Smartly Boosting Sales Performance through Strategically Planned Sales & Marketing Activities

One of the biggest myths in Pharma planning is that channel ROI can tell you where to invest.

As Pharma companies shape their 2026 promotional plans, many still ask which channel will deliver the best ROI. Yet after decades of attempts, “channel ROI” remains more myth than management tool—data is patchy, models are complex, and results rarely hold up in practice.

Wolfgang Wagner, Managing Director of MDecs, argues for a different approach: start with customer value, not channel ROI. By defining the right investment level per customer and eliminating poor options upfront, leaders can simplify choices, avoid wasted spend, and boost impact where it truly matters.

In this interview, Wolfgang shares how to apply this way of thinking and what guardrails help Pharma teams plan smarter and faster for 2026. Karsten: Appreciate you making time for this conversation, Wolfgang. To kick things off, if we stop hunting for a single “winning channel”, what one rule should guide 2026 planning at the customer-segment level?

Wolfgang: Thanks for the invite. The simple rule is: Look at the value of your customers. That alone answers much of the marketing mix question. If you expect $300 in sales from a customer next year, you shouldn’t be planning personal visits—you’ll only lose money. Cheaper digital channels are the right fit. For a $4,000 customer, it makes sense to invest in two more visits rather than sending 20 more emails. And for a $40,000 customer, replacing personal contact with digital touchpoints is risky; you could easily lose significant revenue.

Think of it like cooking: Salt has a strong effect per gram, but you can’t replace flour, water, or butter with it. The same applies to channels—a low-cost channel may be powerful, but it doesn’t mean you can substitute everything else with it.

What too many leaders still miss are the three big misconceptions about channel ROI:

1. That it can be calculated precisely,

2. That it’s a single number, and

3. That it even needs to be calculated. In reality, channel impact is a moving function shaped by customer value and context, not a static figure.

Illustration: Rethinking ROI in Pharma Planning

Karsten: How do you set the recommended investment per customer before discussing channels—what inputs matter most?

Wolfgang: Definitely the revenue potential per customer. Once you know what a customer is worth, you know how much you can afford to invest. The marketing mix becomes a process of elimination: expensive channels drop out for low-value customers, while high-value ones justify more intensive investments.

This approach eliminates weak combinations right from the start. What remains are only a few strong options that can be weighed against each other quickly.

Karsten: Channels can “cannibalise” each other—overlap that makes extra touches non-additive and erodes incremental impact. What simple checklist helps you spot and prevent this, and where do you deliberately combine channels for true synergy?

Wolfgang: Cannibalism is real. Adding more of the same doesn’t always add value—often it eats into other channels. That’s why “ROI as a single number” is a myth. It’s like baking bread: Yeast alone isn’t edible, but in the right proportion it lifts the dough. Too much, and it ruins everything.

Saturation is one of the biggest risks: the more you spend, the smaller the incremental return—until channels start eating into each other’s effect. On the flip side, real synergies exist when the right combinations are made. For example, for top-tier customers, field force and symposia may reinforce each other. For mid-tier segments, digital detail aids and HCP portals often create the best uplift.

The key is to start by excluding bad options. Once you do that, only viable, synergistic mixes remain—and managers can decide quickly without overcomplicating things.

Karsten: Data is often messy and slow. When is “good enough” data sufficient to act, and what shortcuts keep momentum without risking false precision?

Wolfgang: Historical data is usually more of a burden than a help. Gaps, inconsistent reporting, aggregation into “bricks”—all of this makes precise statistical modelling nearly impossible. Even when the maths look good, the outputs are often forced into “acceptable” ranges. That creates the illusion of accuracy, not real reliability.

It’s a bit like asking for the ROI of the car’s suspension compared to the door lock. Both are vital, but in totally different ways—you can’t compare them on a single number.

Reporting intervals differ, budget data often doesn’t add up, and high-value physicians attract more activity simply because they are high-value—creating the illusion that field force is always efficient. Together, these flaws show why “perfect data” is a myth in practice.

Instead of chasing false precision, the better way is forward-looking planning. A solid budget plan for products and customer segments, combined with elimination of channels that don’t fit, gives you results that are reliable enough to act on. Chasing the last few percent with more data only paralyses decision-making.

Karsten: Field force: Where is it non-negotiable, and where should leaders go lighter and use lower-cost channels?

Wolfgang: Field force is non-negotiable for high-value customers. If a segment generates $17,000 annually and the sensible investment is around $4,000, personal engagement is essential. But for low-value customers, it’s wasteful. Imagine sending your reps to customers worth $300 a year—it will never pay back.

This is where digital and lower-cost channels shine. They extend reach and add incremental sales without over-investing.

Karsten: Many fear top-line loss if rep intensity drops. What evidence convinces local sceptics at brand/customer level?

Wolfgang: The fear isn’t about efficiency—it’s about losing revenue. The way to overcome this is with customer-level data showing where personal contacts contribute little or nothing to the top line.

We can demonstrate, with segment-level evidence, that reducing calls in those areas doesn’t hurt sales. In fact, it frees up capacity to expand reach elsewhere with cheaper touchpoints, leading to higher overall profitability. Once managers see this clearly, resistance drops quickly.

Karsten: At country level, what three-layer cadence—annual strategic guardrails, quarterly operational rebalances, and monthly tactical sprints—keeps decisions fast without drowning in analysis?

Wolfgang: Start with an annual high-level allocation—set the strategic guardrails for each brand and segment. Then, rebalance quarterly at the operational level, adjusting for market shifts. Finally, use monthly sprints tactically to test and refine at the edges.

Speed is critical. If decisions are delayed, they often never happen. The most effective plans are built quickly by filtering out what doesn’t fit and moving forward with what does. With this approach, a full portfolio plan can be created in a single afternoon—leaving more time for execution.

Karsten: Wolfgang, thank you for sharing your perspective. These are valuable insights because they cut through complexity and show how Pharma leaders can act with confidence even when data and models fall short. For readers, this perspective is not just about efficiency—it’s about making promotional planning faster, clearer, and ultimately more effective.

Key takeaways

• Stop chasing a single “channel ROI” number—it’s misleading.

• Anchor decisions in customer value and set clear investment limits per segment.

• Eliminate bad channel options first; what remains is easier to compare and execute.

• Keep plans dynamic with yearly guardrails, quarterly rebalances, and monthly adjustments.

In the end, success comes less from searching for a perfect mix and more from ruling out the wrong options early leaving space to focus on the decisions that truly shift performance.

👉 As our recent discussion suggests, channel ROI has its limitations. For 2026 planning, are you placing more focus on customer value as the guiding principle?

#CommercialExcellence #PharmaStrategy #CustomerValue #SFE