Influencing the Influentials


Mr Natural: the original Key Opinion Leader (KOL)

Mr Natural: the original Key Opinion Leader (KOL)

The debate about the effectiveness of marketing through opinion leaders is an important one for us.

We run online communities so that our clients can, among other things, identify their advocates and community opinion leaders and amplify their voice. The objective is higher marketing ROI as marketing-numb customers still listen to their peers even if they have stopped noticing advertising.

The pharmaceutical industry has experimented with this style of marketing for many years, with most large Pharma companies having explicit Key Opinion Leader (KOL) marketing strategies and programs to launch and promote their products. This is easier in the US than in Australia, as individual physician’s prescribing data is available – allowing marketers to promptly measure the impact of their actions on the script-writing behaviour of targeted doctors.

Things were not looking good for the idea that KOL doctors can influence the speed-to-volume for new drugs when a 2001 study around the launch of the antibiotic tetracycline found no evidence of ‘contagion’ (WOM influence) [Van den Bulte&Lilien, AmJSociology, 2001]. Old fashioned marketing explained that product launch on its own.

Things look a lot better for Pharma KOL effects after an  2008 MSI study on ‘Opinion Leadership and Social Contagion in New Product Diffusion’ by Iyengar, Van den Bulte & Valente. They found evidence of contagion working over network ties, after controlling for marketing effort, in a new anti-viral drug launch.

Their findings are really illuminating for Key Opinion Leader marketers; oversimplified they are –

  1. Contagion from KOL’s may not always occur. The difference between the 2001 product launch and the 2008 study is that a life-threatening illness was the target of the second drug launch; consequences were much more serious than for tetracycline. Appears that contagion is more likely when the category is a serious one. “Depending on the product, target audience, the amount and effectiveness of traditional marketing communications deployed… contagion is or is not likely to be at work.” Test!
  2. The 2008 study distinguished between self-reported and peer-reported opinion leader status. The two turn out to be only moderately correlated. You may think you are influential, chances are your peers do not agree. This is an issue because so much of influentials marketing relies on the self reporting of social connectedness and influence. Both types of opinion leader tend to be early adopters, but the peer-reported are much more likely to be.
  3. Doctors who perceived themselves to be opinion leaders (though their peers did not generally agree) responded less to peer behaviour. In network terms this meant that inbound social links facilitated contagion, outbound links did not. There is such a thing as the quiet achiever.
  4. Contagion was affected most by the prescription volume of the doctor – ‘Physicians who prescribe a lot are a more credible source of information…’ Heavy users are likely to be more influential than light users when contagion requires evaluation rather than awareness – if there is low risk, awareness through standard marketing is enough to cause adoption – if there is high risk and evaluation is required, volume-enhanced credible WOM causes adoption.

The implications…

  • Research/determine if more than awareness is required to cause your target customers to take up your new product. Is your product risky?

If evaluation is required for prospects to become customers…

  • Identify the largest volume users of products, in your category, that are already in the market. They are the most likely and the most credible opinion leaders and causes of contagion. (Opinion leaders have the highest lifetime value by the way; they adopt early, and are heavy users). Then,
  • Promote to them, recruit them, amplify their voice so other customers can hear them

Leave a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

Client Testimonials

Richard Umbers, General Manager – Customer EngagementWoolworths
“Resonate has provided us with strategic thought, execution methodology and the necessary skills for us to launch our online community.”
Kathryn Adams-Erwin, Customer Experience ManagerOptus
“Resonate invested time in understanding the Optus Sales Business Unit desired end-state for the initial closed loop feedback program rollout. 12 months later they’ve used their experience and thought leadership to evolve the program to exceed our initial vision and have continued to offer solutions not challenges to all new initiatives. Resonate are an aligned and nimble provider that fits perfectly with our business unit.”
Dean Colton, Manager Customer Experience AdvocacyQantas
“Resonate has been instrumental in the success of our Closed Loop Feedback Program both with services and their innovative Resonate Pulse platform. The Closed Loop Feedback Program now covers multiple touch points and business functions and Resonate’s speed, agility and understanding across our business has been critical in allowing the program to evolve.”
Andrew Sinclair, Director, Strategic Customer Experience Projects, OPTUSOptus
“Resonate has rolled out over a dozen touch-point feedback surveys and four waves of the Market feedback programs across multiple business units and stakeholders in the past year. Resonate has been instrumental in the successful establishment of the broader closed loop feedback program at Optus by providing a rapid and agile service in a complex business environment.”
Will Soulsby, Customer Insights ManagerWoolworths
"Resonate played a key role in establishing a closed loop feedback program into our supermarket business, Jeff and the team were highly responsive to our needs and the program has been a great success in terms of bringing our customers to the forefront of our Store Managers and Operational teams thinking."