Scott A. Waldman, M.D., Ph.D., will receive the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (ASCPT) Rawls–Palmer Progress in Medicine Award at the 2012 Annual Meeting on March 16.
Established in 1978 by Dr. W. B. Rawls, the award recognizes scientists who have implemented progressive research techniques and tools to improve patient care.
Dr. Waldman is the Samuel MV Hamilton Endowed Professor of Medicine, Vice President of Clinical and Translational Research, and Chair of the Department of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics at Thomas Jefferson University. He is also Director of the Gastrointestinal Malignancies Program at the university’s Kimmel Cancer Center and Associate Dean of Clinical and Translational Sciences at Jefferson Medical College.
As a longtime volunteer leader of ASCPT, Dr. Waldman has participated on various committees and task forces, serving on the Board of Directors, as Society president, and as Editor in Chief of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics since 2006.
Dr. Waldman has chaired numerous scientific review panels for the NIH and is on the editorial boards of Personalized Medicine, Expert Reviews in Clinical Pharmacology, and Regenerative Medicine, among others. He is the inaugural Deputy Editor of Clinical and Translational Science and the inaugural Senior Editor of Biomarkers in Medicine.
Dr. Waldman is a recognized clinician–investigator whose research ranges from molecular biology to cancer diagnostics and therapeutics. He received the 2010 ASCPT Henry Elliott Award and the 2011 Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Foundation Award in Excellence for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.
ASCPT is the leading forum for the discussion, development, and integration of clinical pharmacology in the drug development continuum—from discovery to safe and effective use. Headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, ASCPT was established in 1900. Today, more than 2,100 ASCPT members are committed to advancing the science of human pharmacology and therapeutics worldwide.
Congratulations to Christine M. Eischen, PhD, who was recently invested as the Herbert A. Rosenthal, MD ’56 Professor in...
The Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Jefferson Health congratulates its faculty who were among the honorees of this year’s...
Congratulations to Jeff Benovic, PhD, Thomas Eakins Endowed Professor of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology at Thomas Jefferson University, who was...
The Web site for Jefferson, its contents and programs, is provided for informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as medical advice nor, is it intended to create any physician-patient relationship. Please remember that this information should not substitute for a visit or a consultation with a healthcare provider. The views or opinions expressed in the resources provided do not necessarily reflect those of Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals, Thomas Jefferson University or their staffs. By using this Web site, you accept these terms of use. Please read our online privacy statement. Please read our our privacy practices.
The largest part of our business is developing communications for sales incentive plans. We create presentations, develop plan books, and design flash and other forms of communication. We got into this work by accident (one client many years ago asked us to create a “meeting in a box” for his IC plan – the rest, as they say, is history), but now we embrace it and have carved out a niche. That niche is taking highly analytical and dry plan data and making it more interesting, more engaging, and more motivating for the sales representative. Over the past 10 years we have done just this for thousands of plans and hundreds of thousands of participants.
We strive to tell a visual and emotive story with our work. We work hard at capturing the vital information that is important to a sales person and making that information understandable and engaging. I like to think we do a good job – when our clients allow us to. You see, telling a story about incentive compensation and creating captivating visuals to convey that information isn’t easy. It requires that we make choices about what information we share. It means that we may have to simplify the message. It may mean changing how we present and what types of communication that we use. This, for some clients, is easier said than done.
There isn’t always one…but when there is, it usually comes down to working with the analyst (and sometimes legal). I don’t mean this in a negative light towards analysts (or legal) – well maybe just a little.
You see, it is often hard for the analyst or lawyer to let go of the details – which we sometimes have to do. This isn’t to say that the details are not important, but we need to look at the objective of the particular communication piece we are working on. Often, we are trying to get people excited about a plan or engaged with how much they can earn if they maximize the potential. Details can muck that objective up. Some analysts feel that they need to have everything included in any document that goes out to the sales force. As Garr Reynolds states in PresentationZen Design, “the fundamental concepts related to communication are restraint, simplicity, and naturalness.” This is important. Too often we are specifically directed to go back and add in more information that would be better presented in a separate document or different format.
Other times the analyst (or lawyer) is not adding detail, but removing content. Let me explain by using an example. Most of the sales incentive plans that we work with have a targeted incentive payout associated with them. This is a number that the average performer should earn. What company’s typically want however is to motivate people to move beyond the average and reach for the top performance. To achieve this, we try to paint a picture of what it means to be the top performer – both from a monetary perspective (how much they can earn) and from an achievement perspective (what that means for them on a psychological/social basis) and from a behavior perspective (what they need to do to be on top).
Some analysts (and some lawyers) have a problem with adding in the achievement and behavior aspects – since they are not specific parts of the plan. They want the black and white drawing without any of the color. Anything that is thought to be fluff or fanciful or pushing the envelope we are told to remove. We are left trying to tell a story but being limited in what we can say and how we can say it.
In the end, we typically work out a compromise with the analyst (but usually not with the lawyer). We suggest other ways around the issue. We convey the reason behind why we have only a picture of the mountain on the slide or why we did not include all the eligibility rules in the PowerPoint presentation. We get the Director or VP involved. But sometimes, we don’t get our way and we have to add in more detail or take out the story aspect. When this happens, it means that the company loses. They don’t get the strong, memorable communications piece that they need. They instead, get a communication piece that might explain, but doesn’t inspire; a piece that contains all the information, but doesn’t create understanding; a piece that covers all the bases, but doesn’t do anything to motivate.
Tell me about your experience with incentive communications in the comment section – the good, the bad, and the ugly…
I recognis the frustrations laid out above; it can seem that ‘subject experts’ refuse the validity of the communication’s goal, and remain focused on the data.