HCP Engagement Strategy: Why Share of Voice Stopped Working
Your HCP engagement strategy is probably optimized for a world that ended around 2022. Reach and frequency. Channel mix. Share of voice. Those were the right levers when 60% of physicians would see a rep. Veeva's Pulse data put that figure at 45% in 2024 and falling. When access shrinks, the strategy that wins is not the one that squeezes more touches out of fewer doors. It is the one that makes each interaction worth the physician's time. This post lays out what that strategy looks like, what the data says about the gap between pharma and its physicians, and how to rebuild engagement around what physicians are actually trying to get done.
The gap you are engaging into
Two numbers describe it. Deloitte's 2025 research found that only 28% of HCPs believe pharma's engagement strategies meet their needs. In the same research, 82% of life sciences executives said they were satisfied with those strategies. You are, in all likelihood, in the 82%. Your physicians are in the 72% who disagree with you.
DT Consulting's benchmark, built on 12,200 rated interactions from 6,100 HCPs across 13 countries, reached a similar verdict in 2024: pharma's use of engagement channels "continues to be mismatched with HCP preferences." The mismatch is not a content problem. It is a question of what pharma thinks engagement is for. Most engagement models exist to deliver messages. Physicians engage with you to solve problems. Those are different jobs, and only one of them earns a second meeting.
What physicians are actually trying to do when they engage with you
Strip away the channel conversation and a physician's interaction with your company has a small number of purposes. She wants to know whether your therapy is right for a specific patient in front of her. She wants that patient to get the drug without a fight. She wants help when the fight happens anyway. She wants to know what to do when the patient comes back with a problem on therapy. Every one of those jobs sits in the chain from prescribing decision to treated patient, and every one of them is a place where your engagement either helps or gets in the way.
The fight happens a lot. The American Medical Association's latest physician survey found that 93% of physicians say prior authorization delays care and 82% say it at least sometimes leads patients to abandon treatment. A 2026 JAMA study summarized by Johns Hopkins found insurer rejections of brand name prescriptions reached 40.7% of initial attempts in 2024, with nearly half of those never filled within 90 days. Your physician wrote the script. She did her part. Then the system she was engaging with on your behalf let her patient fall through. That is what she remembers at the next call, whatever your message recall study says.
Why experience beats share of voice
This is not a soft argument. Bain's pharma work in 2018 found that roughly 40% of a physician's drug recommendations relate to her overall experience with the company rather than the product itself, and that physicians who rate a company highly are two to three times more likely to prescribe its products. McKinsey's launch research from the same year found fully satisfied prescribers more than twice as likely to prescribe. If your engagement strategy spends 90% of its effort on the product argument and leaves the experience to default, you are under investing in the variable that moves two fifths of the decision.
The companies that have read this evidence are changing their models. Lilly's LillyDirect and Pfizer's PfizerForAll were both built to remove the roadblocks physicians and patients hit after the prescribing decision. Novartis launched its Cosentyx direct platform in 2025 because, in the words of its US president, the company needs "new ways to reach patients more directly by removing barriers in the system." These are engagement decisions, even though nobody filed them under engagement. They change what a physician gets when she chooses your drug.
Rebuilding engagement around progression
Here is the shift in one sentence. Stop managing engagement as message delivery and start managing it as whether the physician and her patient progress to the next stage. Four practical changes follow.
Give every channel a job in the chain. The rep's job in a specialty category is rarely to deliver the efficacy story one more time. It is to know which of this physician's patients are stuck, why, and what the company can do about it this week. Medical's job is to make the clinical decision easier before it is made. Patient services' job is to make the fulfillment path visible to the office so nobody has to call to ask. When every channel has a progression job, omnichannel orchestration becomes a question of who does what for whom, rather than how many impressions you can stack. We explain that distinction in our definition of Customer Excellence.
Measure what the physician would measure. Not recall, reach or satisfaction, but time from script to first dose for her patients, how often her prior authorizations get resolved and how fast, and whether her patients are still on therapy at 90 days. If you cannot see those numbers by physician or by practice, you cannot engage on them, and you are leaving the physician to find out by herself.
Turn the field into a listening system. Reps and MSLs hear about a new payer policy, a hub bottleneck or a pharmacy problem weeks before any dashboard shows it. Most companies have no reliable way to capture that signal, classify it, assign an owner and act on it. Build that loop and the field becomes an intelligence asset as well as a delivery channel. We described the operating version of this in our practice note on journey operations for field excellence.
Make the standard explicit. Physicians judge you against the best service they received this week, not against the other reps who called. That is the Consumer-Grade standard, and it has six testable conditions: recognition, anticipation, coherence, effort, resolution and visibility. Run your current engagement model against them. Does the physician have to reintroduce her patient's situation every time she talks to a different part of your company? Does she find out a prior authorization failed from you, or from the patient? Can her office see where a case stands without calling? Every no is a place engagement is failing her, and a place a competitor can win.
Three questions for your engagement review
- Of the physicians you engaged most heavily last quarter, how many had patients who never started your therapy, and does anyone in your organization know why?
- Which of your channels has a defined job in helping a patient progress from script to first dose, and which exist only to deliver a message?
- When a rep hears about a recurring access barrier, where does that information go, and what happens to it?
If your engagement strategy cannot answer these, it is a promotion strategy with a different name. The physicians in Deloitte's 72% already know the difference.
About the author
Wayne Simmons is the founder of The Customer Excellence AGENCY and the author of The Customer Excellence Enterprise (Wiley, 2024). He is founding faculty of the MS in Customer Experience Management at Michigan State University's Broad College of Business. He led global customer excellence in Pfizer's first Chief Marketing Organization and in Bayer's Customer Powerhouse. Related reading: What is value leakage in pharma? and What is Consumer-Grade Pharma?







