Data Elements: Trends.aspx

Profile Information

 

Outsourcing Practices

Respondents By Region North America 74%, Europe 25%, Asia 1%, Buyer Group Big Pharma 16%, Specialty Pharma 20%, Emerging, Niche or Start-Up Company 9%, Biotech 20%, Emerging Biotech 14%, Medical Device 17%, Generics or Biosimilars 5%, Medical Device and Generics/Biosimilars are New Buyer Categories in 2015 Department C-Suite 17%, Operations 17%, Manufacturing 16%, Quality Assurance 16%, R&D/Formulation 13%, Data/Clinical Trials Management 8%, Purchasing 7%, Regulatory Affairs 5%, TBD: Short Blurb Annual Outsourcing Expenditure: More than $50M 23%, $10M to 50M 62%, Less than $10M 16%, The Most Popular Methods Used To Select An Outsourcing Partner: Industry Research 67%, Industry Research is a New Category in 2015 Consultants 59%, Referrals 54%, Trade Shows/Events 40%, Periodicals & Publicatio ns 36%, Web Searches 18%, Online Directories 24%, Average Number Of Methods Used To Select An Outsourcing Partner 2015 3.0 To ensure quality, sponsors are using more methods to indentify new partners %, of Respondents Who will Attend The Following Industry Events AAPS 41%, Bio International 38%, Bio Europe 35%, Contract Pharma 29%, ChemOutsourcing 26%, BPI 25%, DCAT 25%, DIA 21%, CPhI Europe 17%, CRS 18%, Informex 12%, Interphex 5%, TBD Copy to come after data is tabulated 5%, of respondents will not be attending tradeshows in 2015

 

Strategic Partnering Trends

Average Number Of Services Outsourced By Company Type Big Pharma And Emerging Biotech Relying On Contract Suppliers For The Greatest Number Of Unique Services Biotech Emerging Biotech Specialty Pharma Big Pharma Emerging, Niche or Start-Up Company Overall Average Number Of Services Outsourced By Expenditure: 50+ million USD per year 10 to 50 million USD per year Less than 10 million USD per year The Data Shows An Increase In The Number Of Different Services Outsourced From 2014 to 2015, Regardless Of Buyer Group Or Budget Size

 

Emerging Market Trends

% Of Projects Contracted To Each Type Of Outsourcing Relationship Tactical Service Provider 35%, 2014 to 2015: +4%, Preferred Provider 35%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Strategic Partnership 30%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Interest Level In Strategic Partnerships Very Interested in a strategic partnership with a CRO/CMO 28%, Interested in a strategic partnership with a CRO/CMO 51%, Neither interested nor uninterested in a strategic partnership with a CRO/CMO 17%, Not interested in a strategic partnership with a CRO/CMO 5%, Emerging Biotech respondents showed the greatest interest in strategic partnerships: 48%, interested and 41%, very interested Level Of Influence On CRO/CMO Selection – Hard Traits Not a factor in t hUendimecpiosriotannt Somewhat Important Important Very Important Track Record & History Of Success 1%, 2%, 17%, 40%, 39%, Financial Stability Of The Organization 1%, 2%, 17%, 44%, 36%, Operational/Methodological/Therapeutic Experience 1%, 3%, 18%, 44%, 35%, Adaptability & Flexibility With Project Needs 1%, 3%, 19%, 45%, 32%, Range Of Services & Service Offering 1%, 4%, 22%, 46%, 28%, Risk Sharing Opportunities 1%, 4%, 27%, 42%, 26%, Geographic Convenience & Location 2%, 7%, 27%, 41%, 23%, Use of Contractors In Emerging Markets To Save Costs 2%, 6%, 29%, 41%, 22%, Size & Structure Of The Organization 2%, 6%, 29%, 42%, 21%, Level Of Influence On CRO/CMO Selection – Soft Traits Not a factor in t hUendimecpiosriotannt Somewhat Important Important Very Important Good Communication & Transparency 1%, 2%, 15%, 40%, 43%, Understanding Of The Customer's Requirements 1%, 2%, 16%, 39%, 42%, Industry Reputation For Doing Quality Work 1%, 2%, 16%, 39%, 42%, Responsiveness 1%, 2%, 15%, 43%, 39%, Willingness To Go The Extra Mile 1%, 2%, 18%, 44%, 35%, Adaptability To Sponsor's Desired Methodology 1%, 2%, 20%, 45%, 32%, Rapport Between Teams 1%, 3%, 20%, 44%, 32%, References From Colleagues Or Coworkers 1%, 3%, 22%, 44%, 29%, Cultural Fit 2%, 7%, 29%, 39%, 23%, Prioritized CRO/CMO Attributes For Strategic Partnerships Operating Procedures That Are Established Collaboratively Dedicated Project Manager Long-Term Commitment Customized Protocols Or Outlines Flexibility In Terms Of Commitment Preferred Scheduling Arrangement Flexible Payment Terms Discounted Pricing Arrangement Previous Sources Of Dissatisfaction When Working With CROs/CMOs Product Quality 35%, 2014 to 2015: -1%, Timeliness Of Resolving Issues 34%, 2014 to 2015: -6%, Unexpected Charges 33%, 2014 to 2015: -3%, Communication & Transparency 30%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Risk Sharing 28%, 2014 to 2015: +3%, Confidentiality & Security 28%, 2014 to 2015: +5%, Product Delivery 27%, 2014 to 2015: -3%, Technical Expertise & Knowledge 25%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Prioritization & Attention To My Project 25%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Regulatory Track Record & Reputation 21%, 2014 to 2015: +2%, Unexpected charges was the top source of dissatisfaction for Emerging Pharma and Medical Device companies Metrics Used To Evaluate CRO/CMO Performance Quality & Accuracy of work 56%, 2014 to 2015: -5%, Cost Effectiveness 46%, 2014 to 2015: -1%, Safety & Compliance Audits 44%, 2014 to 2015: -1%, On-Time Delivery 42%, 2014 to 2015: -11%, Technical Expertise 41%, 2014 to 2015: -3%, Customer Service 37%, 2014 to 2015: 0%, Project Management 36%, 2014 to 2015: -4%, Communication & Transparency 36%, 2014 to 2015: +1%, Billing practices 27%, 2014 to 2015: +3%

 

New Technology

%, of Respondents Who Consider Emerging Market CROs/CMOs Pharmaceutical Companies 84%, 2014 to 2015: +11%, 1 Big Pharma, 2 Specialty Pharma , 3 Emerging Pharma Biotech Companies 86%, 2014 to 2015: +8%, , 1 Biotech , 2 Emerging Biotech Among Respondents Who Consider Emerging Market Providers... , 1 Big Pharma Have Worked With CROs and/or CMOs In Emerging Markets 53%, Overall , 2 Specialty Pharma Are Aware Of Reliable CROs and/or CMOs In Emerging Markets, But have Not Worked With One Yet 38%, , 3 Emerging Pharma Are Willing To Outsource To Emerging Markets, But Do Not Know Any Reliable CROs and/or CMOs Yet 9%, ➍ Biotech Emerging Biotechs Are Most Likely To Consider Offshore Suppliers , 5 Emerging Biotech %, of Outsourced Projects Assigned to Each Region (Among Respondents Who Engage Emerging Market Providers) US & Canada 23%, 2014 to 2015: -3%, China 17%, 2014 to 2015: 0%, Argentina & Brazil 15%, 2014 to 2015: +4%, India 11%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Western Europe 11%, 2014 to 2015: -1%, Eastern Europe & Turkey 10%, 2014 to 2015: +1%, Korea 5%, 2014 to 2015: 0%, Middle East 5%, 2014 to 2015: +1%, Thailand, Vietnam 4%, 2014 to 2015: +1%, Among Those Who Engage Emerging Market Providers, Two-Thirds Of Projects Are Offshored Respondents Who Do Not Consider Emerging Market Providers Mentioned the Following Concerns Quality Level Is Too Risky 51%, 2014 to 2015: +4%, Regulatory Compliance Concerns 31%, 2014 to 2015: -2%, Communication Concerns & Challenges 25%, 2014 to 2015: +2%, Simply Have Not Considered It 23%, 2014 to 2015: -4%, Logistics Are Too Complicated 22%, 2014 to 2015: -1%, Intellectual Property Concerns 19%, 2014 to 2015: -7%,