Pharmaceutical advisory boards provide strategic inputs and guidance to organizations on various business aspects. However, successful advisory board management requires optimum investment in resources and operations. To maximize the return on investment it is important for pharmaceutical and medical device professionals to ensure that the quality of meetings and dialogue with advisory boards is excellent. This research from Best Practices, LLC is designed for pharmaceutical and biotech executives seeking ways to best utilize the knowledge of advisory boards. Research findings provide benchmarks on the appropriate structure for various types of advisory boards, selection of advisory board participants, advisory board operational and resource benchmarks.

1. Strategic Benchmarking Research & Analysis
Benchmarking Advisory Board Management At Large Pharmaceutical
& Medical Device Organizations

2. Table of Contents
 Executive Summary pgs. 3-8
 Research Overview pg. 3
 Participating Companies pg. 4
 Key Recommendations pg. 5
 Segments and Abbreviations pg. 6
 Key Findings & Insights pgs. 7-15
 Structure Of Advisory Boards pgs. 16-23
 Selection of Advisory Board Participants pgs. 24-31
 Operations Of Advisory Boards pgs. 32-41
 Cost Of Advisory Boards pgs. 42-49
 Challenges & Best Practices pgs. 50-54
 Benchmark Profile pgs. 55-59
 About Best Practices, LLC pg. 60-61

3. Field Research & Insight Development:
Thirty-five survey responses from Medical Affairs,
Marketing and Patient Advocacy leaders at 29
biopharmaceutical & Medical Device companies. This
reports captures insights across Large, Mid-Size and Small
companies.
Additional deep-dive interviews with 7 selected executives
who participated in the study.
• Identify Critical Benchmarks for
advisory board Operations
• Provide Cost Benchmarks for
Running advisory boards
Research Objectives & Methodology
Research Objectives:
 Best Structure for Various Types of Advisory Boards
 Selection of Advisory Board Participants
 Benchmarking Operations Of Advisory Boards
 Cost Of Conducting Advisory Boards
 Top Challenges & Best Practices Of Conducting Advisory Boards
Business Objectives:
A well run advisory board requires optimum investment in resources and operations. To maximize the return on
investment it is important for pharmaceutical professionals to ensure that the quality of meetings and dialogue with the
board is excellent. This research is designed for pharmaceutical and biotech executives seeking ways to best utilize the
knowledge of advisory boards.

4. Universe of Learning: Research Participants from Study
This study engaged 35 executives from 29 leading life sciences companies. Segmentation analysis was key to examining
trends and effective practices. Thirteen participants at 9 companies make up the Large Company Segment (annual
revenues greater than USD 10 Billion). Most responses came from US & Canada(63%) followed by Asia (20%).
Benchmark Class
Large Companies Segment

5. Segments and Abbreviations
Segments:
• TBC: Total Benchmark Class
• Large Companies Segment (LC): LC is defined as companies with >$10B annual revenue.
Abbreviations:
• TBC: Total Benchmark Class
• LC: Large Companies

6. Page | 6
Key Findings & Insights: Structure Of Advisory Boards
 Physician & Clinical Advisory Boards Most Common: Six out of 10 benchmarked companies maintain
physician and clinical advisory boards.
 Segments: Large Companies utilize all the types of advisory boards studied in this research.
Sixty-two percent of large companies have physician advisory boards and 69% have clinical
advisory boards. Half of large companies also host marketing advisory boards.
 Number of Participants Range From 9-11 Across Different Advisory Boards: Payer and clinical
advisory boards average around 9 participants while marketing advisory board participants’ average at 11
and physician advisory boards at 10.
 Segment: Large companies have a similar number of advisory board participants as the total
benchmark class.
 National Participants Preferred for Advisory Boards: A majority of companies prefer participants with a
national reach for clinical and payer advisory boards. Almost half of benchmarked companies prefer
national participants for marketing advisory board while 30% prefer regional participants. Similarly, for
physician advisory boards 48% of companies like national member, while more than a third prefer a mix of
both national and regional participants.
 Large Companies Prefer National Participants for Physician Advisory Boards: Unlike some
benchmarked companies, 56% of large companies prefer national participants as a part of their
physician advisory boards while 33% like a mix of both national and regional.
The following key findings and insights emerged from this study.

7. Page | 7
Key Findings & Insights: Structure Of Advisory Boards
 Top Challenges: The top three challenges that study participants face when conducting advisory board
meetings are selecting members/location(45%), managing advisory boards (36%), & physician availability
(36%).
The following key findings and insights emerged from this study.

8. Page | 8
23%
46%
54%
69%
62%
20%
29%
49%
60%
60%
Others
Payer Advisory Board
Marketing Advisory Board
Clinical Advisory Board
Physician Advisory Board
Total Benchmark Class Large Companies
Q. Please indicate the advisory board(s) that currently has a presence in your organization.
Compared to small and mid-cap pharma companies, large companies host a greater variety of advisory
boards. All companies are more inclined to have physician or clinical advisory boards, but even large
pharma companies do not always organize and conduct marketing or payer advisory boards as part of
their organizational strategy.
Large Companies Are More Inclined to Implement Advisory Boards
Across Various Perspectives
% Respondents
N=35
Others: Patient
Scientific Advisory Board
ad hoc only
Type of Advisory Board Used:
N=13

9. Page | 9
Q, Please indicate the preferred reach of advisory board members.
N=14-26
Companies continue to seek out national participants or create advisory boards with a national reach, as
opposed to a regional reach. That said, regional participants can be important for both physician and
payer advisory boards as companies will explore regional regulations and differences that can influence
how a drug is presented in a specific geography
National Participants and Reach Favored for Most Advisory Boards
% Respondents
Reach of Participants
88%
48% 57% 48%
4%
30%
43%
16%
8%
22%
36%
Clinical Advisory Board Marketing Advisory
Board
Payer Advisory Board Physician Advisory
Board
National Regional Both
Total Benchmark
Class
88%
42%
60% 56%
29%
40%
11%
12%
29% 33%
Clinical Advisory Board Marketing Advisory
Board
Payer Advisory Board Physician Advisory
Board
Large Companies
N=5-9

10. Page | 10
Q. Please indicate the preferred duration (in hours) for each advisory board meeting.
Physician and marketing advisory board meetings at large companies tend to be for lesser duration as
compared to TBC companies. Large companies typically conduct physician advisory boards take around
7 hours while marketing advisory board meeting take around 6 hours. In contrast, clinical advisory boards
take about 9 hours at large companies.
Clinical Advisory Boards At Large Companies Last Longer Than Marketing
or Physician Advisory Boards
N=8-17
* Limited data for payer advisory board, thus not shared.
8.4
7.9
8.4
8.8
6.3
7
Clinical Advisory Board Marketing Advisory Board Physician Advisory Board
Total Benchmark Class Large Companies

11. Page | 11
N=35
The vast majority of insights (approximately 63% ) in this benchmark study come from bio-pharma
professionals serving the United States market. Study insights were also contributed from bio-pharma
leaders working in Asian, European, Middle East & Australian markets.
Benchmark Research Captures Insights Mainly From U.S., Asia & Europe
% Respondents
US & Canada:
63% Europe: 11%
Asia: 20%
Middle East:
3%
Australia:
3%
Q. What region are you responding for?
Geography

12. Page | 12
Q. Please indicate your industry. [Choose all that apply.]
Participation came from across various industries in each segments. Overall 71% of companies
represented pharma industry while around 20% were from bio-tech and medical devices each.
Insights Harvested from Organizations Representing Different Industries
% Respondents
N=35
Others: Nutrition
Service provider
Industry
71%
23%
20%
9%
6%
77%
30%
67%
0%
0%
80%
20%
20%
10%
10%
58%
25%
25%
17%
8%
Pharmaceutical
Biotechnology
Medical Device
Diagnostic
Other
Total Benchmark Class Large Companies Mid-cap Companies Small Companies

13. Page | 13
Best Practices®, LLC is an internationally recognized thought leader in the field of best practice
benchmarking®. We are a research, consulting, benchmark database, publishing and advisory firm that
conducts work based on the simple yet profound principle that organizations can chart a course to superior
economic performance by leveraging the best business practices, operating tactics and winning strategies of
world-class companies.
6350 Quadrangle Drive, Suite 200
Chapel Hill, NC 27517
(Phone): 919-403-0251
www.best-in-class.com
Learn More About Our Company: