The document outlines a benchmarking research conducted by Best Practices, LLC aimed at identifying effective strategies and insights for biopharmaceutical companies in managing professional and trade relations functions. It provides an overview of operational effectiveness, success metrics, and challenges faced by leaders in the field, gathering data from 26 executives across various companies. Key findings emphasize the importance of collaborative practices in influencing guidelines, enhancing corporate reputation, and establishing executive partnerships.

1. Professional & Trade Relations Excellence:
Optimizing Group Structure & Operations
Best Practices, LLC
Strategic Benchmarking Research
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Executive Summary, p. 4-15
II. Operational Effectiveness, p. 16-28
III. Measuring & Communicating Success, p. 29-36
IV. Challenges & Hurdles for Professional Relations Leaders, p. 37-44
V. Organizational Structure, p. 45-51
VI. Financial & Human Resources, p. 52-60
VII. Pitfalls, Lessons Learned & Success Factors, p. 61-64
VIII. About Best Practices, p. 65-66
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC

3. Research Objective & Methodology
Best Practices, LLC conducted this benchmarking research to identify successful industry
practices and executive insights that biopharmaceutical companies can use to develop a
strategic Professional and Trade Relations (PTR) function.
Study Objectives & Methodology Key Topics Covered
Objectives:
Recognizing changing needs among • Professional Relations Operational
professional and trade groups and a Effectiveness
shifting health care landscape, this study
seeks to identify PTR benchmark • Measuring & Communicating Success
metrics, industry trends, pitfalls to avoid
and success factors that lead to effective • Challenges & Hurdles for Professional
external collaborations with associations Relations Leaders
and societies.
• Organizational Structure
Methodology:
To collect quantitative data, Best • Financial & Human Resources
Practices, LLC used an online survey
instrument. Analysts conducted in-depth • Pitfalls, Lessons Learned & Success
interviews to collect executive insights Factors
and harvest best practices and lessons
learned.
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 3

4. Universe of Learning: 25 Companies Engaged
Research participants included 26 Professional and Trade Relations executives and
managers from 25 biopharma and medical device companies across a wide variety of
therapeutic areas and product classes. Six companies participated in interviews.
Mid-Cap Pharmaceutical Co.
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 4

5. Director-Level Respondents Dominate Benchmark Class
Eighty-four percent of the research participants are at a director level. Professional and
Trade Relations as a function resides in multiple departments and is combined with other
roles depending on company size, organizational structure and headcount allocation.
Respondent Job Level Respondent Job Areas
• Advocacy
Head, 4% Manager, 4% • Advocacy & External Affairs
Senior
• Advocacy & Professional Relations (2)
Senior/ Manager, 8%
• Business Analytics & Insights
Executive
• Business Unit Commercial Operations
Director, 19%
• Corporate Communications (2)
Associate
Director, 15%
• Global Marketing
• Government & External Affairs
• Grant Management
• Marketing (2)
• Medical Affairs
• Payer Market Development
• Product Strategy
• Professional Affairs
• Professional Relations (4)
• Strategic Partnerships
• Trade & Distribution
• Trade & Specialty
Director, 50%
(n = 26) • Trade Relations (2)
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 5

6. Key Insights: Informing Guidelines, Policy & Image
Professional Trade Relations groups have the opportunity to inform and influence
guidelines, policy and the company’s reputation to the professional public. This is often
an advisory role rather than a command-and-control role.
Influencing and Informing Guidelines: PTR groups often assist in treatment and policy
Influencing and Informing Guidelines: PTR groups often assist in treatment and policy
guidelines development by linking product or therapy experts to advocacy
guidelines development by linking product or therapy experts to advocacy
organizations involved in the process.
organizations involved in the process.
Influencing Corp Brand & Reputation: Savvy PTR groups interact frequently (daily and
Influencing Corp Brand & Reputation: Savvy PTR groups interact frequently (daily and
weekly) with their counterparts on corporate branding, social responsibility and other
weekly) with their counterparts on corporate branding, social responsibility and other
reputational fronts to help forge positive corporate identities ––communicated to and
reputational fronts to help forge positive corporate identities communicated to and
through the professional communities.
through the professional communities.
Informing Media Investment for Scientific Branding: Almost half of the benchmark class
Informing Media Investment for Scientific Branding: Almost half of the benchmark class
represents the company’s full portfolio of products when communicating with
represents the company’s full portfolio of products when communicating with
association partners. PTR groups also advise on key journals and targets for media
association partners. PTR groups also advise on key journals and targets for media
investment that helps shape the company’s image among professional, payer and
investment that helps shape the company’s image among professional, payer and
patient groups.
patient groups.
Exposing Leaders to Leaders: A quarter of PTR groups actively and frequently engage
Exposing Leaders to Leaders: A quarter of PTR groups actively and frequently engage
corporate leadership with key association leadership. This represents an opportunity
corporate leadership with key association leadership. This represents an opportunity
front for learning, listening and communication at the executive level.
front for learning, listening and communication at the executive level.
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 6

7. Ad Boards Are Top Activity for Informing Treatment Guidelines
Professional and Trade Relations may assist in development of treatment guidelines by
linking product or therapy experts to advocacy organizations involved in the process.
Only one third of participant groups are not involved in informing treatment guidelines.
Q23. Which activities does your PTR group do to inform treatment guidelines in your company’s
therapeutic focus areas? (Please choose all that apply.)
Treatment Guidelines Activities
Advisory boards 42%
Health Outcomes analysis 38%
Unrestricted grants 38%
PTR group doesn’t take steps to
33%
inform treatment guidelines
Other:
Expert panels 25% • “Grants are independently
decided by our grant office. Only
medical interacts on clinical
Quality of Life analysis 21% dialogue and for guidelines only in
response to inquiries.”
• “Product developments, e.g. new
Other 13% indication”
• “To be determined”
(n = 24) % Responses
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 7

8. PTR Aligns with Key Internal Groups through Frequent Interaction
Frequent communication, at least monthly, with key internal stakeholders ensures
alignment of goals and messages. Many companies have cross-functional teams that meet
regularly to update priorities and targets. Respondents also noted daily communication
with marketing, medical affairs, managed markets, sales, compliance, and finance.
Q11. Please note the frequency with which you interact with other key internal colleagues/groups to
share and learn.
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Annually Never
Corporate Communications
– Internal
12% 31% 23% 27% 8% 0%
Corporate Brand &
Reputation
8% 38% 19% 8% 12% 15%
Government Affairs (Federal,
State or International)
8% 31% 27% 23% 4% 8%
Policy 4% 35% 27% 19% 12% 4%
Corporate Communications
– External
4% 27% 27% 27% 4% 12%
Corporate Social
Responsibility
4% 27% 15% 12% 15% 27%
(n = 26)
“Organized interaction is monthly by conference call for professionals within a
function and semi-annually in a physical meeting.” - Respondent
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 8

9. Integrated Portfolio Is Favored PTR Positioning Strategy
Almost half of the benchmark class is representing the full portfolio of the company’s
products in communicating with association partners. If a company focuses on a
particular disease (e.g., diabetes), brand and therapeutic emphasis may intersect.
Q17. Which statement(s) best describes your corporate positioning strategy with professional and
trade relations organizations? (Please check all that apply.)
PTR Corporate Positioning Strategy
PTR group presents an integrated
portfolio of the company’s 48%
brands/products.
PTR group presents therapeutic area
32%
specific information.
PTR group presents brand/product
28%
specific information. "Our interactions also stress
the broader environment that
PTR group presents information based
patients, HCPs, and
on a company characteristic (e.g. 24%
pharma/bio must operate in
research-based, patient-focused, etc.).
and the importance of
No formal corporate positioning ensuring HCP-industry
8%
strategy. interactions can continue and
that innovation can flourish
Other 4% for unmet needs.”
(n = 25) - Respondent
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 9

10. Portfolio Perspective Provides Benefits over Brand Positioning
Professional Relations functions can position their companies more strategically with
association partners when communicating for the full integrated portfolio rather than for
brands. Representing the entire company allows PTR to “take it up a level.”
Comments from the Field
“Taking it up a level to the corporate or portfolio level
allows us to address chronic disease, primary care,
disparities and other healthcare issues when working
with our association partners.”
“When representing all brands, we can roll up lots of little
grants into one large contribution and potentially become
a higher level sponsor.”
“Leverage across all the therapeutic areas if possible.
Think what it means to work for the whole company not
just a brand.”
“Addressing associations at the corporate level instead
of the brand level creates better long-term partnerships.”
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 10

11. Only 24% Schedule Regular Meetings with Executive Partners
PTR leaders touted the importance of executive partnerships but acknowledged the
challenge of doing them consistently or effectively due to scheduling conflicts and
executives’ priorities. Our research showed that effective communication can still take
place in ad-hoc discussions and association gatherings.
Q18. Which statement best describes your PTR group’s approach to executive level partnerships
that enable your leadership to discuss policy issues, agendas, and common interests with external
association leaders?
Occasional meetings to bring VP and
SVP or “C” Level leaders into contact 44%
with association heads.
Regularly scheduled meetings to bring
VP and SVP or “C” Level leaders into 24%
contact with association heads.
Ad hoc or informal meetings to bring “Regular meetings at conferences
VP and SVP or “C” Level leaders into 16% and select regular meetings that
contact with association heads. are quite infrequent (likely annual
at best). Meetings can be a full
time occupation for all involved
No approach to such partnerships. 16% without much specific result if not
managed in disciplined way.”
(n = 25) - Respondent
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 11

12. Executive Partnerships Are Important but Difficult to Engineer
Although two-thirds of companies fund executive partnerships to build high-level
relationships with associations, many find program success elusive. The most common
problem is insufficient motivation/interest/time at the VP level within the corporation.
Key Objectives of Executive Partner Meetings:
• Brief associations on key issues & interests of corporation
• Hear key issues & interests of association partners
• Identify new opportunities for partnering
• Use executive voice to highlight the importance of a key issue
Failure Points:
x Insufficient support at the C-suite/Presidential level
“Everyone wants to be interacting
x Not in VP job description/ not measured at the highest levels. Managing
x Executive schedules are too heavy this is a real challenge.”
x Not viewed as essential
– Interviewed Associate Director
x Disconnect over expectations for additional funding
“Execs who are high up are not
Successful Strategies: looking to sit on an association
subcommittee or help with a
Identify places where the executive can participate with the
organization and make it meaningful to both parties. newsletter. They want an equally
high role in the association and
Consider AVP or Director-level partnerships instead of VP
not all of them have that kind of
Match up corporate & association execs who share specific interests opportunity.”
Schedule executive partner meetings at association events
– Interviewed Director
Invite association execs to corporate headquarters
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC 12

13. About Best Practices, LLC
Best Practices, LLC is a research and consulting firm that conducts
work based on the simple yet profound principle that organizations
can chart a course to superior economic performance by studying
the best business practices, operating tactics and winning
strategies of world-class companies.
Best Practices, LLC
6350 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 200, Chapel Hill, NC 27517
919-403-0251
best@best-in-class.com
www.best-in-class.com
Copyright © Best Practices®, LLC