Biotech and pharma sales cycles into health systems and payers run through formulary committees, P&T boards, and KOL influence networks that standard lead-gen marketing was never built to navigate. We build account plans and multi-stakeholder campaigns matched to how these institutions actually decide.
The Problem
Marketing targets a job title when the real buyer is a committee
Formulary and purchasing decisions at health systems run through P&T committees, value analysis boards, or procurement groups with membership that shifts by quarter and rarely appears on a purchased contact list. Campaigns built around a single title – Chief Pharmacy Officer, VP Medical Affairs – miss the pharmacist, the nurse informaticist, and the finance representative who all have a real vote, and the deal stalls in a room marketing never mapped.
KOL relationships live in medical affairs, disconnected from the account plan
Key opinion leaders influence formulary and clinical adoption decisions in ways a generic marketing campaign can't replicate, but most biotech and pharma companies keep medical affairs' KOL engagement entirely separate from the commercial account strategy. The account team runs its plan without visibility into which KOLs are already engaged at a target institution, and medical affairs runs KOL programs without input on which accounts actually matter commercially.
Sales cycles run 12-24 months, longer than most campaign plans account for
Formulary review, clinical evaluation, and budget cycles at hospital systems and payers routinely stretch past a year, but most ABM programs are built and measured on a quarterly campaign cadence borrowed from faster-moving industries. Without a plan that sustains engagement across the full cycle – through committee turnover, budget resets, and competing priorities – accounts go quiet for months and the relationship has to restart from a cold position.
Compliance constraints on physician and provider engagement get treated as a blocker instead of a design input
Sunshine Act reporting, fair market value requirements, and promotional review processes genuinely limit how biotech and pharma companies can engage individual providers and institutions, and many commercial teams either avoid account-based tactics entirely out of caution or run programs that draw compliance scrutiny after the fact. Neither approach produces a sustainable account engagement model.
How We Help
We start by mapping the real buying committee at each target account, not the title on a contact list. That means identifying the P&T committee or value analysis board structure, the pharmacy and clinical stakeholders with real influence, and the finance or procurement function that ultimately signs off, so the account plan reflects who actually votes rather than who's easiest to find on LinkedIn.
From there we build the bridge between medical affairs' KOL relationships and the commercial account plan that most organizations never connect. This means a shared view of which KOLs are engaged at which target accounts and coordinated planning, always structured within your medical, legal, and regulatory review process, so commercial and medical affairs are reinforcing the same institutional relationship instead of running parallel, disconnected efforts.
Campaign cadence gets rebuilt around the real length of the sales cycle. Instead of a quarterly campaign that goes quiet after launch, we build a sustained account engagement plan – clinical evidence delivery, committee-relevant content, and structured touchpoints – that survives committee turnover and budget cycles across twelve to twenty-four months, so the relationship compounds instead of resetting every time a champion changes roles.
Compliance gets designed into the account plan from the start rather than reviewed in afterward. We work within Sunshine Act reporting and fair market value requirements and route every tactic through your existing promotional and medical review process, building account engagement that legal and compliance can approve confidently rather than programs that draw scrutiny after they've already run.
What we deliver
- Committee mapping – identification of the real formulary, clinical, and procurement stakeholders per target account
- Medical affairs and commercial alignment – a shared account view connecting KOL engagement to commercial account strategy
- Multi-year account engagement plan – sustained cadence built to survive the real 12-24 month sales cycle and committee turnover
- Compliance-integrated tactics – account engagement designed within Sunshine Act and promotional review requirements from the start
The account isn't the buyer. The committee is the buyer, and it has a chair, a pharmacist, a finance rep, and turnover every budget cycle. Most biotech ABM programs fail because they were built to sell to a person instead of navigate an institution.
Our Methodology
We run this as a 90-day sprint built around the two structural problems that undermine most biotech and pharma ABM programs: targeting individuals when the real buyer is a multi-stakeholder committee, and running campaign cadence too short for a sales cycle that regularly exceeds a year. The first 30 days are diagnostic – committee mapping for priority target accounts, an audit of current medical affairs and commercial coordination, and a review of existing compliance review processes as they apply to account-based tactics. Days 30 to 60 build the account plans and the medical affairs and commercial alignment process, with tactics routed through your compliance review from the start. The final 30 days launch sustained engagement on priority accounts and establish the longer-cycle cadence and reporting rhythm the sales cycle actually requires.
What separates this from a standard ABM agency engagement is that most ABM playbooks are built for B2B SaaS sales cycles measured in months, with a buying committee of three to five people who are easy to identify from job titles. We build the account and committee model for institutions where the real buyer is a formulary board and the cycle runs past a year, because for most biotech and pharma companies the problem isn't a lack of ABM tactics – it's that the tactics being used were built for a completely different kind of sale.
How We Work
The first 30 days are audit and account mapping. We identify the real committee structure at your priority target accounts, review current medical affairs and commercial coordination, and map your compliance review requirements as they apply to account-based engagement. Days 30 through 60 build the account plans and alignment process, with engagement tactics moving through your promotional and medical review process alongside development. By day 90 we're running sustained engagement on priority accounts and reporting against the longer cycle the sales process actually requires.
On our side, the team is an ABM lead who owns account strategy and committee mapping, working directly with your commercial and medical affairs teams rather than as a separate marketing function. From your side, we need access to your CRM and current account data, a point of contact in medical affairs to align on KOL engagement, and visibility into your promotional review and compliance requirements so tactics get built to pass review the first time.
Cadence is weekly during the first 90 days, covering account mapping progress, medical affairs alignment, and plan development, with async updates as compliance review moves on its own timeline. After the initial sprint, most engagements move to a monthly cadence tied to the realistic pace of institutional sales cycles, with quarterly deeper reviews of account progression through the committee. Typical engagement length is 6 to 12 months given the sales cycle length involved, with many programs continuing on an ongoing account management basis once priority accounts are actively progressing.
What to expect at each phase: month one surfaces the real committee structure at target accounts, often more complex than the existing account plan assumed. Month two shows the medical affairs and commercial alignment taking shape and initial engagement tactics moving through review. Month three onward is where sustained account engagement starts producing visible movement through the formulary or evaluation process, understanding that full-cycle results take considerably longer than a typical marketing quarter.
- More complete committee mapping replacing single-contact account plans
- Coordinated KOL and commercial engagement at priority accounts
- Sustained relationship continuity through committee and budget cycle turnover
- Account engagement built to pass compliance review on the first pass
If your biotech & pharma company needs account-based marketing (abm) leadership, we should talk.
Expand your marketing team output with our experts
Let us take a custom approach to your growth goals by assembling and leading the best-in-class marketing team to support your next stage.
Frequently asked questions
How much does an ABM engagement cost for a biotech or pharma company?
Most biotech and pharma ABM engagements with us run $10K-25K monthly, depending on the number of priority accounts and the complexity of medical affairs and compliance coordination required. That's typically less than the cost of a dedicated in-house ABM team, and it accounts for the longer, more complex sales cycle this category involves. Larger account lists or more complex compliance environments sit toward the higher end.
How long before we see results from an ABM engagement?
Committee mapping and initial account plans are typically ready within the first 30-45 days. Given that formulary and institutional sales cycles routinely run 12-24 months, meaningful movement through the evaluation process usually shows up in the 6-12 month range rather than the 90-day window that works for shorter sales cycles. Early signals – engagement from previously unreached committee members, KOL alignment – show up sooner.
How does the ABM team integrate with our existing staff?
We work directly with your commercial and medical affairs teams to build a shared account view, rather than operating as an isolated marketing function. Weekly working sessions during the buildout cover account mapping and plan development with whoever owns commercial strategy on your side. If you have an in-house ABM function, we become the account strategy and medical affairs alignment layer.
What makes Winston Francois different from a traditional ABM agency?
Most ABM agencies apply a B2B SaaS playbook built for a three-to-five person buying committee and a sales cycle measured in months. We build the committee model and engagement cadence for institutions where the real buyer is a formulary board and the cycle runs past a year, with compliance designed in from the start rather than reviewed after the fact. We operate as an embedded team accountable to account progression, not campaign metrics.
How do you measure ROI from an ABM engagement?
We track account progression through the formulary or evaluation process, breadth of committee engagement compared to the single-contact baseline most programs start from, and coordination metrics between commercial and medical affairs. Because the sales cycle is long, we report leading indicators – committee reach, KOL alignment, evaluation stage – alongside the eventual formulary or contract outcome.
What type of biotech or pharma company is the right fit for this service?
Companies selling into health systems, payers, or institutional buyers where the purchase decision runs through a formulary committee or value analysis board are the best fit. Companies with active KOL programs in medical affairs that aren't currently connected to commercial account strategy tend to see the fastest structural improvement. The first step is committee mapping against your current priority account list.
