Let's keep count of the Oncology Reps that quit each week...

Quote
Anonymous said:
Well, if you're saying that reps have no impact, this will be a great way to see. After losing so many reps, there should be a downturn in sales, if reps make a difference. It may take a little while bc there is not branded competition counter-detailing.

To the person who made the jump from people are leaving to it must be due to lack of leadership...I think it's difficult to make that jump. There are other companies launching drugs, who are recruiting them; there is the Teva acquisition that may scare people... Give me some examples why current leadership sucks so bad. I don't think you can come up with specifics, other than you are disgruntled?

What about all of this off-label promotion...would leadership be better if they didn't have to fix what you did wrong?? ...or did leadership start promoting off-label before the field did? What was the view of leadersrding using the Rummel study to promote front line before we got caught??
Click to expand...


Leadership promoted off label indirectly when they refused to pony up for safety data in combination therapy with rituxan to take to the FDA which therefor rendered 90 per cent of Treanda use off label. If I was fired from Ceph for off label promotion, I would sue that ass!
 


















Just the beginning...Treanda compliance recall survey, RepInc coaching opportunity, MS, Campbell, HR, compliance dept., I could go on and on. Sales personnel are sending out resumes as fast as they can e-mail them. Hopefully, Teva will come in and create a program to weed out the spine-less, completely inept senior management that is prevalent at today's Cephalon. By the way, even oncology management thought the Jolly Green Giant completely blew the question referencing disincentivizing the sales force to ever try to sell off label. Case in point...
 












Could it get any worse when teva takes over? Someone should notify the leaders of teva about the shit storm at cephalon. Anyone remember when training handed out the rummel poster and asked us to take notes on it? Remember when Craig wanted to bring rummel to the national meeting? Its so ridiculous!
 






They used to make us listen to a debriefing from medical affairs or our MSLs after each ASH or ASCO Meeting on all of the pertinent data involving Treanda, on-label or off-label, as well as anything else coming along for CLL or NHL. That stopped only a year ago. This is so ridiculous!!! Teva management, help save us!
 


















Anonymous said:
ONLY YOU can save yourselves. Tell every dirty detail to anyone who will listen on what the company did to encourage you to promote off-label.
Click to expand...

That is actually bad advice. Unless you have solid documenation of the company leadership encouraging off-label promotion, it is a losing argument. Part of the logic to that argument was that you did promote off-label. Despite feeling encouraged to do so by management, you are saying you promoted off-label. That is a non-starter.
They best tact is to go after the quality / legality of their survey methodology. If you are dismissed, that crappy survey will be the cause, not some distant past encouragement to promote off-label.
 






Anonymous said:
That is actually bad advice. Unless you have solid documenation of the company leadership encouraging off-label promotion, it is a losing argument. Part of the logic to that argument was that you did promote off-label. Despite feeling encouraged to do so by management, you are saying you promoted off-label. That is a non-starter.
They best tact is to go after the quality / legality of their survey methodology. If you are dismissed, that crappy survey will be the cause, not some distant past encouragement to promote off-label.
Click to expand...

The best advice is to get the fuck out of here. Teva can keep this ship of fools.
 
























Anonymous said:
Good luck with that, since the government signed off on the use of the survey...
Click to expand...

Wrong! The Treanda monitoring program has nothing to do with the government survey. The survey is similar to our CIA survey, but was not approved by the government. It is the Treanda monitoring program that will cause terminations.
Also, they CIA survey methodology was prepared by Cephalon and approved by the government. Our compliance department was extremely ignorant in not taking into consideration how / why oncology injectable drugs have different patterns of natural off-label use prior to designing that survey.
 






Anonymous said:
Wrong! The Treanda monitoring program has nothing to do with the government survey. The survey is similar to our CIA survey, but was not approved by the government. It is the Treanda monitoring program that will cause terminations.
Also, they CIA survey methodology was prepared by Cephalon and approved by the government. Our compliance department was extremely ignorant in not taking into consideration how / why oncology injectable drugs have different patterns of natural off-label use prior to designing that survey.
Click to expand...

Do you think psych drugs are not commonly used off-label? Psychiatrists try everything and anything to get patients to respond...just like Oncology. Doesn't mean you can promote off-label. Period.
 






Anonymous said:
Do you think psych drugs are not commonly used off-label? Psychiatrists try everything and anything to get patients to respond...just like Oncology. Doesn't mean you can promote off-label. Period.
Click to expand...

First of all, it is night and day. I sold in both markets. In oncology it is much more common and the level of education / communication in establishing a drug as a gold standard, when that standard is not part of the label, is much more extensive. Additionally, barriers to payment such as a formulary tier, simply do not exist with these oncology therapies once they are an official NCCN approved as an treatment standard.
The other poster was not saying that these circumstances meant they could be promoted off-label. It was clear that they were referring to the level of noise for therapies like Treanda created by usage off-label as a gold standard meant these surveys would be meaningless.
 
























Top Bottom
Back
Quote