Editor’s note: Charu Gupta is marketing director at research firm InCrowd, Boston.  

Even though marketing researchers try to get insights as quickly as possible, an inability to properly understand their market is their biggest fear, according to a recent survey of nearly 100 life sciences marketing researchers. In today’s health care and life sciences marketing research industry, it seems like the only constant is the rapid pace of change.

Consider some sobering statistics:

  • It takes between $2.6 and $4 billion to bring a new drug to market, according to a 2014 report by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development.
  • Seventy-two percent of all drug launches don’t meet revenue projections, according to another study in 2014 by Simon Kucher & Partners.

Considering the staggering costs and probabilities of failure, my team at InCrowd set out to learn who marketing researchers are, identify their priorities, view their perceptions and understand their challenges.

How does rapid change impact marketing researchers and the life sciences market they serve? What drives them? What makes them cringe? The 2017 State of Life Sciences Market Research Industry Report took the pulse of nearly 100 marketing researchers to find out.

Who are today’s life sciences marketing researchers? 

Marketing researchers today are veteran professionals who are highly educated, with 63 percent possessing a master’s degree or higher. They are also experienced, with nearly 95 percent having more than five years of experience in their field. Additionally, the majority told us they have been with their current employer for five years or more.

For this group, with experience comes commitment. We found that life sciences marketing researchers are dedicated to their craft, as many told us they stay in the field because it gives them a sense of purpose. More than one-third (36 percent) said the ability to learn and grow is the most rewarding part of their job, while having a positive impact on the lives of patients came in second (28 percent).

Men outnumber women by more than a two-to-one margin, with 71 percent skewing older (46+), compared to 27 percent between the ages of 30 and 45. Most of these employees likely have work/life balance on their minds as well. A whopping 82 percent of those surveyed are married and 83 percent have children.

How are marketing researchers learning and investing?

When it comes to how marketing researchers communicate with one another, it seems that a mix of social media and old-school networking is in play. LinkedIn is a popular way for those surveyed to get information about trends and challenges. But simply talking to colleagues and peers was just as popular as using social media.

In fact, the battle between old and new is a constant theme throughout the 2017 report.

Marketing research is still a traditional industry in many ways, with employees hesitant to stray from tried-and-true processes and methodologies. These researchers are spending money mostly on quantitative surveys, product launches and qualitative and third-party database research. However, 60 percent of those surveyed plan to experiment with new forms of research like online communities.

In order to keep up with the times, marketing researchers said they will begin to invest in new technologies more than ever. Social media analytics and big data are increasing areas for investment, with 44 percent already using social media analytics and 38 percent using big data programs. Big data is definitely an area to watch closely, as it has gone from a buzzword to a core pillar of how pharma companies and health systems think about improving patient outcomes and reducing costs.

Where are marketing researchers looking for help and improvement?

As the life sciences marketing research industry continues to shift, researchers are grappling with rapidly changing market forces, red tape and a lack of resources.

The three biggest reported pain points preventing marketing researchers from doing their jobs effectively are an inability to understand the market, corporate culture as a barrier to progress and a lack of resources. Almost one-quarter (23 percent) cited red tape and a negative corporate culture as the main reason for disliking their jobs. Restrictive government regulations (14 percent) came in second. Irrelevant information/a rapidly changing market came in third at 11 percent. These factors all combine to form high turnover, mismanagement and miscommunication for marketing researchers who say they’re fighting a constant uphill battle.

But the news isn’t all bad.

While resources for engaging in automation and new kinds of research might be lacking, the desire to move in that direction is definitely there.

When it comes to automated tracking studies, 31 percent of respondents said they wish they could engage in it, compared to 15 percent who are actually doing so. That’s compared to 38 percent who wish they could do automated, mobile qualitative tracking; 42 percent who desire text analytics; and 62 percent looking for participation in behavioral analytics tracking.

Marketing researchers are eager to integrate multiple types of research data and technology is being developed that will eventually tie together quantitative survey data, qualitative interview research and third-party data like social media feeds for a fuller and more holistic view of a patient or provider.

Anxiety meets eagerness 


In 2017, highly educated and experienced life sciences marketing researchers are keenly aware of the costs of developing new drugs and the pressure to succeed in the market and they’re anxious about the serious downsides to market miscalculations. However, that anxiety is combined with an eagerness to find new marketing research solutions that will help them navigate changes such as survey automation and the integration of research data.

The 2017 State of Life Sciences Market Research Industry Report finds marketing researchers on the brink of change. They’ve done their homework, their wish lists are drawn up and they’re ready to explore the newest and most innovative methodologies.

The question remains – will they be successful?