2013 CRO QualityBenchmarking – PhaseII/III Service ProvidersInfo@ISRreports.com 									©2013 Industry Standard Research ...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 22act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 33act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 44act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 55act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 66act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 77act with confidenc...
www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 88act with confidenc...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers

776
-1

Published on

Industry Standard Research’s (ISR) “2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers” report provides pharmaceutical sponsors and clinical service providers with an independent and comprehensive analysis of CRO service quality and clinical outsourcing of Phase II/III clinical trial services.
In its 5th year, ISR continues to believe this annual report is the single most comprehensive source for data on the topic of CRO delivery quality and customer loyalty.

Published in: Health & Medicine, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
776
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers

  1. 1. 2013 CRO QualityBenchmarking – PhaseII/III Service ProvidersInfo@ISRreports.com ©2013 Industry Standard Research www.ISRreports.comPREVIEW
  2. 2. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 22act with confidenceReport ObjectiveIndustry Standard Research’s (ISR) “2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers” reportprovides pharmaceutical sponsors and clinical service providers with an independent and comprehensiveanalysis of CRO service quality and clinical outsourcing of Phase II/III clinical trial services.In its 5th year, ISR continues to believe this annual report is the single most comprehensive source for data on thetopic of CRO delivery quality and customer loyalty.248pages157respondents+350charts and graphs1. Phase II/III Outsourcing Behaviors• Growth of clinical outsourcing• Anticipated future outsourcing activities for next 12 months2. Sponsors’ Attitudes, Beliefs, and Intentions about Service Providers• Perceived leaders• Proposal volume• Service Provider usage• Cost experiences• Future usage preference3. Service Provider Performance and Scorecards across Attributes• See page 3 of this preview for more details4. Segment Selection Rubrics and CROs to Short List5. Summary Outcome Measures: Service Variability and Customer Loyalty6. Company Service Quality ProfilesMajor Sections:What you will learn in this report:• Performance of 29 Phase II/III CROs, measured across 26 critical dimensions of service quality• How sponsors make their clinical outsourcing decisions, including which service attributes driveselection• Attitudes, beliefs, and intentions for future outsourcingHow you can use this report:• For buyers of clinical research service, this report offers insight into CRO service quality andempowers you to make smarter clinical outsourcing decisions by providing evaluation and selectiontools.• For clinical service providers, this critical report offers insight into your service quality, yourcompetitors’ quality, buyers’ needs, CRO selection criteria, paths to differentiation, and clinicaloutsourcing trends and forecasts.Valuable for:Clinical Operations, Outsourcing, Service Provider Marketing and Business Development
  3. 3. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 33act with confidenceISR’s Service Provider Performance and ScorecardsCharacteristics MeasuredCompanies IncludedStaff Characteristics• Project Manager Quality /Experience• CRA Quality / Experience• Therapeutic Expertise of theProject Team• Project Team Chemistry• Timely Project Communications• Staff Turnover• Commercial Market Knowledge• Local Market / RegulatoryKnowledgeOperational Excellence• Up-front Contingency Planningand Trial Risk Management• Speed of Site Start-up• Data Quality• Network of Sites and Investigators• Meeting Overall Project Timelines• Meeting Database Lock Timelines• Meeting First Patient – First VisitTimelines• Offers Innovative Solutions• Speed of Sites / InvestigatorRecruitment• Patient / Volunteer RecruitmentStrategy• Positive Experience with ServiceProvider• Access to Real-time DataOrganizational & FinanceCharacteristics• Breadth of Services• Global Footprint• Low Cost• Minimizing Change Orders• Overall Value• Financial Strength and Stability• Accenture• Aptiv Solutions• Bioclinica• Charles River• Chiltern• Clinsys• Cognizant• Covance• Davita Clinical Research• DCRI-Duke• Encorium• Eurofins• ICON• INC Research• Medpace• Novella• Paragon• PAREXEL• PharmaNet/i3• PPD• PRA• Premier Research• Quintiles• Rho• RPS• SGS Life Sciences• Tata• Theorem• World Wide Clinical TrialsISR’s report includes 470 service provider evaluations of 29 CROs across 26 critical characteristics associated withservice quality. Of these 29 service providers, 15 received full profiles (bolded below, based on respondent usage).
  4. 4. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 44act with confidenceTable of Contents (1 of 4)Full table of contents and additional sample pages available in the full preview,free on our website:http://isrreports.com/industry-reports/2013-cro-quality-benchmarking-phase-ii_iii-service-providers
  5. 5. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 55act with confidenceSample Page: Report Introductionact with confidencewww.ISRreports.com ©2013 | 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 2CovanceICONINC ResearchPAREXELPharmaNet/i3PPDPRAQuintilesBioclinicaDCRI-DukeMedpacePremier ResearchRPSSGS Life SciencesWorld WideClinical TrialsMinimizingStaffTurnoverCRA QualityProject TeamChemistryTherapeuticExpertiseTimely ProjectCommunicationsCommercialMarketKnowledgeProjectManagerQualityStaff CharacteristicsRatings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit shortLocal Market /RegulatoryKnowledgeFigure 1 – “Staff Characteristics” RatingsResponses have beenrandomized. Data available inthe full report.© 2013 Industry Standard ResearchWelcome to the 2013 edition of the CRO Quality Benchmarking study for Phase II/III services.Industry Standard Research is never short of reasons to monitor service quality. That said, for both CROsand the sponsors who purchase their services, the justifications for doing so are increasing in number.Phase II studies are bifurcating into either larger, more global studies or smaller, more complicatedstudies. Both of these require evolved and specialized capabilities. Phase III studies, for their part, simplycontinue to increase in size and scope, narrowing the field of CROs capable of performing the work.As pharma company CFOs continue to sharpen their pencils – or at least make costs more predictable– the past 12 months have seen a continuation of the trend toward larger “partnership” agreementsbetween sponsors and CROs. They are becoming more common, longer in duration, and encompass abroader and broader scope of services.These dynamics point toward increasing focus on – and demand for – CRO services. But they alsoheighten the need for vigilance toward service quality.Industry Standard Research continues to believe this report is the single most comprehensive sourcefor data on the topic of CRO delivery quality and customer loyalty. This year 157 representatives from77 different trial sponsor organizations gave us their perspectives on – and experiences with – 29different service provider organizations. In total, we received ratings on 470 service encounters.There is a wealth of information in the report for both sponsor companies and CROs.For SponsorsSponsors should focus their attention on the Service Provider Scorecards and Segment SelectionRubric sections. Data in these sections will provide sponsors with the ammunition to make informedselections of CROs. Specifically, sponsors will understand which CROs lead and which lag the industryon 26 important determinants of effective trial conduct including: Project Manager Quality, TimelinesManagement, Therapeutic Expertise, Data Quality, Price, and many more. In addition, sponsors will learnhow consistently each CRO performs across these attributes and how loyal their customers are. Webelieve that using such information makes for more successful relationships between sponsors and theirservice providers.Sponsor companies that take the time to understand the data and use it to formulate challengingquestions for their potential CRO partners will increase their chances of outsourcing success.For CROsGenuine differentiation is extraordinarily difficult to achieve in the delivery of complex services. Usethe Service Provider Performance data to benchmark your company’s delivery quality and shape itsoperational and marketing strategies. In addition, spend a significant amount of time in the Study Datasection of this report. It contains a wealth of data on more topics than we can cover in the analysissection of the report.On the whole, CROs that put the data to use in their Operations and Marketing strategies will be betterprepared to meet customer needs and take a greater share of the outsourced clinical development market.
  6. 6. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 66act with confidenceact with confidencewww.ISRreports.com ©2013 | 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 4www.isrreports.com  ©2013|  2013  CRO  Benchmarking  Report  –  Phase  II/III58    (0.04)  (0.29)  (0.29)  (0.29)  (0.17)  (0.21)  (0.29)  (0.33)  (0.13)  (0.33)  (0.42)  (0.54)  (0.42)  (0.29)  (0.33)  (0.33)  (0.46)  (0.38)  (0.46)  (0.13)  (0.38)  (0.42)  (0.33)  (0.04)  (0.13)  (0.21)  (2.00)  (1.50)  (1.00)  (0.50)  0.00    0.50    1.00    1.50    2.00    0%  20%  40%  60%  80%  100%  Greatly  Missed  ExpectaZons  Somewhat  Missed  ExpectaZons  Met  ExpectaZons   Somewhat  Exceeded  ExpectaZons  Greatly  Exceeded  ExpectaZons  INC Research "Ideal" distributionINC Research Profile – Service VariabilityINC Research Service Variability Index = 37 (N = 24 evaluations)INC Research Profile - Average Customer ExperienceSomewhatExceedsExpectationsSomewhatMissesExpectationsSample Profile — Service VariabilitySample Profile — Average Customer ExperienceSample Company Service Variability Index = 37 (N=24 evaluations)© 2013 Industry Standard Research© 2013 Industry Standard Researchact with confidencewww.ISRreports.com ©2013 | 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 6Sample Profile HighlightstRelative Strengths• Similar to other large CROs, ________ is meeting expectations for attributesthat correlate with size such as Breadth of services and Therapeutic expertise.Relative Weaknesses• Minimizing change orders• Patient/ volunteer recruitment strategy• Project manager qualityact with confidencewww.ISRreports.com ©2013 | 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 5www.isrreports.com  ©2013|  2013  CRO  Benchmarking  Report  –  Phase  II/III59    6.4  5.3  0   2   4   6   8   10  Industry  Average  INC  Research  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  [CELLRANGE]  0%  10%  20%  30%  40%  50%  60%  50%   65%   80%   95%  INC Research Profile - Performance vs. Attribute ImportanceINC Research Profile - Customer Loyalty% Rating “Meets” or “Exceeds” Expectations% RatingAttributeamong theTop 5 MostImportant% RatingAttributeamong theTop 5 MostImportantSample Profile — Performance vs. Attribute ImportanceSample Profile — Customer Loyaltywww.isrreports.com ©2013| 2013 CRO Benchmarking Report – Phase II/III 596.45.30 2 4 6 8 10Industry AverageINC ResearchOverall project timelinesChange orderminimization metricsNetwork of sites/investigatorsPrior positive experienceFirst patient / first visit timelinesMetrics for site start-upStaff turnover metricsOffers innovative solutionsUp-front contingency planningProject manager qualityOverall valueCRA qualityData quality metricsLocal market /Regulatory knowledgePatient/ volunteerrecruitment strategyLow costSite / InvestigatorrecruitmentTechnology for real-timeaccess to dataProject teamchemistryGlobal footprintCommercial market knowledgeTimely project communicationsDatabase lock timelinesFinancial strength/ stabilityTherapeutic expertiseBreadth of services0%10%20%30%40%50%60%50% 65% 80% 95%INC Research Profile - Performance vs. Attribute ImportanceINC Research Profile - Customer Loyalty% Rating “Meets” or “Exceeds” Expectations% RatingAttributeamong theTop 5 MostImportant% RatingAttributeamong theTop 5 MostImportant© 2013 Industry Standard Research© 2013 Industry Standard ResearchSample Pages: CRO ProfileCompany
  7. 7. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 77act with confidenceSample Page: Scorecardsact with confidencewww.ISRreports.com ©2013 | 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 2CovanceICONINC ResearchPAREXELPharmaNet/i3PPDPRAQuintilesBioclinicaDCRI-DukeMedpacePremier ResearchRPSSGS Life SciencesWorld WideClinical TrialsMinimizingStaffTurnoverCRA QualityProject TeamChemistryTherapeuticExpertiseTimely ProjectCommunicationsCommercialMarketKnowledgeProjectManagerQualityStaff CharacteristicsRatings Key: Clear leadership Better than most About average Falling a bit shortLocal Market /RegulatoryKnowledgeFigure 1 – “Staff Characteristics” RatingsResponses have beenrandomized. Data available inthe full report.© 2013 Industry Standard Research
  8. 8. www.ISRreports.com ©2013 | Preview of: 2013 CRO Quality Benchmarking – Phase II/III Service Providers 88act with confidenceOrdering InformationPricing and ordering information is available on our website:http://isrreports.com/industry-reports/2013-cro-quality-benchmarking-phase-ii_iii-service-providers

×