As life sciences organizations increasingly embrace digital models of engagement, they need to streamline their PDF rendering processes to avoid unnecessary delays and costs in getting promotional materials to market.

1. A Rationale for a PDF Rendering
Factory Model
As life sciences organizations increasingly embrace digital models
of engagement, they need to streamline their PDF rendering
processes in order to avoid unnecessary delays and costs in
getting promotional materials to market.
Executive Summary
It’s not easy to remember life before the “PDF;”
this file format has become the de facto standard
for reviewing and approving digital content before
it is finalized and published. But as life sciences
companies continue to favor digital engagement
models for their brand communications, the
sheer number of PDFs that need to be rendered
is outgrowing most organizations’ ability to scale
this function.
For most life sciences organizations today, the
PDF rendering process entails a manual and
cumbersome process of converting a complex
interactive asset developed by a marketing agency
into a PDF format that meets the required criteria
for the medical, legal and regulatory (MLR) review
process. Although most companies would not
consider this function a strategic one, the inability
to quickly and seamlessly complete this process
can significantly hamper and even delay the MLR
review process, as well as the timing of promotion-
al materials. Additionally, it can pose a significant
drain on current resources’ time.
Typical challenges that affect PDF quality and the
MLR review process include:
• A lack of standard operating procedures
(SOPs).
• Poor communications between the different
departments involved.
• A lack of well-defined roles and responsibilities.
• High turnover among responsible personnel.
Organizations that lack a standard and stream-
lined approach to PDF rendering — from capturing
the relevant input details, to quality checks and
efficient file-sharing practices — are at risk of
generating substandard PDFs and prolonging
the review and approval process. When tied with
time-sensitive activities such as a brand launch,
the delays can have huge financial implications
for life sciences companies.
One solution is for organizations to use a PDF
rendering factory model, which enables them to
benchmark their requirements and establish a
process to consistently deliver PDFs that meet
cognizant 20-20 insights | march 2015
• Cognizant 20-20 Insights

2. these requirements. This white paper looks at
the current PDF rendering landscape, describes
an automated and streamlined approach to PDF
rendering and looks at the benefits of using such
an approach.
The Current PDF Rendering Landscape
Many life sciences businesses use a manual system
for rendering PDFs, wherein someone in the orga-
nization takes the digital assets from the agency
and manually converts them into a PDF. Because
there are often no formalized standard operating
procedures (SOP), the manual process often leads
to varying input request details, inconsistent
output quality, multiple iterations, and increased
time and effort requirements (see Figure 1). The
PDF rendering infrastructure also lacks scalability
to handle variable volume and types of requests.
Asking an agency to take over this task would be
costly, as it would charge the agency billing rate.
The result: an inefficient and high-cost MLR
review process. In one bio-pharma organization,
we estimated that 40% of an IT commercial
operations manager-level time was spent on PDF
rendering, preventing him from focusing on more
strategic priorities. Other challenges commonly
faced by the digital promotional materials team
include:
• Outputs that are not in the correct format or fit
for the purpose (which is problematic for both
reviewers and agencies).
• Renderings that are not always compatible
with marketing systems, leading to rework and
delays.
• Manual processes that are dependent on one
person, regardless of workload.
• The need to reduce cycle time and rework in
order to accomodate the needs of planned and
refreshed digital projects.
• Poor accounting of PDF rendering and process
costs.
Toward a PDF Rendering Factory Model
Because many life sciences businesses do not
understand their PDF rendering process, the first
step to improving this process is for the organi-
zation to solicit inputs from individual stakehold-
ers and then identify inconsistencies in their
understanding. They then need to convene all
the stakeholders to iron out these inconsistencies
and establish a blueprint of the current process.
The organization should then map out a new
process based on the following elements:
• Utilize a central mailbox for PDF rendering
requests to avoid hundreds of e-mail commu-
nications.
• Establish nomenclature guidelines for
requestors and a context for the entire MLR
execution team.
cognizant 20-20 insights 2
Typical PDF Rendering Process
E-Marketing
Brand Promotional
material inputs
Absence of nomenclature standards
for rendering requests
Sharing of files via e-mail
without centralized repository Quality inconsistencies
No formal signoff by
agency or E-MarketingAgency selection
New
Revision
Review changes Review changes
No
Yes
Not MLR ready
MLR ready MLR system
review
Reconcilliation
No changes
No changes
Changes
Minor
Minor
Major
Major
Asset release
Is the
complex interactive
asset correct?
No formal PDF
rendering input
request form
Creation/revision of
asset manuscript
and wire frames for
various platforms
and channels
Request initiation of
promotional material
after approvals
from finance and
marketing
Pre-MLR live or SFLR review
(facilitator captures in Adobe PDF,
interactive viewable on development site)
PSD/PDF
creation, build kit.
PDF rendering of
pre-MLR assets
PDFrenderingofmajor
reconcilliationassets
PDFrenderingofminor
reconcilliationassets
PDFrenderingof
correctedasset
post-proofreading
Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations
Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations
Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations
Creation of complex
interactive asset
Proofread Proofread
Manual PDF rendering process
Multiple iterations of process
with different requirements
Agency/
Internal
Creative
Services
Commercial
Systems
Team
Developer
E-Marketing
Manager
MLR/
Facilitator
11.
How are reconcilliation
requests handled differently
from new items
1
2 3
4 5 8
6
7 14 16
13 15
12
109
17
19
18
11
Figure 1

3. • Create a standard incoming request sheet
template to ensure specifics are correctly and
accurately captured to minimize potential
rework.
• Determine standards for PDFs to ensure they
are fit for purpose in review, submission and
archival systems, and meet the immediate and
near-term needs of MLR stakeholders.
• Categorize content needs by type and usage
of output, and render output on target device
directly.
• Develop pre-request “gating filters” to allow
content owners to validate representative
samples of output before running iterations of
full-scale execution for new content types.
• Establish a project coordinator to act as liaison
with appropriate stakeholders, and be responsi-
ble for request validation and process/account-
ability to track requests through iterations and
closure.
By mapping out a transition from the old process
to the new one, we believe life sciences companies
will realize significant improvements in the
process, time and quality of the PDF rendering
process (see Figure 2).
Entrusting the PDF rendering process to an
external agency or vendor could be an optimal
solution, especially for organizations that want
to avoid the additional overheads of licensing
automated solutions and staffing to support a
process with fluctuating demands. The external
partners can provide expertise in gaining opera-
tional efficiencies while providing a lower cost
solution than the manual, agency-driven model.
The benefits of such a model extend across the
enterprise:
• Business IT can shift focus from execution to
optimizing processes and building core IT capa-
bilities to support brand needs.
• MLR process owners gain rapid rendering
turnaround times, with consistency and docu-
mentation to facilitate validation of outputs.
• E-marketing managers can handle requests
across many types of digital engagement
models and devices to meet evolving digital
tactics.
• Other stakedholders gain input/output quality
criteria, scalability, standardization, minimized
rejections and request metrics.
cognizant 20-20 insights 3
PDF Rendering Process Using the Factory Model
E-Marketing
Manager
Further review
and approval
Incoming QA
No
No
Yes
Yes
E-Marketing/
brandmanager
approval
Meets all the
request criteria?
Request form
meets standards?
Request form
for PDF rendering
Move request
criteria and source
files to a central
repository
Received and
reviewed
Identify request
criteria not met
Uploading in
central repository
QA of final PDF
rendered asset
QA of final PDF
rendered asset
Weekly status
report
Complex asset
received from the
developer
PDF rendering
of the asset
Commercial
System Team
Project
Coordinator
PDF
Rendering
Team
1
2
3
45
8
6
7
12
10
9
11
No
No
Yes
Yes
Meets all the
request criteria?
Meets all the
request criteria?
Figure 2

4. cognizant 20-20 insights 4
Figure 3
Implementation Phases
Reduce Cost in
Current Process
(Day 1 – 30)
Address Current
Pain Points
(Day 31 – 60)
Process
Improvements
(Day 61 – 90)
Implementation Details ■ Lift and shift existing
deliverable.
■ Scalable resources to
render PDF’s typically
in 24 hours.
■ Creation of a central repository
■ Establish common nomenclature
■ Obtain key stakeholder rendering
standardization requirements
■ Create, review and confirm
Request qualifying criteria
Develop fit-for-purpose
standards
Develop job tracking template
■ Prioritize process efficiencies
■ Evaluate efficacy of
automated tools
■ Implement request/
fit-for-purpose standards
■ Roll out optimized process
■ Immediate cost savings
■ Metrics for status
reports and project cost
allocation
■ Redirect commercial IT efforts
to process management
■ Stream internal
communications
■ Reduce rendering request
review time
■ Identify process
optimization tools
■ Minimize reworks
■ Reduce PDF rendering
processing time
■ Quicker MLR approval time
■ Continuous improvement
opportunities
Key Benefits
Implementing a PDF Rendering
Factory Model
A PDF rendering implementation can follow a
phased approach and realize benefits all along the
way (see Figure 3):
• Phase 1a: Reduce costs and implement a
highly efficient and cost-effective global PDF
production model.
>> Establish incoming and outgoing quality con-
trol criteria to resolve issues prior to work
and validate output against standards.
>> Ensure rapid turnaround time (24 to 72 hours)
on any device and in a format fit for purpose.
>> Develop a simple cost structure with ability to
capture and bill individual projects.
>> Send weekly status reports to key
stakeholders.
>> Establish on-site request coordinator as liaison.
• Phase 1b: Provide consultation to address
current pain points.
• Create a central repository for submission,
tracking and management of PDF rendering
requests.
• Establish a common nomenclature for PDF
rendering requests.
• Obtain key stakeholder rendering standardiza-
tion requirements.
• Create, review and confirm request qualifying
criteria; develop fit-for-purpose standards;
develop job tracking template.
• Phase 1c: Provide assistance to implement
process improvements.
>> Prioritize process efficiencies.
>> Evaluate efficacy of automated tools.
>> Implement request/fit-for-purpose standards.
>> Roll out optimized processes.
• Phase 2a: PDF rendering steady state.
>> Provide ongoing PDF rendering requests
as needed.
>> Maintain optimized process.

5. About Cognizant
Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technology, consulting, and business
process outsourcing services, dedicated to helping the world’s leading companies build stronger business-
es. Headquartered in Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction,
technology innovation, deep industry and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative work-
force that embodies the future of work. With over 75 development and delivery centers worldwide and
approximately 211,500 employees as of December 31, 2014, Cognizant is a member of the NASDAQ-100,
the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and
fastest growing companies in the world. Visit us online at www.cognizant.com or follow us on Twitter: Cognizant.
World Headquarters
500 Frank W. Burr Blvd.
Teaneck, NJ 07666 USA
Phone: +1 201 801 0233
Fax: +1 201 801 0243
Toll Free: +1 888 937 3277
Email: inquiry@cognizant.com
European Headquarters
1 Kingdom Street
Paddington Central
London W2 6BD
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7297 7600
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7121 0102
Email: infouk@cognizant.com
India Operations Headquarters
#5/535, Old Mahabalipuram Road
Okkiyam Pettai, Thoraipakkam
Chennai, 600 096 India
Phone: +91 (0) 44 4209 6000
Fax: +91 (0) 44 4209 6060
Email: inquiryindia@cognizant.com
­­© Copyright 2015, Cognizant. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission from Cognizant. The information contained herein is
subject to change without notice. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.
About the Authors
Andrew Isaacs is a Principal in Cognizant’s Analytics Life Sciences Practice. He has over 25 years of life
sciences experience, focusing on leading global commercial operations and technology optimization
teams, marketing excellence, brand management teams, life cycle planning, stakeholder management
and governance/change management. Previous to Cognizant, Andrew was the commercial processes
and practices lead for a global pharmaceuticals company and chief strategy officer for a life sciences
medical communications agency. He also introduced “marketing excellence” at a global life sciences
company and launched multiple products and services and oversight for global new product develop-
ment. He has an undergraduate degree in biomedical engineering, an M.B.A./M.S. graduate degree and
post-graduate certificates in project management and new product development. He recently authored
the point of view “Accelerating Bio-Pharma’s Marketing Transformation.” Andrew can be reached at
Andrew.Isaacs@cognizant.com.
Bharat Menghani is an Engagement Manager in Cognizant’s Analytics Life Sciences Practice. He has
over 12 years of experience in the life sciences and healthcare industry. He has led multiple initiatives in
process optimization and recommended sales force effectiveness strategies, including resizing, restruc-
turing, vacancy management, call plan and sample optimization. He has also been involved in developing
and deploying technology platforms that could be leveraged as an enabler for faster reaction to market
events and to gain process efficiencies. He has an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering and
an M.B.A. in marketing and strategy. Bharat can be reached at Bharat.Menghani@Cognizant.com.
Looking Forward
Even before the movement to digital content,
PDF rendering was a manual and cumbersome
process for many life sciences organizations. But
as marketing tactics evolve to encompass a broad
spectrum of digital engagement models, it’s
become crucial for companies to find a scalable
PDF rendering solution that meets the needs of
an evolving content review and approval process.
By embracing a PDF rendering factory model, life
sciences organizations will be equipped to move
forward into a digital future, unencumbered by
delays to their MLR processes and with freed-up
resources to apply to strategic initiatives.
Codex 1248