When it comes to paradigm shifts, pharma and biotech aren’t traditionally ahead of the proverbial curve. I should know, right? Having spent the entire 2000’s as a rep, analyst, sales trainer, and district manager, there were times when ‘moving the needle’ seemed glacier-like. The predominant mindset (pre-patent expiry cliff) regarding a paradigm shift in pharma was analogous to turkeys somehow casting a vote in favor of Thanksgiving – they’d only be hurting themselves.

Enter the iPad.

The thought process throughout much of the industry is now focused on the practical application of this tool – but why? Because it’s freaking cool and does some amazing stuff, that’s why – technically speaking, of course. Personally though, I think we should pump the brakes a bit and do our best to balance the desire to leverage this technology to its fullest extent without compromising the value of representative-physician contact. In other words, rather than further automating sales forces, we should view the iPad as the perfect platform for performance support in advance of this interaction. In order to maintain a balance between representative empowerment and physician satisfaction, the real meat behind this tool is in its simplicity and capacity to serve in performance support – NOT physician engagement.

Zack King recently discussed pharma executives’ reaction to the iPad , but we’ve learned lessons on this topic recently from physicians, too. In a survey conducted by Manhattan Research, only 36 percent of physicians found the iPad experience to be more useful than speaking with reps in a traditional fashion. By the sounds of it, Shiny Object Syndrome has the potential to creep into the marketplace and consequently distract from a potentially well-crafted branding and messaging campaign. In fact, another piece of research from Gryphon Scientific suggests that 80 percent of physicians will avoid interactions with reps toting iPads altogether. So much for developing relationships deeply rooted in clinical merit and patient focus, right? The use of the iPad as a ‘point-of-sale’ tool should be used sparingly to avoid physician distraction or worse, avoidance.

By performance support, I’m referring to the benefits of data accumulation, mobile utility, and representative up-skilling capabilities. The implications for amassing various data feeds have appreciably improved with the introduction of the iPad, leading to increased focus on closed loop marketing and real-time decision support. Data input and aggregation, leveraged by representatives and DM’s to make informed targeting and messaging decisions, is a perfect place to start.

Document storage and interactive clinical applications for representative development are other key areas of use that iPad-carrying employees can leverage. Interactive clinical modules, compliance manuals, testing deployment, and leadership development courses are all examples of assets that can and potentially should be centered on the iPad. Since time in the field and customer interaction are keys to success for field personnel, using this tool for performance support and knowledge improvement can be accomplished after physicians round at the hospital,  between calls throughout the day, or during wait times in a clinic. The on-demand element and visual appeal jive nicely with adult learning styles and organization efficiency.

Additionally, mobile functionality delivering visual, highly-relevant analytics is a game-changer in my humble opinion. Imagine the alignment of physician, payer/plan, and incentive compensation data all in a single, visually dynamic report. Drilling further into either one of these axes and variables yields limitless potential for savvy executives, marketers, and field personnel alike – all from the comfort of the physician’s waiting room.

In the end, the iPad is a popular and well-equipped tool with limitless potential throughout pharma and biotech. There are obvious synergies between its intuitive reactions to change and its mobile dependability – but simply put, the iPad is an adaptive piece of technology that’s application is still up for debate in pharma. My suggestion is somewhat simplistic: let’s look at how to exploit its functionality internally (at least initially) before approaching the market on a variably-accepted platform.