Adding new depth to an existing segmentation

Using behavioural theory to add fresh insights to an existing physician segments by exploring the underlying motivations and biases

The behavioural challenge - Drive use

Our client’s brand is a targeted oncology treatment that had recently been approved for use in the adjuvant setting – earlier than its previous indication. A previous prescriber segmentation had identified 4 distinct segments, based on their existing use of the treatment in later stages and their intended future use in the new indication.

For each of the segments, there were some specific challenges identified for use of the product in the new indication. The over arching reasons for these challenges were well known (including attitudes towards the trial data for the new indication, approach towards sequencing through treatment options and approach towards mutation testing). However, our client needed to better understand how to address these challenges and so research was required to understand the underlying motivations and biases that were driving the behavioural barriers.

"Behavioural biases in prescribing the brand"

Our approach

Our first stage was to run a Hypothesis Workshop, structured using the EAST Behavioural Framework to better identify the range of hypotheses behind the behavioural challenge for each segment. Client stakeholders were given a pre task based on the hypotheses and then during the workshop, we worked through the hypotheses for each segment, ranking and prioritising based on likely level of influence in order to highlight areas of focus for the research.

Because direct questioning was going to be of limited value in exposing System 1 drivers of the behaviours, an approach that could access these non-rational beliefs, via a suite of behavioural-led exercises and tasks was required.

Our research approach used extended one-on-one interviews to explore the key hypotheses and their underlying drivers in detail, using specific behavioural-led tasks and activities such as:

By structuring the Discussion Guide around the relevant hypotheses and using these and other questioning techniques, we ensured that the research was designed to reveal the underlying influences and how to effectively address them.

Half of the sample were asked to use an app to keep an e-journal and complete a set of directed tasks that deal with aspects derived from the segmentation research. This provided ethnographic style insight to help build out a richer picture of what drives each segment and including video footage for “Get to know your segments” exercises.

Implicit / timed associations: Getting closer to the subconscious System 1 thinking and beliefs

Perceptual positioning / projection: Establishing a safe space for respondents to project rationale onto others

Forced choices: Addressing loss aversion and establishing both clinical and emotional benefits offered

Patient vignettes: For observed, rather than rationalised, influences on behaviour

Our solution

Anchored around the EAST behaviour change framework we identified a range of Behavioural Biases that existed with the importance of each varying across the four segments. For example...

More broadly...
Further work was required to make earlier use more attractive in order to overcome the more obvious concerns noted previously such as loss aversion associated with not wanting to lose the ability to have the product as an option in later lines of treatment when used in the adjuvant setting.

Struggling to stay on top
For one segment with a particularly high workload they struggled to stay on top of all the data and new product releases that occur in the oncology space – as such they are protocol driven and rely on pre-established processes and guidelines to de-risk treatment decisions. For this group it is about making the pathway to prescription easy, helping automate testing procedures and making the product front of mind in the appropriate patient types (utilising availability heuristic and defaults)

Decisions driven by ego
For another segment their adjuvant prescribing decisions were driven by ego and a belief that they always select the appropriate product for the patients needs. Here there is a need to change this committed behaviour by appealing to their self-serving bias by communicating that the superior data of our clients product means they’ll be offering the best choice to patients, regardless of their characteristics. That is to say although their approach to prescribing will change, it remains consistent with their underlying belief system. This could be undertaken via a series of social campaigns with a variety of messenger types given the group is heavily influenced by experience and peers.

The outcomes

Identification of specific behavioural barriers by segment allows us to prepare targeted plans and specific interventions, and adaptations to marketing communications that reflects the specific beliefs, motivations and concerns of each of the segments.

During the Debrief Workshop the biases and their potential solutions were explored for each segment. Based on the predominant influences associated with each segment possible behavioural interventions were brainstormed and discussed and then ranked based on ease of implementation and the likely impact they would have.

We then ran an Activation exercise to brainstorm and share details of how the interventions could be executed in market.