Ask Indegene (Beta)
Online
🧠 Building on our previous conversation...
Hello, how can I help you today?
You may type your question or choose from the options below:
Explore Solutions
Browse Insights
View Case Studies
Read Latest News
Explore Careers
Connect with an Expert
Thank you!
We'll be in touch. In the meantime, feel free to keep exploring!
#FutureReadyHealthcare
As pharmaceutical companies navigate rising HCP expectations, digital disruption, and evolving market dynamics, traditional commercial models are being pushed to their limits. The future of pharma go to market strategy lies in hybrid models that combine the high-touch impact of field teams with the precision, agility, and scale of digital engagement.
To better understand how leading pharma organizations are adapting, Indegene partnered with GLG Research to conduct a 2023 survey of 100 senior professionals across marketing, sales, and commercial operations. The goal was to assess how hybrid go to market models are being defined, implemented, and measured, and to uncover peer-driven insights that can inform the next wave of commercial transformation.
This report is designed to help industry leaders evolve their pharmaceutical commercial model. From decision-making ownership to omnichannel capability building and segmentation approaches, each section highlights key pharma industry trends shaping the future of go to market strategies.
Survey Demographics
100 leaders across marketing, sales, and commercial operations functions participated in this study conducted between April 27, 2023 and May 12, 2023. Some survey questions included multiple selection options, so totals do not always add up to 100.
Survey Insights
1. Brand and Country Teams Lead the Charge on Commercial Decision-Making
This study shows that 80% of industry leaders indicate that decisions happen most often at the brand level, while 79% indicate the same for the country level. Leaders also shared that decisions are rarely made at the regional level. Pharma companies with an annual revenue under $1 billion showed a similar pattern as the broader data set, with the brand level selected as the number one level for commercial decisions and the country level as the second most likely. These results underscore how today's pharma go to market strategy continues to prioritize localized control and agility over regional consolidation within the pharmaceutical commercial model.
2. Launch Success Tops Commercial Priorities Across the Industry
What are your top three commercialization priorities over the next 3 years?
Launching new products successfully is far and away the focus of leaders, with 39% of respondents listing it as their number one priority. The top three priorities of industry leaders highlight the emphasis placed on launching and selling, but also reveal a growing focus on customer experience (CX) across the pharma industry.
Companies consistently ranked launch success as the number one priority across all sizes—36% of companies with less than $1 billion in revenue, 37% with revenue between $1 and $20 billion, and 39% with revenue above $20 billion all listed it as their top goal.
US market exposure further amplified this trend. Only 14% of companies with less than 25% of their revenue from the US ranked launch success as their top priority. That figure rose to 26% for companies with 25–50% revenue from the US, 47% for those in the 50–75% bracket, and 50% for companies with over 75% of their revenue in the US.
These insights signal that successful launches remain central to a competitive pharma go to market strategy, especially in organizations refining their pharmaceutical commercial model for high-growth markets like the US.
3. Data and Technology Lead the Way in Omnichannel Capability Building
What are the top three ways you are building out your organization's omnichannel capabilities?
Based on leader responses, companies are aggressively employing a wide variety of tactics to build out their omnichannel go-to-market models. The top focus areas include building a data-driven culture and adopting digital technologies—key enablers of effective pharma go to market strategy in today’s evolving landscape.
While training ranks lowest among the priorities, the spread is relatively narrow—just a 13-point difference separates the highest and second-lowest categories—indicating that organizations are approaching omnichannel transformation from multiple fronts.
Regional differences also emerged. Among EU-based or EU-focused global companies, 25% ranked partnering with service providers as their number one approach to enhancing omnichannel engagement. Building a data-driven culture and establishing an omnichannel Center of Excellence (COE) followed closely, tied at 17%.
This suggests that regardless of geography, pharma companies are investing in long-term omnichannel capability building to strengthen their pharmaceutical commercial model and deliver more personalized, effective HCP engagement.
4. Hybrid Models Are Driven by Access, Experience, and HCP Preferences
What are your top three motivations for deploying a hybrid model?
In the face of ongoing challenges to HCP access, leaders cited improving access as a top motivation to transition to a hybrid model. 24% of respondents ranked it as their top priority, and an overwhelming 59% ranked it as a top 1, 2, or 3 priority. In addition to improving access to HCPs, respondents indicated a high priority for taking advantage of HCP preferences with 15% ranking it as their number 1 priority, and 46% ranking it as a priority overall.
While customer experience was a top commercialization priority, 53% of leaders also prioritized customer experience as a motivation for deploying a hybrid model. Companies operating primarily in the US ranked enhancing customer experiences much higher than EU companies with 20% ranking it as their number 1 motivation, 10% ranking it as their second motivation, and 22% ranking it as their third motivation. For EU and EU-focused companies, only 5% ranked it as their number 1 motivation, with 17% ranking it as their second and third motivations.
Actionable results seem to be more of a driver than corporate mandate or FOMO, with very few respondents citing those as reasons for deploying a hybrid model.
5. Data Gaps and ROI Attribution Emerge as Top Barriers to Hybrid GTM Success
What challenges do you face with deploying a hybrid model?
Deploying a hybrid pharma go to market strategy isn’t without its hurdles. Industry leaders identified data availability, integrity, and actionability as the most significant challenge in implementing a hybrid model. 22% ranked it as their number one challenge, with another 32% placing it in their top three.
Closely related to data issues, demonstrating marketing ROI and attribution also emerged as a core concern, with 19% of leaders ranking it as their top challenge. This underscores the growing need for measurement frameworks within evolving pharmaceutical commercial models.
Interestingly, perception and mindset barriers were also cited—11% of leaders listed perception as their number one challenge, suggesting lingering skepticism or hesitation around adopting hybrid models.
Although data was the number 1 challenge for the complete set of companies, for companies with revenue under $1 billion, lack of mandate to support change was the primary challenge with 27% ranking it number 1. And while data availability was the number 1 challenge overall, lack of technology or service providers was not a significant challenge for most respondents.
These insights reflect a key pharma industry trend: the future of hybrid engagement depends not only on tools and vendors but on solving upstream data and decision-making barriers.
6. How Pharma Companies Define a Hybrid Commercial Model
Which of the following best describes what a hybrid commercial model means in your company?
25%
Field sales reps using rep-triggered digital channels to engage HCPs
23%
Field sales reps using HQ-driven digital channels to engage HCPs
19%
Field sales reps meeting HCPs already primed with digital channels
15%
Field sales reps and digital channels engaging HCPs independently
11%
Field sales, field medical, and field access working together as a pod
6%
Supporting field sales with an inside sales force and RTE and other rep-triggered tools
When asked what a hybrid commercial model means in their organization, most pharma leaders pointed to a model where field sales reps use rep-triggered digital channels to engage HCPs (25%). Close behind, 23% said they rely on HQ-driven digital channels to support rep engagement. These top selections indicate that many organizations still view hybrid engagement through the lens of field force enablement, rather than as a fully integrated, cross-functional strategy.
Other definitions included field reps meeting HCPs already primed with digital content (19%), and field reps working in tandem but independently of digital channels (15%). Less common were more advanced team-based or inside sales approaches—only 11% referenced pod-based models (field, medical, and access working together), and just 6% cited inside sales forces or rep-triggered tools like real-time engagement (RTE).
The data suggests that while hybrid engagement is evolving, most organizations still center the model around traditional field roles, with digital playing a supporting or complementary function rather than being fully embedded.
To what degree is the hybrid commercial model defined and assessed as a mandate across your company?
The majority of pharma organizations have now formalized their approach to hybrid commercialization. According to the survey, 65% of respondents indicated that the hybrid commercial model is formally defined and assessed as part of a corporate, business unit, or key function mandate.
Another 32% reported that their approach is loosely defined and informally assessed, suggesting experimentation or early-stage adoption without formal governance. Only 3% of companies indicated that hybrid models are not yet clearly defined within their organization.
This data reflects growing maturity in pharma go-to-market strategies, with most companies moving beyond pilot programs to adopt structured, enterprise-aligned hybrid models that can be measured and scaled.
7. Omnichannel Definitions Still Vary Across the Industry
While omnichannel is a cornerstone of the modern pharmaceutical commercial model, its definition remains fluid across the industry. According to the survey, commercial leaders offered a wide range of interpretations, underscoring the evolving nature of omnichannel in pharma go to market strategy.
■
16% of respondents used terms like connected, integrated, and journey, emphasizing orchestrated touchpoints across coordinated channels based on HCP preferences and behaviors.
■
25% focused on variety, using terms like marketing, multiple, different, and platforms to describe a multi-channel approach to engaging HCPs.
■
Another 25% combined both elements — acknowledging the use of disparate channels while aspiring toward seamless integration and coordination.
Customer experience also played a central role, with 17% defining omnichannel through a CX lens—reflecting its growing importance across hybrid go to market models. Fewer leaders mentioned brand-related terms (8%) or technology (only 3%), suggesting that while tech enables omnichannel, it’s not yet central to how it’s defined.
These varying perspectives highlight the need for organizations to align internally on what omnichannel truly means—so strategies can be executed consistently, measured effectively, and scaled confidently.
There is a common understanding of the difference between omnichannel and multichannel across my company. Would you agree?
8. Strong but Varied Urgency to Evolve Pharma Commercial Models
What is the sense of urgency to evolve your company’s commercial model?
21% of commercial leaders answered that it was a very high priority to evolve their current commercial model, while 72% indicated that it was a somewhat high priority. Only 7% indicated their urgency for evolving their commercial model was low.
Urgency varied across company revenue. For companies with revenue over $20 billion, 31% rated their urgency to evolve their commercial model as very high and 69% rated it as somewhat high. 0% rated it somewhat low or very low. For companies between $1 and $20 billion, 13% rated their urgency very high, 80% rated it somewhat high, 7% rated it somewhat low, and 0% very low. For companies with revenue under $1 billion, 27% rated their urgency very high, but only 45% rated it somewhat high, while 9% rated it somewhat low, and 18% rated it very low.
Leaders at companies with the majority of their business in the EU or US also indicated different levels of urgency for evolving their commercial model. For companies in the EU or global companies with the majority of their business in the EU, 22% rated their urgency very high and 78% rated it somewhat high. 0% of EU-focused companies rated it somewhat low or very low. While companies in the US or US-focused, 20% considered their urgency to be very high, 54% considered it somewhat high, 8% considered it somewhat low, and 3% consider it very low.
9. High Confidence in GTM Models, Despite Recognized Need for Change
How confident are you that your existing commercial model is set up well to achieve your goals?
Despite the desire and urgency to evolve their GTM model, commercialization leaders are overwhelmingly confident that their current GTM model is set up for success. 25% of commercial leaders are very confident, and 65% are somewhat confident, but only 3% of commercial leaders are not confident that their current GTM model will be successful.
There was some variation in confidence based on annual revenue and geography. Companies with an annual revenue over $20 billion, 29% were very confident, 38% were somewhat confident, 6% were neutral, and 3% were not confident. Companies between $1 and $20 billion, 20% were very confident, 71% were somewhat confident, 5% were neutral, and 4% were not confident. For companies with an annual revenue under $1 billion, 36% were very confident, 45% were somewhat confident, and 18% neutral, and 0% were not confident.
For EU-centric companies, 29% were very confident, 69% were somewhat confident, 2% were neutral, and 0% were not confident. For US-centric companies, 22%, were very confident, 63% were somewhat confident, 10% were neutral, and 5% were not confident.
10. HCP Segmentation Practices Vary Widely Across Pharma
How many dimensions do you use when segmenting HCPs?
A foundational element of any effective pharma go-to-market strategy is how HCPs are segmented. The survey found a wide range of practices and maturity levels:
■
The most common approach is segmenting by 2–5 dimensions, with 33% of leaders saying they “almost always” or “mostly” use this method.
■
Surprisingly, 15% of respondents reported that they rarely or never use segmentation even though targeted engagement is a core tenet of modern commercial models.
These results suggest that while many pharma organizations are evolving their segmentation strategies, others still operate with limited targeting sophistication — a gap that could affect how well hybrid and omnichannel engagement strategies are executed.
11. Field Sales Strategy Evolves to Fit the Hybrid Pharma Go-To-Market Model
How has your field sales strategy changed in the past two years?
As companies evolve their pharmaceutical commercial models, field sales strategies are shifting accordingly. When asked how their approach has changed in the past two years, leaders revealed a wide variety of hybrid strategies blending digital and in-person engagement.
■
40% of respondents said they now use digital tools to enable and inform field reps — integrating data and insights to support more effective rep interactions.
■
16% are taking a more segmented approach, deploying field reps to focus on specific geographies while using digital to expand HCP reach in whitespace territories.
■
5% of companies have scaled back their field force without adding a digital supplement — highlighting the risk of under-engaging key HCPs.
These results underscore that while digital enablement is becoming the norm, there is no one-size-fits-all model. Each organization is testing and adapting their GTM approach based on size, market focus, and commercial maturity.
Do you consider your field sales reps as a part of your omnichannel mix?
Commercial leaders are also overwhelmingly considering field reps to be a part of their omnichannel mix. Across all companies, regardless of revenue, 91% considered field reps as a channel. For EU-focused companies, 98% consider reps to be part of their omnichannel mix, while for US-focused companies, only 86% consider reps to be a channel.
12. Evaluating Hybrid Performance: Attribution, Insights, Budget, and KPIs
Measurement & Attribution
Do you measure digital channels’ impact, relative to field sales reps in your company?
Pharma leaders are evolving from siloed campaign metrics to more holistic measurement of hybrid go-to-market strategies. When asked how they assess digital vs. field rep impact, 73% of commercial leaders said they use attribution models to measure the relative effectiveness of each channel. However, 26% still rely on separate metrics for digital and in-person efforts—revealing that consistency in measurement is still maturing across the industry.
Annual revenue greatly impacted the likelihood of measuring the relative success of digital channels and reps using an attribution model with only 55% of companies under $1 billion using an attribution model. 75% of companies with revenue between $1 billion and $20 billion and 85% of companies over $20 billion in annual revenue cited using an attribution model.
Customer Insights
Customer insights from HQ-directed marketing campaigns also play a role in hybrid effectiveness
Which of the following ways do you leverage customer insights from HQ-directed digital and marketing campaigns to inform your field sales reps’ focus, call plan and messaging?
■
52% of leaders regularly share broad category customer insights with their field reps
■
21% share individual-level HCP insights
■
A quarter of the commercial leaders collect customer insights, but they do not share them with their field force.
The way industry leaders report how they leverage customer insights varies based on company revenue. For companies with an annual revenue over $20 billion, 29% do not share insights at all while only 18% share them at an individual level. For companies between $1 and $20 billion in annual revenue, 24% do not share insights and 24% share them at an individual level. For companies with an annual revenue under $1 billion, 18% do not share insights and 18% share them at an individual level.
Budget Allocation
Budget allocation is another indicator of where companies are placing their bets. Field sales still dominate the budget, receiving 56% on average, while digital strategies capture 25%. But in three years, that’s expected to shift:
■
Digital investment projected to rise to 35%
■
Field rep budgets expected to fall to 45%
■
Inside sales expected to rise slightly to 20%
How is your budget allocated between digital strategies and field sales reps now, and how do you expect it to be allocated in three years?
Key Performance Indicators
What KPIs do you use to measure the impact of your commercial model?
87% of respondents measure the effectiveness of their commercialization model based on revenue. The top four metrics for measuring the success of a commercialization model were centered on sales and included revenue, market share, profitability, and total prescriptions. Although customer experience was a priority for leaders looking for deploy a hybrid model, when it comes to measuring success of that model, customer experience is in the bottom half of the list.
While all companies cited revenue most often as the KPI they use to measure, there was some variation in the top 5 KPIs cited based on annual revenue. For companies with an annual revenue over $20 billion, the rankings were slightly different than the larger set with 91% citing revenue as a KPI, 82% citing market share, 68% citing prescriptions, 55% citing profitability, and 53% citing share of voice. Companies between $1 and $20 billion, 84% cited revenue as a KPI, 76% cited market share, 73% cited profitability, while only 56% cited prescriptions, and 36% cited customer experience. Companies with an annual revenue under $1 billion 91% cited revenue, 80% cited prescriptions, 70% cited profitability, 60% cited customer lifetime value, and 50% cited market share.
Implications for Pharma Commercial Leaders
As hybrid go-to-market models become the new standard, commercial, marketing, and sales leaders must take deliberate steps to evolve their pharmaceutical commercial model—not just structurally, but also in mindset, execution, and measurement.
There are many ways for sales, marketing, and commercial operations leaders to work toward creating and deploying more effective and efficient hybrid go-to-market-models.
“Omnichannel” is still being defined and there is variability in understanding across internal teams. Simplify language and terms where possible so that everyone is clear and aligned when it comes time to operationalize.
Launch success is critical, and it is important to avoid waiting until launch to try something for the first time. Actively sponsor omnichannel learning sessions and market tests so that when launch arrives, there is a strong basis of understanding and knowledge to apply for launch success.
Establishing an internal “learning agenda” for omnichannel is key to learning, adapting and leading.
With the increase in channels, including the rep as a channel, it is critical to intentionally coordinate and synchronize to gain maximum impact. This will require a higher level of integrated and agile planning across internal teams and partners/agencies than is “standard” today.
When leading omnichannel campaigns and building support internally, tie performance measures to revenue and market share rather than softer KPIs like “engagement” to drive alignment with the broader organizational goals.
Given future prediction of a much more balanced investment across inside sales, digital and F2F reps over the next 3 years, take steps today to build domain knowledge in working together across all three to drive improved customer and market impact.
Authors
Nancy Phelan
Milesh Gogad
Brooke Anderson
