Omnichannel in Pharma, and Why It Underdelivers

Omnichannel in pharma is the coordination of a company's channels around a customer rather than around the company's own functions. Almost every program sold under that name does something narrower, which is coordinating message delivery across channels. That narrower thing is worth doing, though it remains a different thing, which is why the results so often disappoint relative to the investment.

Organizations coordinate most easily along the lines they already manage. A company that manages channels will coordinate channels, and a company that manages brands will coordinate brand messages. Coordinating around a customer requires acting along a line no function owns, which is the part that rarely survives contact with an operating plan. The word omnichannel came through that collision intact while the ambition inside it was quietly reduced.

The category is saturated with content produced by parties selling the narrower version, so the vocabulary has drifted toward what platforms can do. Message consistency across email, field, web and portal is a real capability with real engineering behind it. The question worth taking up is why a company can complete that work and still see no change in whether patients start therapy.

Channel coordination makes activity consistent, journey coordination makes progress continuous

Channel coordination makes a company's outbound activity consistent. The same claim, the same positioning and the same next step appear wherever a customer meets the brand. Journey coordination makes a customer's progress continuous, which means a case that starts in one channel can be finished in another without the customer restarting it. Those are two different achievements, and only the second shows up in whether anything actually moved.

A company can reach the first completely and leave the second untouched. Every channel can carry an identical message while an authorization still stalls, a benefit verification still asks for information already supplied, and a physician's unresolved question still dies in a queue. Consistency of message says nothing about whether anything moved. What the customer meets is a well coordinated company that cannot finish what it started.

The distinction matters because the two require different work. Channel coordination is largely a content and technology problem, solvable inside marketing with a platform and a governance process. Journey coordination is an accountability problem, because continuity requires somebody to hold a case across functional boundaries. Budget tends to follow the problem that has a product attached to it.

Why most maturity models measure the easier thing

Most omnichannel maturity models measure channel coordination and report it as journey coordination. They score channel breadth, message consistency, data unification, campaign orchestration and personalization depth. Every one of those is a property of the company's outbound machinery. None of them is a property of the customer's progress.

The scoring is honest enough, because it measures what a company can see from inside. A company knows its own channels and its own content, and it knows far less about whether a case closed. Maturity scores rise, dashboards improve, and the experience the customer has may not change at all. I have watched organizations reach a high rating on a model of this kind while their hardest cases took exactly as long as before.

The clearest evidence that something is missing sits in the gap between how companies rate themselves and how customers rate them. Deloitte 2025 research found only 28 percent of HCPs believe pharma's engagement strategies meet their needs, against 82 percent of life sciences executives who say they are satisfied with those same strategies. A gap of that size is rarely a measurement error, and I read it as two parties scoring two different things under one word.

The six conditions a coordinated experience has to meet

The Consumer-Grade Specification is a closed set of six structural conditions. Recognition, Anticipation, Coherence, Effort, Resolution and Visibility. Felt attributes such as easy, simple, fast and transparent are reported outcomes that decompose into those six, with thresholds set per organization. Holding them as a specification rather than an aspiration is what makes them usable in an operating review.

Recognition is whether the company knows who it is dealing with and what has already happened. Anticipation is whether the next need is met before the customer has to raise it. Coherence is whether what the customer meets holds together across parties and over time. Effort is how much work the customer has to do to get a result.

Resolution is whether the thing the customer came for actually got finished. Visibility is whether the customer can see where matters stand and what happens next. Coherence is the condition most omnichannel programs are genuinely chasing, and it is one of six. A program can satisfy it fully and leave the other five roughly where they were.

Which conditions a message platform cannot deliver alone

Four of the six sit largely outside what channel orchestration reaches on its own. Recognition requires customer context and enterprise memory that persist across functions, rather than campaign history held inside a marketing stack. A platform can personalize using what marketing knows, while recognition requires what the hub, the field and the call center know as well.

Effort is set by the number of steps a customer has to complete, and most of those steps live in processes marketing does not own. Forms, verifications, documentation requests and repeat questions determine the effort level, and no amount of message coordination reduces them. A perfectly orchestrated sequence can escort a customer through an unchanged quantity of work.

Resolution requires somebody with authority to finish a case, which is an operating role rather than a channel capability. Visibility requires a single current view of where a case sits, assembled from systems never designed to report to one another. Anticipation and Coherence are the two conditions a platform contributes to most directly, which is a reasonable contribution and a partial one.

Why experience was framed as adjacent rather than connective

The reason this keeps recurring sits further back than any technology decision. Imported customer experience models framed the discipline as standalone and adjacent, a function with its own surveys, its own team and its own program calendar. That framing made experience something a company could place beside the commercial model. Imported customer experience was rejected in this industry for reasons that were largely rational, because the first iterations did not fit how pharma actually operates, and the wrong lesson was drawn from that reasonable rejection.

Experience is better understood as the connective fabric across functions and an embedded commercial construct. It belongs with the other named domains as the fourth domain of commercial excellence rather than as a layer added over the first three. A channel layer sits on top of an organization, while a fabric runs through it. That difference decides whether a customer's case can cross a boundary.

What happens when a horizontal surface meets vertical silos

Pharma's functional structure produces vertical interactions against engagement that runs horizontally. Medical, marketing, access, field and patient services each interact downward through their own channels, while an HCP engagement relationship and a patient's journey run sideways across all of them. Each function performs its own interaction competently, and the customer meets the places where those interactions are supposed to meet each other.

An omnichannel program that leaves those boundaries intact is building a horizontal surface over a vertical organization. The surface is genuine, and underneath it the handoffs, the ownership and the memory remain divided exactly as before. The seams show up as the customer's problem rather than the company's, which is why they persist through several otherwise successful programs. A physician asked the same question twice by two parts of one company is reading the structure accurately.

None of this reflects anyone's competence. Each function is staffed by people doing demanding work to a standard their own leadership set. The failures cluster in the spaces no organization chart describes, which makes this a design gap and therefore open to design. Gaps of that kind respond to ownership and instrumentation rather than to exhortation.

Will AI fix a fragmented commercial model?

The current expectation is that AI will resolve all of this, and that expectation deserves a direct answer. AI will not make a fragmented commercial model customer-centric. It makes whatever operating system exists faster and more scalable. That applies with full force to channel orchestration.

Applied to a company whose channels are coordinated and whose journeys are not, AI produces more coordinated messages arriving faster. Applied to a company that has closed its boundaries, the same capability compounds, because context travels and resolution follows. The technology is indifferent to which of those two organizations it is installed in.

This is the argument I make most often and find hardest to land. A capability that amplifies gets read as a capability that repairs, because the outputs improve immediately and visibly. Message quality rises, response times fall, and the case that stalled last quarter stalls again this quarter. Amplification and repair are different purchases, and only one of them changes a progression number.

What a properly instrumented program measures

Engagement is the standard currency here, and it reports attention rather than movement. Opens, reach, frequency, channel mix and content consumption describe what registered, and a program can raise every one of them while moving nobody closer to therapy.

Progression is the alternative. The stage ladder runs Scripts Written, Filled, Therapy Started, 90-Day and Persistence, and each stage names a state a customer either reached or did not. Measured that way, an interaction is judged by whether the next stage became more likely rather than by whether it was delivered. Every interaction either compounds value or creates drag, which is the sentence that turns an engagement metric into an economic one.

Instrumenting that is harder than instrumenting channels, which is the honest reason it remains rarer. It requires agreement on the stages, a view of where cases currently sit, and a named owner for the transitions between them. The approach to measuring experience in pharma that holds up is the one reporting movement between stages rather than activity within channels. In my experience a program that cannot say which stage it improved has reported effort rather than progress.

Key Takeaways

Omnichannel in pharma is the coordination of channels around a customer rather than around the company's own functions.
Channel coordination makes outbound activity consistent, while journey coordination makes a customer's progress continuous.
Most maturity models measure the first and report it as the second, which is why results disappoint relative to investment.
Coherence is one of six Consumer-Grade conditions, and Recognition, Effort, Resolution and Visibility sit largely outside what a message platform delivers alone.
A program leaving functional boundaries intact builds a horizontal surface over a vertical organization, and the seams become the customer's problem.
AI makes whatever operating system exists faster and more scalable rather than making a fragmented commercial model customer-centric.

Diagnostic Questions to Consider

State whether your omnichannel program coordinates message delivery or coordinates customer progress.
Name the owner accountable for a case that has to cross a functional boundary before it can be finished.
Score your program against each of the six conditions separately rather than against a composite maturity level.
Report the share of customer cases closed in a channel other than the one where they started.
Identify which stage of the progression ladder your last omnichannel investment measurably improved.

Closing Reflection

The word omnichannel describes an ambition this industry has largely accepted and an implementation that has largely been narrowed. Nobody narrowed it deliberately. It narrowed because channel coordination has a product, a budget line and a measurable output, while journey coordination has none of those and asks for authority across boundaries instead.

The useful consequence is that the remaining work is structural rather than technical. The platforms largely exist and the content is largely coordinated, which means the constraint has moved to ownership, memory and resolution. Those are decisions a commercial leadership team can make without buying anything further.

Exceptional science deserves an exceptional commercial system, and coordinated messaging is a modest portion of what that means. A customer judges a company by whether the thing she needed got finished, rather than by whether its channels agreed with one another. That standard was set outside this industry, by every other service in her life, and it will decide what omnichannel is eventually taken to mean.

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.

The Customer Excellence Agency: Advancing the Pursuit of Excellence in Service of Science.

< Older Post

[PRACTICE NOTE] Your Call Plan Isn’t the Problem. Your Customer Context Is.

March 15, 2026

Why healthcare professionals now judge pharmaceutical engagement against the best experiences in their lives, and what that means for the future of commercial leadership. When commercial performance falters, the reflex inside many pharmaceutical organizations is to adjust the machinery of field execution. Leaders revisit call plans, recalibrate targeting models, and increase the volume of activity in the hope that more precision or more frequency will restore momentum. For decades this system has been treated as the central instrument of commercial performance, determining which physicians are prioritized, how frequently representatives engage, and how resources are deployed across territories. Yet the growing gap between commercial effort and commercial impact suggests a deeper issue. T he problem is rarely the design of the call plan itself. It is the context in which healthcare professionals now operate. Physicians are navigating increasingly complex clinical, administrative, and informational environments, and that evolving reality now shapes prescribing behavior far more than the cadence of promotional interactions. What many organizations are experiencing is a widening Customer Context Gap. Commercial systems were designed for a time when prescribing decisions could be influenced primarily through promotional interaction and product information. Today physicians operate inside a far more complex reality shaped by administrative burden, reimbursement constraints, digital information overload, and growing expectations for seamless support across the entire care journey. In this environment the physician’s decision is influenced not only by clinical evidence but also by how easily a therapy fits into the practical realities of care delivery. When commercial models remain anchored in promotional activity while the customer’s context has fundamentally changed, even the most disciplined call plan struggles to deliver the outcomes it was designed to produce. Closing this gap requires a different way of thinking about commercial performance. The question is no longer how to optimize promotional activity but how to align the organization around the real journeys through which physicians help patients receive therapy. Prescribing decisions unfold within complex sequences of clinical evaluation, reimbursement navigation, patient readiness, and ongoing support. When commercial strategy is designed around these journeys rather than isolated interactions, the role of the field force begins to evolve. Representatives are no longer positioned primarily as messengers of information but as partners in removing barriers that slow care. Organizations that recognize this shift begin redesigning their commercial systems accordingly, aligning field engagement, digital support, access programs, and patient services around the same goal: helping healthcare professionals help patients move from clinical intent to successful treatment. From Promotional Activity to Customer Journeys The pharmaceutical industry has historically organized commercial activity around the moment of promotion. Call plans, targeting models, and message sequencing were designed to influence prescribing behavior primarily through informational engagement with healthcare professionals. While this model brought structure and scale to commercial operations, it reflects an earlier era in which the path from clinical awareness to prescribing action was comparatively linear. Today the journey is far more complex. Physicians must navigate an intricate landscape of clinical evidence, treatment guidelines, payer requirements, prior authorization processes, patient affordability concerns, and adherence challenges. Prescribing a therapy is no longer a single decision point. It is the beginning of a chain of events that determines whether a patient ultimately receives and remains on treatment. This is why the commercial conversation must expand beyond the traditional moment of prescription to encompass three interconnected journeys. The first is the Path-to-Prescribe , where scientific evidence, clinical education, and confidence in the therapy shape the physician’s willingness to recommend treatment. The second is the Path-to-Fulfill, where access, affordability, patient readiness, and operational support determine whether that recommendation ultimately becomes therapy in the patient’s hands. The third is the Path-to-Adhere , where ongoing patient support, monitoring, and engagement determine whether patients remain on therapy long enough to realize the intended clinical benefit. Science drives the Path to Prescribe, where evidence, clinical education, and confidence in the therapy shape the physician’s willingness to recommend treatment. Experience shapes the Path to Fulfill, where access, affordability, and patient readiness determine whether that recommendation becomes therapy in the patient’s hands. Sustained outcomes depend on the Path to Adhere, where ongoing support, monitoring, and engagement ensure patients remain on therapy long enough to realize its intended clinical benefit. When commercial organizations focus almost exclusively on the first while leaving the latter journeys fragmented and burdened, a significant portion of therapeutic value is lost between intention and impact. In many therapeutic areas, the result appears in the persistent gap between prescriptions written, prescriptions filled, and therapies sustained—gaps that reflect not a failure of science but a failure of system design. Recognizing these three journeys shifts the unit of focus from promotional activity to the real-world pathways through which care is delivered. It reframes the role of the field force, the purpose of digital engagement, and the design of patient support programs around a single objective: reducing the friction that stands between clinical intent, treatment initiation, and sustained patient outcomes. Customer Context Is the New Commercial Variable For much of the pharmaceutical industry’s history, commercial performance was largely explained by a familiar set of variables. Product efficacy, clinical differentiation, promotional reach, and sales force execution determined the trajectory of most brands. When performance lagged, leaders adjusted those levers by refining segmentation, optimizing targeting, and recalibrating call plans. Today those traditional levers still matter, but they no longer explain commercial outcomes on their own. A far more powerful variable has entered the equation: customer context. HCPs now operate within an environment defined not only by clinical complexity and administrative burden but also by rising expectations shaped by their experiences outside healthcare. Physicians are also consumers. In their personal lives they interact daily with companies such as Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Netflix that anticipate their needs, remove friction, and simplify complex processes through thoughtful design. These experiences quietly reset the benchmark for competence, responsiveness, and respect for their time. When those same physicians step into their clinical roles, they do not shed those expectations. They carry them with them. The contrast between the seamless orchestration of their consumer experiences and the fragmented systems surrounding many healthcare interactions becomes difficult to ignore. What once felt acceptable now feels unnecessarily burdensome. This dynamic represents the Consumer-Grade Imperative. Healthcare professionals increasingly evaluate pharmaceutical engagement not against other pharmaceutical companies but against the best experiences they encounter anywhere in their lives. In this environment even a clinically superior therapy can struggle if the surrounding system makes it difficult to initiate treatment, navigate reimbursement, or support patient adherence. Customer context therefore becomes the new commercial variable. It determines whether scientific differentiation translates into practical adoption. It shapes whether prescribing intent becomes therapy initiation and whether therapy initiation becomes sustained patient outcomes. Call plans were designed to manage activity. Customer context requires organizations to manage journeys. The Field Force in the Era of Customer Context Recognizing customer context as the defining commercial variable inevitably reshapes how the role of the field force is understood. For decades the pharmaceutical sales representative has been positioned primarily as the carrier of scientific information. Call plans optimized the frequency and sequencing of these interactions to ensure that physicians received consistent messaging. That role does not disappear, but the environment surrounding it has changed profoundly. Physicians today are navigating administrative burden, payer complexity, digital information overload, and increasing time pressure. In this environment they are not simply seeking more information. They are seeking clarity, simplicity, and support that helps them navigate the complexity surrounding treatment decisions. This shift transforms the representative from a messenger of information into something far more valuable: a partner in removing friction from the care journey. Conversations move beyond repeating clinical claims toward understanding the practical barriers that physicians and their teams face as they attempt to initiate and sustain therapy for patients. The most effective field forces are therefore supported by commercial systems designed around journeys rather than activities. Representatives are equipped not only with scientific messaging but with the insight and coordination required to address obstacles across prescribing, reimbursement, and patient support. Field engagement becomes a catalyst for problem solving rather than simply a vehicle for promotion. From Call Plans to Customer-Aligned Commercial Systems If customer context has become the defining commercial variable, then the systems designed to support the field must evolve accordingly. The traditional call plan was built to manage activity. It provided structure for how frequently physicians were engaged, how territories were covered, and how resources were deployed. Yet activity alone does not determine whether therapies ultimately reach patients. What determines impact is whether the commercial system surrounding the physician reduces or increases the burden of delivering care. A customer-aligned commercial system begins with the journeys through which physicians help patients move from diagnosis to treatment and beyond. Marketing clarifies the scientific story. Sales provides trusted relationships and real-time understanding of physician needs. Access teams simplify reimbursement pathways. Patient support programs reduce administrative burden. Digital engagement reinforces and extends human interaction. The result is a commercial system that operates less like disconnected functions and more like an integrated network designed to help physicians help patients. This is the essence of Customer Excellence. It aligns the entire commercial enterprise around the real-world context in which care is delivered. The problem was never the call plan. The problem was the context. Key Takeaways Commercial performance in pharma organizations has traditionally been managed through field execution mechanics, yet the effectiveness of those mechanics increasingly depends on how well they reflect the real-world context in which physicians operate. Customer context has become the most pivotal commercial variable as administrative burden, payer complexity, and consumer-grade expectations reshape how prescribing decisions are made. HCPs now evaluate pharmaceutical engagement against the best experiences they encounter anywhere in their lives, raising the standard for clarity, responsiveness, and ease. Optimizing promotional activity alone is no longer sufficient. Commercial success depends on reducing friction across the journeys physicians navigate as they move patients from diagnosis to treatment. Customer Excellence represents the structural response, aligning marketing, sales, access, digital engagement, and patient support around the real journeys of care delivery . Diagnostic Questions to Consider Are we optimizing the activity of our field force, or designing commercial systems that support the real journeys physicians navigate to help patients receive therapy? How well do we understand the administrative, reimbursement, and operational barriers physicians encounter after they decide to prescribe a therapy? Do our commercial systems reduce the burden placed on physicians and their staff , or unintentionally add to the complexity of care delivery? Are we benchmarking our engagement against other pharma companies , or against the best experiences physicians encounter in their lives as consumers? Have our investments in digital platforms simplified the physician’s experience, or multiplied the number of disconnected interactions they must manage? Are we still managing performance through activity metrics alone , or beginning to understand the context that ultimately determines whether therapies reach patients? Closing Reflection The pharma and life sciences industry has spent decades refining the mechanics of field execution. Call plans, segmentation models, and targeting systems brought structure and discipline to commercial organizations. Yet the environment surrounding physicians has evolved far more rapidly than the systems built to support them. Healthcare professionals now operate in a world defined by consumer-grade expectations for clarity, responsiveness, and ease. When the experience of engaging with a pharmaceutical company fails to reflect those expectations, the contrast becomes impossible to ignore. Organizations that recognize this shift will redesign their commercial systems around the realities of modern care delivery. They will move beyond managing activity and toward understanding the context in which physicians help patients receive treatment. In doing so they will close the gap between scientific innovation and real-world impact. Your breakthrough science deserves experiences worthy of it. Together, we turn customer excellence into real-world impact. About the Author Wayne Simmons is a hands-on commercial excellence architect and founder of The Customer Excellence Agency, where he partners with pharmaceutical and life sciences leaders to turn customer-centric ambition into durable commercial advantage. He previously served as Global Customer Excellence Lead within Pfizer’s Chief Marketing Organization and has held leadership roles with Bayer Pharmaceuticals and The Ritz-Carlton Leadership Center. Wayne writes The Customer-Centric Marketer newsletter and is the author of The Customer Excellence Enterprise: A Playbook for Creating Customers for Life. The Customer Excellence Agency: Advancing the Pursuit of Excellence in Service of Science.

Tan building with a hanging sign against a clear blue sky