It’s clear from our discussion that we’re not debating Region vs. Region. Instead, we’re collectively recognizing that the real issue lies with the IC itself. None of the ICs we’ve had so far truly capture sales ability. Every single IC has been shaped by unique nuances that inevitably advantage or disadvantage certain Regions.
These unique variable factors are slightly challenging to discern at the Territory level, but they stand out like a sore thumb at the Region level.
Once the new IC is released, cross-reference it with the data on the Sales Report and you’ll easily predict which Region the IC will favor for Q1 through Q3.
Until these systemic issues (Teaching Hospitals vs Nonacademic Hospitals, 340B Hospitals vs Non340B Hospitals- ask your Buyer the price of PAX on 340B vs VKY, Hospitals that added PAX on Formulary due to COST SAVINGS over VKY- & none of your data is going to change their mind vs Hospitals that follow the Guidelines regardless of price), we’ll keep experiencing an IC that favors a certain Region more than others, we’ll seeing the same imbalances and we’ll continue feeling the same frustrations resurface year after year.
These unique variable factors are slightly challenging to discern at the Territory level, but they stand out like a sore thumb at the Region level.
Once the new IC is released, cross-reference it with the data on the Sales Report and you’ll easily predict which Region the IC will favor for Q1 through Q3.
Until these systemic issues (Teaching Hospitals vs Nonacademic Hospitals, 340B Hospitals vs Non340B Hospitals- ask your Buyer the price of PAX on 340B vs VKY, Hospitals that added PAX on Formulary due to COST SAVINGS over VKY- & none of your data is going to change their mind vs Hospitals that follow the Guidelines regardless of price), we’ll keep experiencing an IC that favors a certain Region more than others, we’ll seeing the same imbalances and we’ll continue feeling the same frustrations resurface year after year.