Menu
Close
.svg)
Lately, I’ve found myself thinking a lot about experience—not just as a concept, but as something that fundamentally shapes human behavior. It’s a thought that lingers, especially when I’m behind the steering wheel of my BMW (and no, the car pictured above isn’t mine), weaving through traffic on my way to a client meeting, or a research facility, or even just an errand to the local grocery store.
Driving, at its core, is a functional activity—a means of getting from Point A to Point B. And yet, BMW has somehow transformed it into something that feels seamless, exhilarating, and deeply rewarding. When I hit the gas pedal, the 523-horsepower V8 engine responds instantly, with an effortless precision that feels almost like an extension of my own intention. Kind of telepathic. This is not an accident. BMW engineers don’t just build fast cars—they intentionally and meticulously design the driving experience itself.
That experience is something greater than the sum of its parts. Yes, my BMW accelerates from zero to sixty in 3.6 seconds, but that statistic alone doesn’t account for the visceral thrill of the drive. Lots of other cars will deliver that and more. The joy comes from the sensation of control, the connection between human and machine, the confidence of knowing that every push of the accelerator is precise and intuitive. At its core, BMW understands that people don’t just buy performance specs—they buy the way the car makes them feel.
Just like driving a car, prescribing a medication is an experience—one that goes beyond just the attributes and mechanics of the product itself. Taking a medication is an experience. Living with a disease is an experience. And for caregivers, helping a loved one manage that disease is its own experience. Yet, when a pharma commercial team brings a therapy to market, the focus is often heavily skewed toward clinical data—efficacy rates, statistical significance, side effect profiles, hazard ratios—as if prescribing decisions and patient adherence happen in a clinical vacuum. In reality, health care providers (HCPs) don’t just make choices based on numbers alone, and health care consumers (HCCs) don’t persist with a therapy just because a trial says they should. The entire treatment experience—how easy or difficult it is to prescribe, access, tolerate, and incorporate into daily life—plays a critical role in determining whether a drug succeeds or fails in the real world.
It goes without saying that pharma operates in a way more regulated environment than pretty much all other industries. We can’t do the same kind of aspirational messaging or lifestyle-driven branding as if we're selling a pair of jeans, or a video game, or a craft beer. But that doesn’t mean we can’t engineer the treatment experience itself. In fact, the companies that win in our industry are those that think way beyond the drug and invest in and design a seamless, intuitive, supportive and ultimately rewarding experience—not just for patients, but for HCPs, caregivers, and the broader healthcare ecosystem around the medication.
HCPs don’t prescribe from a spreadsheet—just as patients don’t choose to stay on therapy based on clinical trial endpoints alone. People respond to and act based upon their experience—the way a treatment (or any product) fits into their life, their workflow, their daily routine, their practice dynamics, their sense of control and well-being. The best brands don’t just market a drug; they orchestrate a customer experience.
And in an industry where data alone is rarely enough, that’s what separates the brands that drive real adoption from those that struggle to gain traction.
Take Jardiance (empagliflozin) as a prime example. HCPs don’t prescribe it just because of its ability to reduce HbA1c. They prescribe it because it simplifies their decision-making—offering cardiovascular and renal protection, once-daily dosing, and a clear value proposition that makes their patients safer and their job easier. One decision, multiple benefits. That’s a no-brainer, and an experience worth repeating.
Or look at Dupixent (dupilumab). It’s not just an IL-4 inhibitor—it’s freedom from the exhausting cycle of severe eczema or asthma. It’s an escape from endless corticosteroids, unpredictable exacerbations, and the relentless disruptions of disease. But beyond its MOA, what makes Dupixent truly resonate is the support ecosystem built around it. Streamlined access programs. Adherence support. Clear onboarding for patients. It’s not just a drug; it’s an experience engineered to facilitate persistency.
For pharmaceutical commercial teams, whether it's launching a new brand, accelerating adoption of recently introduced product, or uncovering new opportunities for an in-market therapy, the fundamental challenge remains the same: how do we create an experience that drives both HCP prescribing and HCC request and adhere? The answer lies not just in traditional customer journey research but in a more systematic, behavioral science-informed approach to customer experience design. This means looking beyond linear models of decision-making and instead examining how HCPs and patients actually engage with a treatment in real-world settings.
By shifting the focus to how treatment decisions and behaviors unfold in routine practice and daily life, pharma marketers can optimize the experience to feel seamless, intuitive, and ultimately, more rewarding for both HCPs and HCCs.
Virtually all brand teams depend on customer journey mapping as a foundation to guide their strategy. They deconstruct the decision-making process, barriers to access, and emotional milestones along the pathway. But what’s often missing is a structured and nuanced examination of the actual treatment experience—the difference between knowing that a barrier exists and understanding how it feels to navigate that barrier. Traditional research may tell us that prior auths are a hurdle, but it won’t reveal whether the process feels like a minor inconvenience or an infuriating, time-consuming ordeal that leads to Rx abandonment. Similarly, we may know that a side effect or adverse event is manageable, but unless we ask patients how it impacts their daily lives, we won’t uncover whether it’s a mere nuisance or a significant deterrent to adherence. To bridge this gap, pharma brand teams must expand their primary marketing research efforts beyond the traditional journey framework and ask a different set of questions, such as:
By starting to pose these types of questions early in the commercialization process, brand teams can proactively design an experience that strengthens both an HCP’s motivation to prescribe and a patient’s motivation to stay on therapy. Stanford Professor BJ Fogg’s behavioral model highlights that motivation alone is insufficient—adoption and habit creation also depend on reducing friction and making an action easy to perform. If prescribing a therapy feels complex or burdensome, HCPs may hesitate or avoid it altogether. If starting or staying on treatment feels like too much effort, patients will resist. Customers, whether HCPs or patients, need to feel that the juice is worth the squeeze—that the benefits outweigh the perceived hassle. Experience-driven marketing research enables commercial teams to identify and address these hidden barriers, allowing them to refine brand messaging, patient support programs, access initiatives, and digital tools that make treatment more intuitive, accessible, and rewarding to engage with.
This shift in research focus isn’t just an academic exercise—it has real world commercial implications. The most successful pharma brands don’t leave the treatment experience to chance; they engineer it. They take insights from experience-driven research and leverage them to refine everything from patient onboarding materials to personal and non-personal HCP engagement strategies. They ensure that when an HCP prescribes, the workflow feels effortless—and when a patient starts therapy, the experience is intuitive, clear, and psychologically reinforcing. Pharmaceutical teams that embrace this systematic approach to experience design don’t just drive higher brand adoption—they architect treatment journeys that feel satisfying and rewarding, reinforcing the behaviors that lead to long-term success.
Managing cardio- and cerebrovascular risk is one of the most analytically rigorous domains in modern medicine. For conditions like hypertension and dyslipidemia, PCPs and cardiologists rely on quantifiable, responsive biomarkers—blood pressure readings, LDL levels, coronary calcium scores—to assess treatment efficacy. These metrics provide immediate feedback, reinforcing both clinical decision-making and therapeutic adherence. However, when it comes to stroke prevention—particularly in atrial fibrillation (AFib) and other high-risk patient populations—HCPs are forced to navigate a far less tangible framework. Unlike LDL reduction in hyperlipidemia or HbA1c control in diabetes, there is no immediate physiological confirmation that a patient taking Eliquis (apixaban) or Xarelto (rivaroxaban) is adequately protected from stroke. The absence of real-time feedback makes anticoagulation management feel fundamentally different—less immediate, less reinforcing, and potentially, less satisfying.
This lack of reinforcing feedback introduces a psychological and strategic challenge in the management of stroke prevention. HCPs are trained to prioritize measurable impact, yet in stroke prevention, the only confirmation of efficacy is the absence of an event—a patient not having a stroke. Unlike an antihypertensive that lowers blood pressure within weeks or an HMG Co-A reductase inhibitor that noticeably reduces LDL-C over time, prescribing a Factor Xa inhibitor is an exercise in risk mitigation without tangible validation - almost like a vaccine. The impact is that stroke prevention may become deprioritized in HCPs' clinical decision-making, especially in co-morbid patients and when juxtaposed against other CV interventions that provide immediate, quantifiable reassurance. This dynamic can lead to therapeutic inertia, where an HCP might hesitate to optimize or intensify stroke prevention simply because there’s no immediate signal that the current treatment is insufficient.
From a pharmaceutical brand strategy perspective, this gap in the prescriber experience presents a critical challenge—and an opportunity. The brands that succeed in the Factor Xa space are those that acknowledge and address this uncertainty in prescribing behavior. Commercial and medical affairs teams must move beyond traditional efficacy messaging and instead focus on reinforcing the invisible value of stroke prevention. This means leveraging real-world evidence, predictive analytics, and HCP education strategies that help HCPs contextualize the risk reduction achieved by Factor Xa inhibitors—even in the absence of a biomarker-driven feedback loop. Further, patient engagement strategies that reinforce adherence must be designed with behavioral reinforcement in mind, ensuring that both HCPs and HCCs recognize the critical long-term benefit of sustained anticoagulation. Ultimately, the brands that successfully close this gap will not only drive stronger adoption of anticoagulants but will also reframe stroke prevention as an active, data-supported intervention rather than a passive and vague, “hope-for-the-best” measure.
BMW doesn’t just build cars—it crafts an experience so seamless, so intuitive, that owners (like me) become fiercely loyal to the brand. Every touchpoint, from the effortless acceleration to the way the steering responds with precision, reinforces the idea that driving a BMW isn’t just about getting from one place to another—it’s about how it feels to be behind the wheel. That same principle applies in pharma. A treatment isn’t just a chemical compound with supportive clinical evidence; it’s an experience that HCPs and HCCs interact with and live with every day. The companies that understand this—and systematically design an experience that is frictionless, rewarding, confidence-inspiring, and potentially even thrilling—are the ones that will drive stronger adoption and adherence.
Adding an experiential lens to customer understanding and engagement isn’t just an abstract concept—it’s a strategic imperative. By going beyond traditional customer journey research and asking deeper questions -- about the emotions and behavioral thresholds associated with each aspect of of prescribing, patient perception, and real-world friction points -- commercial teams can proactively shape the treatment experience rather than react to obstacles after launch. Whether you’re bringing a first-in-class therapy to market or looking to revitalize an in-line brand, the ability to engineer a seamless, intuitive, and loyalty-building experience will separate market leaders from those struggling for traction.
In today’s medical marketplace, data alone won’t win—experience will. The brands that create an Ultimate Treatment Experience—one that feels easy for HCPs to prescribe and rewarding for patients to stay on—will not only gain market share but also build lasting brand equity. Just as BMW owners don’t just drive their cars—they become part of a brand that understands them, and build it into their identity—HCCs and HCPs will return to brands that make their lives easier. The question isn’t whether pharma should apply an experiential lens—it’s whether any brand can afford not to.
