRUIT   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   BUSSOL   60   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   KX   120   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Howe   Tausee   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Howe   Tausee   KX   50   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Howe   Tausee   KX   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Howe   Tausee   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Howe   Tausee   NET   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Howe   Tausee   MEDSOL   30   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   25   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Keeler   Bart   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Keeler   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Keeler   Bart   KX   20   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Keeler   Bart   COACH   60   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Keeler   Bart   BUSSOL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   25   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   10   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   KX   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   ASSESS   50   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Markley   William   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Markley   William   RECRUIT   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Markley   William   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Markley   William   KX   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Markley   William   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Markley   William   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Martin   Joan   REL   30   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   25   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Martin   Joan   MEDSOL   10   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Martin   Joan   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Martin   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Martin   Joan   REL   120   Investigator   Y       Jul. 9, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   50   Investigator   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Martin   Joan   NET   45   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Metzger   A   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Metzger   A   KX   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Metzger   A   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Metzger   A   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Metzger   A   BUSSOL   20   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Metzger   A   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Milnes   James   ASSESS   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Milnes   James   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Milnes   James   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Milnes   James   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Milnes   James   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Myers   N   REL   10   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Myers   N   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Myers   N   ASSESS   60   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   120   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Myers   N   REL   20   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Myers   N   KX   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Myers   N   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   50   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   ASSESS   20   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   25   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Nolan   Michel   KX   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Nolan   Michel   ASSESS   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Nolan   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   25   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   ASSESS   10   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   120   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   NET   50   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   20   Investigator   Y       Jul. 20, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Owens   M   REL   20   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Owens   M   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Owens   M   REL   60   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Owens   M   NET   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Owens   M   REL   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Owens   M   REL   10   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   120   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   KX   120   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   ASSESS   50   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   NET   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   MEDSOL   30   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   25   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Petty   Bart   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Petty   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Petty   Bart   KX   20   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Petty   Bart   COACH   60   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Petty   Bart   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   25   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   10   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   KX   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Pollack   William   RECRUIT   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Pollack   William   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Pollack   William   KX   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Potter   Joan   REL   30   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   25   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   10   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Potter   Joan   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Potter   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Potter   Joan   REL   120   Investigator   Y       Jul. 9, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   50   Investigator   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Potter   Joan   NET   45   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Ramsey   A   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Ramsey   A   KX   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Ramsey   A   RECRUIT   120   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Ramsey   A   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Ramsey   A   REL   20   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Ramsey   A   KX   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Reinhart   James   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Reinhart   James   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Richards   N   REL   10   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Richards   N   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Richards   N   REL   60   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   120   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Richards   N   REL   20   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Richards   N   KX   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Richards   N   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   50   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   ASSESS   20   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   25   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   40   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   60   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Ryan   Michel   KX   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Ryan   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   25   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   RECRUIT   10   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   120   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   NET   50   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   20   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   20   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Schmitt   M   KX   40   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Schmitt   M   RECRUIT   60   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Schmitt   M   NET   30   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Schmitt   M   BUSSOL   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   10   Investigator   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   120   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   40   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   60   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   KX   50   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   KX   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   NET   60   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   30   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   25   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   ASSESS   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   KX   20   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   40   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   COACH   60   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   KX   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   25   Investigator   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   10   Investigator   Y       Jan. 4, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   KX   120   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   50   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   60   Investigator   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Wellington   William   RECRUIT   30   Investigator   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Wellington   William   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       May 18, 2002   Wellington   William   KX   10   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   40   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   60   Investigator   N                  
 
         [0074]    Referring to Table 4, a scorecard is illustrated summarizing various types of activities and recorded information based on the interaction between the MSL representative, Dr. John Know and various MTLs over a predefined period of time. These particular activities were concentrated for the particular business outcome goal of investigator (as described above). This information is further summarized in Table 5, wherein the time spent is particularly broken down in order to be able to use the information based on whether the business outcome (investigator) had been achieved and what types of activities may need to be done, in terms of changing the activities when interacting with a particular MTL. Table 5 illustrates the activity data for each particular MSL in a certain period of time. This output allows (a) evaluation by management as to the daily activity of an MSL and (b) a journal for organization and planning of the MSL activity in the future.  
                                                                         TABLE 5                           Frequency by Activity Type and Cumulative Duration by MTL                                                Total In-                                                           teractions                                           Prior to   Average   Cumulative   Outcome           RE-               AS-               Achieving   Interaction   Interactions   Achieved   Business       MTL   CRUIT   COACH   REL   NET   SESS   BUSSOL   MEDSOL   KX   Outcome   Duration   Duration   (Y/N)   Outcome               Abptar   3       3       1           2   9   47.8   430   N   Investigator       Agha   1       2   1   1           1   6   35.0   210   Y   Investigator       Ahmed   1       3   1   1       1   2   9   52.8   475   Y   Investigator       Akhtar   3       3       1           2   9   47.8   430   N   Investigator       Alexanian   1       3   1   1           3   9   49.4   445   Y   Investigator       Alixandor   1       3   1   1           3   9   49.4   445   Y   Investigator       Alsina   1       1       1   1       2   6   54.2   325   Y   Investigator       Anderson   1       3       1           4   9   41.7   375   Y   Investigator       Andersten   1       3       1           4   9   41.7   375   Y   Investigator       Attal   4       3       1           1   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Baholst   1       1       1   1       2   6   61.7   370   Y   Investigator       Barlogie   1   1   4       1   1       1   9   48.9   440   Y   Investigator       Barrett   2       2       1           1   6   61.7   370   Y   Investigator       Barsot   1   1   4       1           2   9   48.9   440   Y   Investigator       Bensinger   2       3                   1   6   37.5   225   N   Investigator       Bensoner   2       4       1           2   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Bentinger   2       3                   1   6   37.5   225   N   Investigator       Berenson   2       3       1           3   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Besa   1       3       1           1   6   58.3   350   N   Investigator       Besalt   2       3                   1   6   58.3   350   N   Investigator       Blade   1       2   1   1           4   9   60.0   540   Y   Investigator       Burnast           4   1               1   6   29.2   175   N   Investigator       Cahmet   1       4   1   1       1   1   9   52.8   475   Y   Investigator       Calsina           3                   3   6   17.5   105   N   Investigator       Codst   3       3       1           2   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Dickerson   1       2   1   1       1   3   9   60.0   540   Y   Investigator       Fabptar   3       4                   2   9   47.8   430   N   Investigator       Fahmet           5   1   1           2   9   49.4   445   N   Investigator       Falexan   2       3   1               3   9   47.2   425   N   Investigator       Falsina           3                   3   6   47.5   285   N   Investigator       Feholst   2       2                   2   6   55.0   330   N   Investigator       Fendersten   1       3       1           4   9   42.8   385   Y   Investigator       Fensoner   2       4                   3   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Fersot   1   1   4       1           2   9   48.9   440   Y   Investigator       Fickerson   1       2   1   1           4   9   60.0   540   Y   Investigator       Fodsten   4       3                   2   9   43.9   395   N   Investigator       Funtinger   2       3                   1   6   37.5   225   N   Investigator       Furnast   1       2   1       1       1   6   30.8   185   Y   Investigator       Fusalt   2       3                   1   6   58.3   350   N   Investigator                  
 
         [0075]    Table 6 below illustrates yet another view of the exemplary data in which the frequency and duration of customer interaction are set forth by activity type for each MTL having a successful investigator outcome.  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     TABLE 6                       Summary of Frequency and Duration by Activity Type       Resulting in Successful Investigation Outcome                                    Outcome Achieved (Y/N)?   Y                        Targeted   MTL                   Business   Last   Activity       Outcome   Name   Type   Data   Total                    Inves-   Gerber   RECRUIT   Count of   1       tigator           Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   25                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   10                   of Interaction                Gerber Count of Activity Type   2           Gerber Sum of Duration of Interaction   35                Howe   MEDSOL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   30                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   25                   of Interaction                Howe Count of Activity Type   2           Howe Sum of Duration of Interaction   55                Fitch   KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   100                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   20                   of Interaction                Fitch Count ofActivity Type   3           Fitch Sum of Duration of Interaction   120                Osborne   KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   100                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   20                   of Interaction                Osborne Count of Activity Type   3           Osborne Sum of Duration of Interaction   120                Hicks   BUSSOL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   60                   of Interaction               KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   160                   of Interaction                Hicks Count of Activity Type   3           Hicks Sum of Duration of Interaction   220                Dodds   KX   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   40                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   60                   of Interaction                Dodds Count of Activity Type   2           Dodds Sum of Duration of Interaction   100                Nichols   KX   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   40                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   60                   of Interaction                Nichols Count of Activity Type   2           Nichols Sum of Duration of Interaction   100                Metzger   KX   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   40                   of Interaction                Metzger Count of Activity Type   1           Metzger Sum of Duration of Interaction   40                Keeler   REL   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   35                   of Interaction                Keeler Count of Activity Type   2           Keeler Sum of Duration of Interaction   35                Aden   KX   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   40                   of Interaction                Aden Count of Activity Type   1           Aden Sum of Duration of Interaction   40                Petty   REL   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   35                   of Interaction                Petty Count of Activity Type   2           Petty Sum of Duration of Interaction   35                Adams   KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   90                   of Interaction               NET   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   45                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   120                   of Interaction                Adams Count of Activity Type   4           Adams Sum of Duration of Interaction   255                Patterson   MEDSOL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   30                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   25                   of Interaction                Patterson Count of Activity Type   2           Patterson Sum of Duration of Interaction   55                Martin   KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   90                   of Interaction               NET   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   45                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   120                   of Interaction                Martin Count of Activity Type   4           Martin Sum of Duration of Interaction   255                Rosen   KX   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   40                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   60                   of Interaction                Rosen Count of Activity Type   2           Rosen Sum of Duration of Interaction   100                Ulshafer   REL   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   35                   of Interaction                Ulshafer Count of Activity Type   2           Ulshafer Sum of Duration of Interaction   35                Potter   KX   Count of   2                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   90                   of Interaction               NET   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   45                   of Interaction               REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   120                   of Interaction                Potter Count of Activity Type   4           Potter Sum of Duration of Interaction   255                Schmitt   REL   Count of   1                   Activity Type                   Sum of Duration   10                   of Interaction                Schmitt Count of Activity Type   1           Schmitt Sum of Duration of Interaction   10            Investigator Count of Activity Type   42       Investigator Sum of Duration of Interaction   1865       Total Count of Activity Type   42       Total Sum of Duration of Interaction   1865                  
 
         [0076]    The data incorporated into the CRM are particularly useful for prompt, accurate and specific “activity to outcome” analysis. For example, the interactions with MTL Adams yielded a desired outcome of investigator based on the activities and time as highlighted in FIG. 2. In contrast, the desired outcome of investigator was not achieved by the activities and time spent on MTL Philbin.  
         [0077]    Evaluating Phase  
         [0078]    The Evaluating phase examines metrics of different categories from a variety of sources. Among these sources are commercial data, i.e., increased prescriptions of particular product, business outcomes analyses, i.e., based on the Scorecard information, internal services provided to the MTL, and survey results.  
         [0079]    Direct Analysis  
         [0080]    The impact of MSL activities may be measured in commercial terms. By targeting MSL efforts toward a select group of physicians/outcomes, the conditions are met to enable comparison of product prescribing between the targeted physicians/institutions and the relevant physician/institution universe. For example, to examine the impact of MSL activities, the targeted customer&#39;s product utilization uptake can be compared to the appropriate customer universe. More rapid uptake would result in an increase in the slope of the sales curve over the time since launch, compared to the slope of the sales curve of the comparator population. Historically, the rate of market uptake following launch is a major determinant of total sales over the commercial life of the drug.  
         [0081]    Indirect Analysis  
         [0082]    The statistical tests (e.g., ANCOVA) detect variables that co-vary (in this case, activity types and business outcome types) with a given outcome status (achieved or non-achieved). This permits objective measurement of the effort required to achieve a targeted business outcome, thereby increasing the accuracy of MSL capacity assessments and commercial planning efforts. During the Evaluating phase, the data pertaining to business outcomes, and activities conducted in the attempt to achieve these outcomes, is analyzed. The analyses determine which activities and at what frequency/duration resulted in achieved outcomes, versus those activities and frequency/duration that resulted in non-achievement of a targeted outcome. The determination is accomplished through conducting a statistical analysis that provides the aggregate weight of individual activity types for a specific business outcome type differentiated by achievement and non-achievement.  
         [0083]    Tables 7 and 8 illustrate a statistical analysis of the average frequency of interactions by activity type with respect to achievement and non-achievement of an investigator outcome based on the data in Table 4.  
                                                       TABLE 7                       Statistical Analysis of Investigator Outcome Data                                    Outcome                   Business   Achieved       Average       Outcome   (Y/N)   Data   Interactions   StdDevP               Investigator   N   Average of   2.412   0.771               RECRUIT       Investigator   N   Average of               COACH       Investigator   N   Average of   3.238   0.610               REL       Investigator   N   Average of   1.000   0.000               NET       Investigator   N   Average of   1.000   0.000               ASSESS       Investigator   N   Average of               BUSSOL       Investigator   N   Average of               MEDSOL       Investigator   N   Average of   1.857   0.774               KX       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.056   0.229               RECRUIT       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.000   0.000               COACH       Investigator   Y   Average of   2.667   0.943               REL       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.000   0.000               NET       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.000   0.000               ASSESS       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.000   0.000               BUSSOL       Investigator   Y   Average of   1.000   0.000               MEDSOL       Investigator   Y   Average of   2.444   1.165               KX                        Investigator Average of RECRUIT   1.714   0.881           Investigator Average of COACH   1.000   0.000           Investigator Average of REL   2.974   0.832           Investigator Average of NET   1.000   0.000           Investigator Average of ASSESS   1.000   0.000           Investigator Average of BUSSOL   1.000   0.000           Investigator Average of MEDSOL   1.000   0.000           Investigator Average of KX   2.128   1.017           Total Average of RECRUIT   1.714   0.881           Total Average of COACH   1.000   0.000           Total Average of REL   2.974   0.832           Total Average of NET   1.000   0.000           Total Average of ASSESS   1.000   0.000           Total Average of BUSSOL   1.000   0.000           Total Average of MEDSOL   1.000   0.000           Total Average of KX   2.128   1.017                      
 
         [0084]    [0084]                                                             TABLE 8                       N Data   N Data       Sum of               Average   StdDevP   Difference   StdDevPs   Significance                                    2.412   0.771   −1.356   1.000   S−   RECRUIT**               1.000   0.000   S+   COACH**       3.238   0.61   −0.571   1.553   NS   REL       1   0   0.000   0.000   NS   NET       1   0   0.000   0.000   NS   ASSESS               1.000   0.000   S+   BUSSOL**               1.000   0.000   S+   MEDSOL**       1.857   0.774   0.587   1.939   NS   KX                                                            
         [0085]    Several conclusions may be drawn from the statistical analyses in Tables 7 and 8. For example, the data average for recruiting type activity suggests that if the MSL does not get a commitment after two recruiting interactions, then an investigator outcome is highly unlikely. Also, based on this exemplary data, coaching, medical solutions and business solutions interactions improve the likelihood of a successful investigator outcome. The data suggest that a successful approach to achieve an investigator outcome may be obtained through the following set of interactions:  
                                       1.056   RECRUIT interactions       1.000   COACH interactions       2.667   REL interactions       1.000   NET interactions       1.000   ASSESS interactions       1.000   BUSSOL interactions       1.000   MEDSOL interactions       2.444   KX interactions       11.167   Total interactions plus or minus 3.111                  
 
         [0086]    A statistical analysis based on duration rather than frequency of interactions and activity types may also be derived from the data in a similar manner.  
         [0087]    Tables 9 and 10 illustrate a sample data and statistical analysis report for a second exemplary set of interactions in which multiple business outcomes were targeted over a predetermined period of time.  
                                                                           TABLE 9                           CRM Data for All MTL and All Targeted Business Outcomes                                Targeted   Outcome       Interaction   MTL Last   MTL First       Duration of   Business   Achieved       Date   Name   Name   Activity Type   Interaction   Outcome   (Y/N)?                    Jan. 5, 2002   Adams   Joan   REL   30   Author   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   25   Author   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   10   Author   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   40   Author   N       May 10, 2002   Adams   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Author   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Adams   Joan   REL   120   Author   Y       Jul. 9, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   50   Author   M       Aug. 2, 2002   Adams   Joan   KX   40   Author   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Adams   Joan   NET   45   Author   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Aden   A   REL   40   Consultant   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Aden   A   KX   60   Consultant   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Aden   A   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 18, 2002   Aden   A   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Aden   A   REL   20   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Aden   A   KX   40   Consultant   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Benek   James   REL   120   Consultant   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Benek   James   REL   50   Consultant   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Benek   James   KX   20   Consultant   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Benek   James   RECRUIT   40   Consultant   N       May 10, 2002   Benek   James   RECRUIT   60   Consultant   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Benek   James   KX   30   Consultant   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Benek   James   REL   25   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Benek   James   KX   10   Consultant   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Benek   James   REL   40   Consultant   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Casey   N   REL   10   Consultant   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Casey   N   KX   40   Consultant   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Casey   N   REL   60   Consultant   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 15, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Casey   N   REL   20   Consultant   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Casey   N   RECRUIT   40   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Casey   N   KX   60   Consultant   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Casey   N   REL   30   Consultant   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   50   Author   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   20   Author   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Author   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   N       May 15, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   30   Author   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   25   Author   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   10   Author   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   KX   40   Author   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Dodds   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Emrick   Michel   KX   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Emrick   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Emrick   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Emrick   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   25   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   RECRUIT   10   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   120   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   NET   50   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   REL   20   Investigator   Y       Jul. 20, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   40   Investigator   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Fitch   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   20   Prescriber   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Gerber   M   KX   40   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   60   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Gerber   M   NET   30   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   25   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Gerber   M   REL   10   Prescriber   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   REL   30   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   REL   25   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   REL   10   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   KX   40   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   KX   60   Prescriber   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Hicks   Melissa   KX   120   Prescriber   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   60   Prescriber   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Howe   Tausee   KX   120   Prescriber   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Howe   Tausee   KX   50   Prescriber   N       May 10, 2002   Howe   Tausee   KX   20   Prescriber   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Howe   Tausee   NET   60   Prescriber   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Howe   Tausee   MEDSOL   30   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Howe   Tausee   REL   25   Prescriber   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Keeler   Bart   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Keeler   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Keeler   Bart   KX   20   Speaker   N       May 10, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   40   Speaker   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Keeler   Bart   COACH   60   Speaker   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Keeler   Bart   KX   30   Speaker   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   25   Speaker   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Keeler   Bart   REL   10   Speaker   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Lucas   Emmanuel   REL   60   Speaker   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Markley   William   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Markley   William   RECRUIT   30   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Markley   William   RECRUIT   25   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Markley   William   KX   10   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Markley   William   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Markley   William   REL   60   Speaker   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Martin   Joan   REL   30   Author   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   25   Author   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   10   Author   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   40   Author   N       May 10, 2002   Martin   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Author   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Martin   Joan   REL   120   Author   Y       Jul. 9, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   50   Author   M       Aug. 2, 2002   Martin   Joan   KX   40   Author   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Martin   Joan   NET   45   Author   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Metzger   A   REL   40   Consultant   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Metzger   A   KX   60   Consultant   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Metzger   A   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 18, 2002   Metzger   A   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Metzger   A   REL   20   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Metzger   A   KX   40   Consultant   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   120   Consultant   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   50   Consultant   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Milnes   James   KX   20   Consultant   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Milnes   James   RECRUIT   40   Consultant   N       May 10, 2002   Milnes   James   RECRUIT   60   Consultant   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Milnes   James   KX   30   Consultant   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   25   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Milnes   James   KX   10   Consultant   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Milnes   James   REL   40   Consultant   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Myers   N   REL   10   Consultant   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Myers   N   KX   40   Consultant   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Myers   N   REL   60   Consultant   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 15, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Myers   N   REL   20   Consultant   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Myers   N   RECRUIT   40   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Myers   N   KX   60   Consultant   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Myers   N   REL   30   Consultant   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   50   Author   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   20   Author   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Author   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   N       May 15, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   30   Author   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   25   Author   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   10   Author   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   KX   40   Author   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Nichols   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Nolan   Michel   KX   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Nolan   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Nolan   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Nolan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   25   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   RECRUIT   10   Investigator   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   ASSESS   40   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   N       May 10, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   120   Investigator   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   NET   50   Investigator   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   REL   20   Investigator   Y       Jul. 20, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   40   Investigator   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Osborne   Raymond   KX   60   Investigator   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Owens   M   REL   20   Prescriber   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Owens   M   KX   40   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Owens   M   REL   60   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Owens   M   NET   30   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Owens   M   REL   25   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Owens   M   REL   10   Prescriber   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   30   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   25   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Padva   Melissa   REL   10   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   40   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   60   Prescriber   M       Aug. 28, 2002   Padva   Melissa   KX   120   Prescriber   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   60   Prescriber   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   KX   120   Prescriber   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   KX   50   Prescriber   N       May 10, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   KX   20   Prescriber   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   NET   60   Prescriber   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   MEDSOL   30   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Patterson   Tausee   REL   25   Prescriber   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Petty   Bart   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Petty   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Petty   Bart   KX   20   Speaker   N       May 10, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   40   Speaker   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Petty   Bart   COACH   60   Speaker   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Petty   Bart   KX   30   Speaker   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   25   Speaker   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Petty   Bart   REL   10   Speaker   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   6.0   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Philbin   Emmanuel   REL   60   Speaker   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Pollack   William   RECRUIT   30   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Pollack   William   RECRUIT   25   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Pollack   William   KX   10   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Pollack   William   REL   60   Speaker   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Potter   Joan   REL   30   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Feb. 7, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   25   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Mar. 8, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   10   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Apr. 2, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   40   Formulary   N                           Supporter       May 10, 2002   Potter   Joan   RECRUIT   60   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jun. 3, 2002   Potter   Joan   REL   120   Formulary   Y                           Supporter       Jul. 9, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   50   Formulary   M                           Supporter       Aug. 2, 2002   Potter   Joan   KX   40   Formulary   M                           Supporter       Aug. 28, 2002   Potter   Joan   NET   45   Formulary   M                           Supporter       Jan. 5, 2002   Ramsey   A   REL   40   Consultant   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Ramsey   A   KX   60   Consultant   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Ramsey   A   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 18, 2002   Ramsey   A   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Ramsey   A   REL   20   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Ramsey   A   KX   40   Consultant   Y       Jan. 5, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   120   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Feb. 7, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   50   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Mar. 8, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   20   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Apr. 2, 2002   Reinhart   James   RECRUIT   40   Formulary   N                           Supporter       May 10, 2002   Reinhart   James   RECRUIT   60   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jun. 3, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   30   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jul. 9, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   25   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Aug. 2, 2002   Reinhart   James   KX   10   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Aug. 28, 2002   Reinhart   James   REL   40   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jan. 5, 2002   Richards   N   REL   10   Consultant   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Richards   N   KX   40   Consultant   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Richards   N   REL   60   Consultant   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   120   Consultant   N       May 15, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   50   Consultant   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Richards   N   REL   20   Consultant   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Richards   N   RECRUIT   40   Consultant   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Richards   N   KX   60   Consultant   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Richards   N   REL   30   Consultant   N       Jan. 5, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   50   Author   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   20   Author   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   RECRUIT   40   Author   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   N       May 15, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   30   Author   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   25   Author   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   10   Author   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   KX   40   Author   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Rosen   Kenneth   REL   60   Author   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   120   Investigator   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Ryan   Michel   KX   50   Investigator   N       Mar. 9, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   20   Investigator   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       May 15, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   60   Investigator   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Ryan   Michel   REL   30   Investigator   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   25   Investigator   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Ryan   Michel   KX   10   Investigator   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Ryan   Michel   RECRUIT   40   Investigator   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   25   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Feb. 7, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   RECRUIT   10   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Mar. 8, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   RECRUIT   40   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Apr. 2, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   60   Formulary   N                           Supporter       May 10, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   120   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jun. 3, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   NET   50   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jul. 9, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   REL   20   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jul. 20, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   40   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Aug. 28, 2002   Saxton   Raymond   KX   60   Formulary   N                           Supporter       Jan. 5, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   20   Prescriber   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Schmitt   M   KX   40   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   60   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Schmitt   M   NET   30   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   25   Prescriber   Y       Aug. 2, 2002   Schmitt   M   REL   10   Prescriber   M       Jan. 5, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   30   Prescriber   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   25   Prescriber   N       May 18, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   REL   10   Prescriber   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   40   Prescriber   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   60   Prescriber   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Stewart   Melissa   KX   120   Prescriber   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   60   Prescriber   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   KX   120   Prescriber   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   KX   50   Prescriber   N       May 10, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   KX   20   Prescriber   N       Jun. 8, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   40   Prescriber   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   NET   60   Prescriber   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   30   Prescriber   N       Aug. 28, 2002   Thompson   Tausee   REL   25   Prescriber   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 7, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 8, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       Apr. 2, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   KX   20   Speaker   N       May 10, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   40   Speaker   N       Jun. 3, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   COACH   60   Speaker   N       Jul. 9, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   KX   30   Speaker   N       Jul. 20, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   25   Speaker   Y       Aug. 28, 2002   Ulshafer   Bart   REL   10   Speaker   M       Jan. 4, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   KX   120   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   50   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   RECRUIT   20   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Vogel   Emmanuel   REL   60   Speaker   N       Jan. 4, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   60   Speaker   N       Feb. 14, 2002   Wellington   William   RECRUIT   30   Speaker   N       Mar. 19, 2002   Wellington   William   RECRUIT   25   Speaker   N       May 18, 2002   Wellington   William   KX   10   Speaker   N       Jun. 24, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   40   Speaker   N       Aug. 2, 2002   Wellington   William   REL   60   Speaker   N                  
 
         [0088]    [0088]                                         TABLE 10                           Statistical Analysis for Multiple Targeted Business Outcomes                Outcome                       Business Outcome   Achieved   Data   Average   StdDevP               Author   1   Average of BUSSOL                   Author   1   Average of MEDSOL       Author   1   Average of KX   4.20   0.98       Author   1   Average of RECRUIT   1.00   0.00       Author   1   Average of COACH       Author   1   Average of REL   2.00   0.00       Author   1   Average of NET       Author   1   Average of ASSESS       Author   1   Author Average of BUSSOL       Author   1   Author Average of MEDSOL       Author   1   Author Average of KX   4.20   0.98       Author   1   Author Average of RECRUIT   1.00   0.00       Author   1   Author Average of COACH       Author   1   Author Average of REL   2.00   0.00       Author   1   Author Average of NET       Author   1   Author Average of ASSESS       Consultant   0   Average of BUSSOL       Consultant   0   Average of MEDSOL       Consultant   0   Average of KX   2.40   0.49       Consultant   0   Average of RECRUIT   2.60   0.49       Consultant   0   Average of COACH       Consultant   0   Average of REL   4.00   0.00       Consultant   0   Average of NET       Consultant   0   Average of ASSESS       Consultant   1   Average of BUSSOL       Consultant   1   Average of MEDSOL       Consultant   1   Average of KX   2.00   0.00       Consultant   1   Average of RECRUIT   2.00   0.00       Consultant   1   Average of COACH       Consultant   1   Average of REL   2.00   0.00       Consultant   1   Average of NET       Consultant   1   Average of ASSESS       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of BUSSOL       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of MEDSOL       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of KX   2.25   0.43   NS       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of RECRUIT   2.38   0.48   S −       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of COACH       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of REL   3.25   0.97   S −       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of NET       Consultant   2   Consultant Average of ASSESS       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of BUSSOL       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of MEDSOL       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of KX   3.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of RECRUIT   2.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of COACH       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of REL   3.50   0.50       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of NET   1.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   0   Average of ASSESS       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of BUSSOL       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of MEDSOL       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of KX   3.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of RECRUIT   1.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of COACH       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of REL   2.00   0.00       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of NET       Formulary Supporter   1   Average of ASSESS       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of BUSSOL       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of MEDSOL       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of KX   3.00   0.00   NS       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of RECRUIT   1.67   0.47   S −       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of COACH       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of REL   3.00   0.82   S −       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of NET   1.00   0.00   S −       Formulary Supporter   2   Formulary Supporter Average of ASSESS       Investigator   0   Average of BUSSOL       Investigator   0   Average of MEDSOL       Investigator   0   Average of KX   2.00   0.00       Investigator   0   Average of RECRUIT   4.00   0.00       Investigator   0   Average of COACH       Investigator   0   Average of REL   3.00   0.00       Investigator   0   Average of NET       Investigator   0   Average of ASSESS       Investigator   1   Average of BUSSOL       Investigator   1   Average of MEDSOL       Investigator   1   Average of KX   1.00   0.00       Investigator   1   Average of RECRUIT   1.00   0.00       Investigator   1   Average of COACH       Investigator   1   Average of REL   3.00   0.00       Investigator   1   Average of NET   1.00   0.00       Investigator   1   Average of ASSESS   1.00   0.00       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of BUSSOL       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of MEDSOL       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of KX   1.60   0.49   S −       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of RECRUIT   2.80   1.47   S −       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of COACH       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of REL   3.00   0.00   NS       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of NET   1.00   0.00   S +       Investigator   2   Investigator Average of ASSESS   1.00   0.00   S +       Prescriber   0   Average of BUSSOL       Prescriber   0   Average of MEDSOL       Prescriber   0   Average of KX   3.00   0.00       Prescriber   0   Average of RECRUIT       Prescriber   0   Average of COACH       Prescriber   0   Average of REL   4.00   1.00       Prescriber   0   Average of NET   1.00   0.00       Prescriber   0   Average of ASSESS       Prescriber   1   Average of BUSSOL       Prescriber   1   Average of MEDSOL   1.00   0.00       Prescriber   1   Average of KX   1.57   0.90       Prescriber   1   Average of RECRUIT       Prescriber   1   Average of COACH       Prescriber   1   Average of REL   3.00   0.00       Prescriber   1   Average of NET   1.00   0.00       Prescriber   1   Average of ASSESS       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of BUSSOL       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of MEDSOL   1.00   0.00   S +       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of KX   1.89   0.99   S −       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of RECRUIT       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of COACH       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of REL   3.22   0.63   NS       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of NET   1.00   0.00   NS       Prescriber   2   Prescriber Average of ASSESS       Speaker   0   Average of BUSSOL       Speaker   0   Average of MEDSOL       Speaker   0   Average of KX   1.00   0.00       Speaker   0   Average of RECRUIT   2.00   0.00       Speaker   0   Average of COACH       Speaker   0   Average of REL   2.83   0.37       Speaker   0   Average of NET       Speaker   0   Average of ASSESS       Speaker   1   Average of BUSSOL       Speaker   1   Average of MEDSOL       Speaker   1   Average of KX   3.00   0.00       Speaker   1   Average of RECRUIT   1.00   0.00       Speaker   1   Average of COACH   1.00   0.00       Speaker   1   Average of REL   3.00   0.00       Speaker   1   Average of NET       Speaker   1   Average of ASSESS       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of BUSSOL       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of MEDSOL       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of KX   1.67   0.94   S +       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of RECRUIT   1.67   0.47   S −       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of COACH   1.00   0.00   S +       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of REL   2.89   0.31   NS       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of NET       Speaker   2   Speaker Average of ASSESS       Total Average of BUSSOL       Total Average of MEDSOL           1.00   0.00       Total Average of KX           2.26   1.15       Total Average of RECRUIT           1.93   0.93       Total Average of COACH           1.00   0.00       Total Average of REL           2.95   0.71       Total Average of NET           1.00   0.00       Total Average of ASSESS           1.00   0.00                                                                                    
         [0089]    Formulary Supporter 2 Formulary Supporter Average of COACH  
         [0090]    Survey Analysis  
         [0091]    Another source of performance information is the use of a survey designed to evaluate customer perception of the value of the MSL team. The survey methodology of the present invention measures physician perception along multiple dimensions, allowing the results to be used in operational management, as well as an indicator of the MSL team&#39;s progress over time. The data from the surveys, in combination with the quantitative activity data, is useful in identifying adjustments needed to optimize MSL team size, structure, and strategy. The survey method incorporates questions that allow for the identification of the most valued MSL activities. The activities most valued by the targeted customer are likely to be the most effective activities for increasing brand advocacy.  
         [0092]    Survey Architecture  
         [0093]    The survey method is a tool for measuring brand advocacy among targeted MTLs and the perceived quality and utility of the MSL role. Further, this method is used to measure brand advocacy and the perceived value of the MSL organization within the MSL customer universe. The results obtained from the MSL customer universe can then be compared to the pharmaceutical company&#39;s overall customer universe to assess the value added to pharmaceutical company by the MSL organization. The MSL customer universe is defined by the collective Targeted Customer Lists (TCL) for all MSLs of the company. Although multiple attributes are considered for the inclusion of a physician in a TCL, they can generally be considered MTLs.  
         [0094]    Specifically, this survey method is designed to obtain and integrate multidimensional physician perception data into a quantitative index that is a relevant predictor of physician perceptions. The index integrates the perception dimensions of customer satisfaction, product value, MSL value, and customer service into a quantitative value. The sub-group of physicians that respond “very satisfied” to all perception dimensions under a categorical scale are labeled Brand Advocates. The positive effects of strong brand advocacy on a company&#39;s commercial success are a well-established tenet in marketing. Thus, the index provides a quantitative measure of a MSL organization&#39;s contribution to its parent company&#39;s commercial success. Since the questions are categorized according to MSL activity type, the index can be used as a business metric to assess organizational performance and identify areas in need of improvement.  
         [0095]    The index is used as a rating of the relative perceived importance of categories of MSL activities. These categories are: MSL-Physician Interactions, Educational Funding, and Knowledge Exchange. This ranking function allows the index to be used in tactical business planning.  
         [0096]    Survey Methodologies  
         [0097]    Depending upon resources and/or survey methodologies utilized, all TCL physicians can be surveyed (mailed/paper-based surveys) or a random sample of MSL TCL physicians can be surveyed (telephone surveys). Each survey methodology has its advantages and disadvantages (inconvenience of timing of the call, low return rate, etc.). Given an estimated 5% return rate for a mailed survey, this data gathering methodology will provide a sufficient number of evaluable respondents, provided the customer universe is not unusually small (less than 500 targeted customers). Since most MSL groups interact with more than 500 physicians, even if the return rate is lower than 5%, the mailed survey methodology may still be the most cost-effective and provide a sufficient number of respondents upon which to base the analysis of the data.  
         [0098]    The questions comprising the survey are designed to assess satisfaction for each of the categories of MSL activities, organized into perception dimensions of Customer Satisfaction (C), Product Value (P), MSL Value (M), and Customer Service (S), and the answers are categorized according to: Very Satisfied (1.00), Satisfied (0.75), Neutral (0.50), and Dissatisfied (0.00); or Strongly Disagree (0.00), Disagree (0.50), Agree (0.75), Strongly Agree (1.00), depending upon the context of the question.  
         [0099]    The mean score from all respondents on all perception dimensions comprises the index converted to a decimal. Multiple sub-analyses are performed according to the way the questions are categorized. The questions are preferably designed to fit into each of two categories: MSL Activity Type and Customer Perception Dimension. The questions also focus on attributes that can be acted upon by the MSL organization.  
         [0100]    Below are listed the exemplary questions categorized according to MSL Activity Type and to their relationship to the identified perception dimension, represented as C, P, M or S as discussed above. In addition, a corresponding response value has been added.  
       EXAMPLE 6  
       [0101]    MSL-Physician Interactions Questions  
                                                         Perception   Response       Question   Dimension   Data                                MSL is trustworthy   S   0.5       MSL is considerate of your time and   S   0.5       practice       MSL is not “pushy”   S   0.0       MSL relationship with you and your staff   C   0.75       MSL is a trusted source of information   M   0.0       regarding products and the disease       states related to their use       MSL provides services valuable to your   M   0.5       practice       MSL calls on you frequently enough   S   0.5                  
 
         [0102]    Educational Funding Questions  
                                                         Perception   Response       Question   Dimension   Data                                Educational support was not promotional   C   1.0       Educational support was convenient   S   1.0       Educational support meets the needs of   C   0.75       your practice       Speakers provided were valued   C   0.75       sources of credible information       Educational support provided has had   M   0.5       an impact on the way you practice       medicine                  
 
         [0103]    Knowledge Exchange Questions  
                                                         Perception   Response       Question   Dimension   Data                                Information provided was not too promotional   C   0.75       Information provided was relevant   C   0.5       Information provided has had an impact   M   0.5       on your medical practice       Information was provided in a timely manner   S   0.5       Information provided demonstrated a   C   0.75       high caliber of scientific knowledge                  
 
         [0104]    Product Satisfaction Questions  
                                                         Perception   Response       Question   Dimension   Data                                Product(s) is/are safe to prescribe   P   1.0       Product(s) is/are effective   P   1.0       Product(s) is/are easy to dose optimally   P   1.0       MSL provides information that allows   M   0.75       for optimal use of product(s), improving       product satisfaction       Product(s) is/are adequately covered by   P   0.75       most health plans       Knowledge provided to you by the MSL   M   0.5       has enabled you to use the products       appropriately                  
 
         [0105]    Analyses  
         [0106]    The index is used in a number of different analyses, mostly differentiated by predefined criteria for categorizing questions and categorization of respondents based on overall index score. For example, the mean index sub-score for each of the MSL Activity Type categories may be used to identify areas of excellence as well as areas in need of improvement. These analyses may be driven down to the level of an individual question from which a specific activity can be targeted and assessed.  
         [0107]    Using the example above, the average score of all of the responses is 0.64, obtained by taking the total value of all responses 14.75 and dividing by the number of questions 23. This illustrates the customers evaluation of all the services provided in the example is between neutral (0.5) and satisfied (0.75).  
         [0108]    Further, each activity may be evaluated to find the strengths and weaknesses of the MSL. Again using the example above, the average score for product satisfaction is 0.85 confirming a high approval rating. Conversely, the average score of MSL-Physician Interactions is 0.39 illustrating a low approval rating. Moreover, the score may be based on the perception dimension of customer satisfaction. For example, all of the perception dimensions combined will equal 0.64 as calculated for the MSL activities above. However, the score for customer satisfaction is 0.75 corresponding to a satisfactory rating.  
         [0109]    This survey method and feedback is used to improve and modify the activities of the MSL and to increase customer approval and efficiency of the MSL. Specifically, the survey results may be used to modify other components of the method to obtain the desired business goal of the sponsor company. Eventually, by continuous cyclic repetition of the method, the average score of the entire survey and of particular activity and perception groups will rise to near the 1.0 “very satisfied” rating.  
         [0110]    Value Provided  
         [0111]    In order to perform analyses of the perceived value added by the MSL organization, the MSL customer universe can be subdivided into those physicians on whom only MSLs call and those physicians on which both MSLs and the company&#39;s traditional sales force call. Comparisons of survey scores and business outcomes (script volume and market share) can then be made between these groups and to the entire physician population in order to examine the relationship of index scores to increased brand advocacy. These measures can then be tracked over multiple assessments and the information used to allocate resources among the categories of MSL activities, change MSL practices, and improve the MSL organization&#39;s business model through the enabling of continuous business improvements.  
         [0112]    The system of the present invention permits the user to normalize data to headcount for trend analyses since the anticipated sharp increase in recorded activities resulting from addition of new MSLs may make projections inaccurate. The absolute numbers will also be available, enabling senior management to determine their ROI in the MSL team.  
         [0113]    Effective implementation of MSL team activities will facilitate the appropriate use of the sponsor company&#39;s products. The above-described business system and methods provides the information needed to maximize effectiveness of the MSL team.  
         [0114]    Business Management Tools/Scorecards  
         [0115]    Returning to the example in the execution phase of Dr. John Know, a review of the activities and time spent with MTL Adams may illustrate the needed activities and time to achieve the business outcome of investigator with MTL Philbin. Thus, a feedback system is established to guide the modification of the activities and time spent in the “subsequent” planning phase with any MTL to obtain the desired business outcome. This method can be applied to any objective discussed above in the attribute system to obtain the desired business outcomes, i.e. more publications, presentations, investigation or higher amount of prescriptions written, depending on the sponsor company&#39;s objective.  
         [0116]    Further, as discussed above the time/capacity model can be modified based on the information obtained performing the attribute and CRM assessment. For example, the MSLs may be encouraged to input their activities into the CRM tool on a weekly basis (e.g., by Friday 5 PM Pacific Time), and strongly encouraged to input their activities more frequently (2 times per week). In addition to the regular weekly reporting, it is also desirable to input activities into the CRM on the last working day of the reporting period (the regular weekly input of activities can substitute for this if performed on the last business day of the reporting period).  
         [0117]    Although this invention has been illustrated by specific embodiments, it is not intended that the invention be limited to these embodiments. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made which clearly fall within the scope of the invention. The invention is intended to be protected broadly within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.