Why Pharma CX Programs Fail, and What I Did About Mine

I inherited a customer experience program that looked healthy and could not prove it mattered.

It had everything the playbook asks for. A relationship survey. A transactional survey. An advocacy score reported to leadership every quarter. Journey maps on the wall. Budget, headcount, executive sponsorship. By the standards of the discipline it was a success, and my job was to scale it.

I retired it instead. The surveys went first, then the score. What follows is why, because the failure was not peculiar to that company and you are probably funding a version of it right now.

What does a failing pharma CX program look like from the inside?

Not like failure. That is the problem.

Response rates hold. The score drifts a point one way, a point back. The deck gets better every quarter. People are proud of it, and they should be, because the work is real and the intent is good. Most of the people running your CX program care more about your customers than almost anyone else in the building.

The tell is a single question in the quarterly review. Someone senior asks what you want the business to do differently as a result. If the honest answer is a list of improvements that nobody outside the CX team is accountable for, you do not have a program. You have a reporting habit.

Ask it at your next review. Watch what happens in the room.

Why could it not prove anything?

Three reasons, and the first two are built into the instruments.

Sentiment is not your constraint. The surveys measured how people felt about us. In pharma, how a physician feels about your company is a long way from whether her patient gets your drug, and the distance between those two things is where your money goes. Fred Reichheld made the original case for the advocacy score in the Harvard Business Review in 2003, and it was a good case for the industries he studied. Bain's own later work is more careful than the way the industry quotes it. Their published figure is that relative score differences explain anywhere from 10% to 70% of the variation in subsequent revenue growth. Read that range again. In a different paper the firm put it plainly, calling goodwill "a necessary but insufficient condition for generating revenue growth."

Nobody owned the answer. A score tells you something is wrong somewhere. It does not tell you which handoff broke, who fixes it, by when, or whether the fix held. Our program could raise an issue. It could not assign one.

The third reason is the one that took me longest to see. The thing that was actually failing was happening somewhere we were not looking.

What were we not watching?

The interval between the prescription and the patient.

Look at what the numbers say about that interval now. A 2026 study in JAMA, summarized by Johns Hopkins, found insurer rejections of brand name prescriptions rose from 24.3% of initial attempts in 2018 to 40.7% in 2024. Of those rejected scripts, 48.4% were never followed by a fill of that drug or anything in its class within 90 days. The American Medical Association's latest survey has 82% of physicians saying prior authorization at least sometimes leads patients to abandon treatment, and 93% saying it delays care. IQVIA data reported by Managed Healthcare Executive puts abandonment at 61% once a prescription costs more than $250.

None of that showed up in our survey. It could not. We were asking people how the relationship felt while patients were failing to start therapy, and the two data sets never met. We named that gap value leakage later, once there was something to name.

Does the instrument work with physicians at all?

Not well, and the reason is structural rather than methodological.

Your physician does not think of herself as your customer. She did not choose your brand in the way a consumer chooses a bank. She has a patient in front of her and a formulary behind her. As I put it to CXM last year, doctors do not go around asking about loyalty. Scoring her affection for your company measures something real and almost entirely beside the point.

That deserves its own treatment and it will get one. For now take the narrow version: an instrument built to predict repeat purchase in a voluntary market will underperform in a market where the buyer, the payer and the user are three different people.

What replaced it?

Progression, measured brand by brand and stage by stage.

Script to start conversion. Time to therapy. The stall points where patients wait and how long they wait there. Persistence at 90 days. Barrier resolution rate and speed. Realized value against the value the brand had already earned. Those measures have two properties the old ones lacked. Someone can own each of them, and each of them moves money.

The discipline that sits on top of those measures is what we now call Customer Excellence, and the standard it is built to meet is Consumer-Grade. Neither is a rebrand of what I shut down. The old program asked how customers felt. The new one asks whether they got what the science promised, and what it cost you when they did not.

Would you build a pharma CX program again?

Not as a program. That is the part I would say differently if I were starting over.

A program has a budget line, a team and an end date, which means it can be defunded without anything else changing. An operating discipline sits inside commercial, owns handoffs, and shows up in how brands are run. The first is easy to approve and easy to kill. The second is hard to approve and hard to kill, which is the point.

The industry wide version of this gap is still open. Deloitte's 2025 research found that only 28% of HCPs believe pharma's engagement strategies meet their needs, while 82% of life sciences executives say they are satisfied with those same strategies. Two thirds of your customers disagree with you, and your instruments are not telling you.

Key takeaways

  • A pharma CX program can look healthy on every internal measure and still prove nothing about the business.
  • Sentiment instruments measure something real that is not your constraint, and Bain's own range on score to growth runs from 10% to 70%.
  • Scores raise issues. They cannot assign them, which is why nothing changes.
  • The failure you need to see happens after the prescription, where most CX programs never look.
  • Progression measures work because each one has an owner and each one moves money.

Questions to ask your leadership team

  1. At your next CX review, ask what the business should do differently as a result. Who in the room is accountable for doing it?
  2. If your advocacy score rose four points next quarter, what would you expect to see in your brand numbers, and when?
  3. How many of last quarter's prescriptions became treated patients, and does your CX reporting contain that number anywhere?
  4. Which of your experience measures has a named owner outside the CX team?
  5. If the program were defunded tomorrow, what in your commercial operating model would change?

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: Pharma customer experience, why it stalls and what replaces it, What is value leakage in pharma? and What is Customer Excellence in pharma?

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
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part five of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. Reconstructing the brand pyramid so that experience, not just product, carries the promise.
Coffee shop barista serving drinks behind the counter with menu boards and espresso machines.
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part four of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. Why corporate culture stays abstract until it is defined as a platform for delivering the experience.
Industrial-style café with large windows, people seated at tables, and a bright wooden counter
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part three of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. What the brand lost when it scaled, and what recapturing its mystique would require.
A starbucks logo is on the screen of a cell phone
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
Part two of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. How a highly successful digital innovation can erode the experience it was built to serve.
Starbucks sign on a beige building against a clear blue sky
By Wayne Simmons • June 12, 2025
The final part of the Starbucks Customer Excellence Series. How an experience delivery system is redesigned so excellence is repeatable rather than heroic.