May 18, 2016

With the advent of the The Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA) in 2010 and the final rule being enacted in 2013, the risks to a manufacturer in relation to the promotion of their medical...

Read More
Disclaimer

Data Analytics: The New Competitive Edge...
With the advent of the The Physician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA) in 2010 and the final rule being enacted in 2013, the risks to a manufacturer in relation to the promotion of their medical products to health care providers (HCPs) in the United States became even greater than had existed previously. Prior to this legislation, only companies under a Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) with Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) were required to post their physician payments to their company websites. Now, any manufacturer is at potential risk if transfers of value (TOV) to HCPs are not reported. Although the penalties for violations of PPSA are not at the same level of penalties under a CIA, the financial risk to manufacturers are still substantive.
Europe is jumping on the transparency bandwagon, too. Beginning this year, in an effort to boost transparency and make patients aware of possible conflicts of interest, manufacturers operating in Europe and subscribing to the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) Code of Ethics, must disclose payments made to physicians. Prior to 2016, only manufacturers marketing products in France had be concerned about transparency under France’s Loi Bertrand (French Sunshine Act), which has many similarities to the US PPSA and was launched in 2013.
In addition, the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (JPMA) issued its Transparency Guideline for the Relation between Corporate Activities and Medical Institutions in 2011, and although like the EFPIA Code of Ethics it is a voluntary program, the risks to a manufacturer for failure to comply are its political position and public perception.
As global sales of medical products expand beyond traditional geographies into the emerging markets of Asia and Latin America, manufacturers must consider the complex and unique regulatory environments of the countries in these regions, as related to transparency. For example, in the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), anti-bribery concerns and investigations take on an even more serious nature and manufacturers, and their employees, could face serious consequences if corporate compliance programs aren’t monitored and enforced.
Ultimately, to be successful in both traditional and emerging markets, medical product manufacturers must lower their tolerance for risk and increase their ability to mitigate risk associated with TOV to HCPs on a global basis. Since TOV transparency is essentially a data management activity, manufacturers need to have information systems that enable them to collect, store, and report, on TOV data in an effective and efficient manner, in the required formats of the specific regulatory and professional bodies within the geographies in which they operate. The challenge and opportunity is having a single platform for transparency data management, enabling both local market and global compliance analysts to have a consistent, reliable, and comprehensive approach to ensuring that the risk associated with TOV to HCPs are being minimized.

Contributed by:


Mike Strassberg, MHA, Sales Director, AHM

Mike has over twenty-years of experience in the life sciences industry, having held positions at several medical communications agencies, consulting firms, an HMO, hospital, and a pharmaceutical manufacturer. He has a Master of Healthcare Administration from Cornell University.

 

March 9, 2016

For compliance people, one of the biggest challenges in recent years came when courts in the European Union ruled that the so-called “Safe Harbor” approach to ensuring data privacy for its citizens was no...

Read More
Disclaimer

Privacy Shield Provides Welcome Relief — For Now
For compliance people, one of the biggest challenges in recent years came when courts in the European Union ruled that the so-called “Safe Harbor” approach to ensuring data privacy for its citizens was no longer sufficient.
After lengthy negotiations, the European Commission and the U.S. Department of Commerce have agreed on a new structure for bridging the differences between EU protections and those provided within the US.
From a corporate perspective, the new arrangement comes with stronger obligations on US-based organizations to protect personal data of Europeans. But it’s no longer simply based on trusting companies to do the right thing. Instead the agreement specifies ongoing monitoring and enforcement activities by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Commerce in the US in coordination with European officials. The measures specifically address the potential that has most worried Europeans, namely that government snoops in the US might scoop up data on individual Europeans without their knowledge or consent.
In response to those concerns, the U.S. government as agreed that any such action would be subject to very specific conditions, with limitations and oversight. Furthermore, an ombudsperson will field any concerns raised by Europeans with regard to the process and its effectiveness.
All of that sounds like a step forward. The demise of Safe Harbor has been very troubling for Life Sciences companies, especially those with substantial activities in both regions. With the blessings of the EU and the US, business should be able to go back to something that looks like “normal.” However, a closer reading of Privacy Shield, with its layers or protection and nuanced language leaves one with the suspicion that those who are wary of the adequacy of protections available on this side of the Atlantic, particularly regarding government data grabs, will likely be finding new ways to derail the process.
Indeed, key members of the European Parliament have already reportedly voiced opposition to the measure. It is also important to note that the agreement isn’t fully finalized, so for the moment, companies must continue workarounds under existing legal structures.
Beware of potential costs, associated with the measure, too. Unlike the past where companies could more or less “promise” to do the right thing, Privacy Shield demands actions and imposes considerable levels of government scrutiny, not to mention potentially significant fines for non-compliance.
That’s not intended as negativity. Progress is progress after all. But there will continue to be many issues to contend with. For now, at least, Life Sciences organizations have something they can work with…

Contributed by:


Lisa Keilty, Global VP of Compliance and Strategic Solutions, AHM

Lisa joined AHM after serving as founder of the Compliance Consulting firm PMC2 and spending over 26 years in the life sciences and meeting management industry. Leading such organizations as Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb and Biogen Idec through numerous international projects, financial transparency and reporting requirements, Lisa’s industry expertise has saved Life Sciences and Meeting Management organizations over 30 million dollars. As a member of the Business Development team, Lisa’s primary focus will be Thought Leadership,Demand Generation and Solution Design.

February 17, 2016

The oft-quoted African proverb can remind us of our complementary roles and interlocking obligations… As I take the train back from the 4th Annual Global Pharmaceutical and Medical Meetings Summit, I have many emotions...

Read More
Disclaimer

When it comes to compliant interactions with healthcare professionals, “it takes a village”
The oft-quoted African proverb can remind us of our complementary roles and interlocking obligations…
As I take the train back from the 4th Annual Global Pharmaceutical and Medical Meetings Summit, I have many emotions competing for my attention. I am excited… energized….enlightened…yes, but the one emotion that resonates with me the most is the sense of pride and gratitude. Those feelings are focused on the countless colleagues that continue to educate, assist and even debate how to address the issues we face when working within the Life Sciences Healthcare Meetings area — a challenging, but rewarding vertical market.
Well over 300 Life Sciences industry professionals consisting of Procurement, Meeting Services and Compliance and their supplier-partners gathered in Philadelphia, PA to interact for 2½ days, discussing such topics as Designing and Implementing a Local and Global Strategic Meetings Management Program, Establishing Strong Partnerships with Procurement Teams, and Navigating the Future of Global Regulations Impacting the Life Sciences Industry.
Whether the attendee was a novice or expert, the educational sessions were delivered with an inclusive -`no question is a dumb question attitude’ — and provided a fundamental platform from which challenges can be addressed and success stories can be celebrated and shared.
As a participant on the panel titled The Future of Global Regulations, we highlighted the following trends as something to keep a close eye to and offered additional guidance on managing Healthcare Professional (HCP) interactions where these are concerned:

    • Data Privacy and HCP consent continues to dominate as one of the top 3 concerns and challenges to manage. Important in the US of course, but even more so in EU, data privacy is seen as one of the most fundamental rights a citizen can have. For suppliers and agencies that collect data on HCPs, the focus has been on working with legal departments within your organization and your client’s organization to ensure your contracts have terms and conditions outlining expectations and defined the data that will be collected and shared. In fact, clauses identified as Safe Harbor clauses or language are now being re-labelled as “Privacy Shield Clauses”

 

    • Mandatory compliance training for vendors — or better yet, partners as they were addressed is another positive and quite popular movement being implemented in organizations across the globe regardless of size or volume of business. As partners are an extension of the organization and are representatives or agents of the life science’s company, knowledge and full understanding of anti-bribery, anti-kickback, improper code of conduct and more must be as familiar to them as getting out of bed in the morning. Those suppliers or agencies that work with Life Sciences organizations must be proactive and resourceful in understanding the nuances of each of their customers’ expectations. Training and consistent education for your partners and employees is valuable and vital to compliance adherence and successful HCP interactions even on the smallest scale.

 

  • Location, Location, Location. Much to my surprise the familiar topic of sourcing or choosing properties to hold these meetings and events that have HCPs in attendance remains a major challenge. I was surprised that Meeting Professionals are continuing to struggle with sourcing venues for HCP meetings. Yes, gone are the days of teams deciding the location of the meeting based on the lavishness of the resort or amenities; now we revert to a selection criteria based on it being a centralized location and whether it is business appropriate or “reasonable.” Interestingly enough, Medical Societies / Associations like ASCO, ASH and others are not subject to the same scrutiny when sourcing a location for their large congresses or conventions. As Life Sciences organizations attend or would like to attend, the same criteria must be applied as to whether participation should occur and if, whether ancillary meetings may take place within the venue selected by the medical society. The Life Sciences organization may choose not to support at all and therefore not attend the entire convention or congress. It would be helpful if when sourcing for congresses and conventions, these societies would consider their constituent’s regulatory requirements to help support their engagement and attendance.Something to keep in mind and a necessary rule of thumb when managing compliance processes throughout all HCP interactions is consistency. If you use a certain selection criteria to decide whether or not to participate, that criteria must apply consistently to all.

Opening the Lines of Communication was another key area addressed during the conference. As the title of this blog indicates, it does take a village…..to manage HCP interactions compliantly, in a cost efficient and consistent matter. Hoteliers, agencies, compliance, procurement, meeting services professionals and more are all called upon to help with the heavy lifting of ensuring these engagements meet the requirements and standards of all of the stakeholders. To help illustrate the need for a true partnership, consider this… Two hotel companies who participated in this session provided some statistics as to the sheer volume of meeting inquiries they receive: 20 — 50 leads per day for Global Sales Hotel Chain and the other, a global organization with over 9 hotel brands amongst its footprint receives over 400,000 RFPs for programs per year! These numbers represent all life sciences meeting types not just HCP attended meetings, but that is quite a lot of volume. Because of this volume and the complexity of the local and global regulatory landscape, transparent, fluid and open communication is critical. The goal is to move from vendor or supplier to partner and then from partner to Trusted Advisor.
In closing — what advice can a subject matter expert and her peers offer in keeping up to date with regulations to small — mid-tier companies that may not have a compliance officer or are lacking a seasoned HCP meeting planning team? Subscribe to EFPIA newsletters and to our blog, AHM Voice, create Open Payments Alerts and HCP data privacy alerts and more on Google. In addition, LinkedIn groups that speak to HCP Interactions, Aggregate Spend and Transparency and others are valuable resources at the click of a button to stay in touch with the latest changes or updates.
Of course — continuing to attend and participate in leading Industry conferences like Global Pharmaceutical and Medical Meeting Summit and our own, AHM Annual Industry Conference in May 2016 offers networking, key learning and engagement opportunities with your peers and fellow villagers.

Contributed by:


Lisa Keilty, Global VP of Compliance and Strategic Solutions, AHM

Lisa joined AHM after serving as founder of the Compliance Consulting firm PMC2 and spending over 26 years in the life sciences and meeting management industry. Leading such organizations as Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb and Biogen Idec through numerous international projects, financial transparency and reporting requirements, Lisa’s industry expertise has saved Life Sciences and Meeting Management organizations over 30 million dollars. As a member of the Business Development team, Lisa’s primary focus will be Thought Leadership,Demand Generation and Solution Design.

December 18, 2015

Industry compliance and transfer of value scrutiny has created an atmosphere where tracking cost and the process by which they are calculated is high priority. AHM, a leading vendor of assisting life sciences clients...

Read More
Disclaimer

CALCULATING MEAL ALLOCATION COSTS – LESSONS LEARNED
Industry compliance and transfer of value scrutiny has created an atmosphere where tracking cost and the process by which they are calculated is high priority. AHM, a leading vendor of assisting life sciences clients with managing HCP Interactions, understands the imperative to be diligent in this effort while recognizing that our clients have an individual and unique idea of what costs should be attributed to a per person basis. Solution providers, like AHM that operate in this space must be agile in not only developing processes and systems that apply broadly across its customer base, but can be modified based on the changing landscape of the life sciences industry and the regulations impacting them. A flexible, calculation model for transfer of value is necessary. One key factor is obtaining an itemized receipt upon the conclusion of any meal or event that consists of HCPs in attendance.
One of the key complaints by HCPs is not posting transfers of value about them, but ensuring that what is being posted IS in fact accurate. To ensure accuracy this itemized receipt illustrates exactly in black and white what is being charged to the sponsor and thus by category of spend what will be extracted and reported per HCP. To be successful and achieve accurate reporting for these programs, solution and service providers must be proactive and engage all stakeholders involved outlining expectations of the program including the documentation necessary post program. AHM recommends the following 3-pronged redundancy to obtain this essential document:

  • Beforehand we alert the venue that an itemized receipt will be requested
  • Onsite, during the event we provide the Client Host the ability to upload a photo of the receipt
  • Post event we employ timed system and manual follow-ups with the venue

AHM provides the Client host with technological tools (e-sig app) to accurately record all attendees, their food and beverage consumption and other appropriate details on reportable HCPs.
The flexibility is introduced in the determination of the calculation. AHM works with its clients to determine exactly what they consider reportable Food and Beverage and then co-creates rules on how to handle items like tax/tip, room rentals, unmet minimum fees, admin fees, and delivery charges. AHM reviews all options with our client (while presenting best practices) and then creates a calculation model based on their specific choices.
The final cost allocation calculation is completed utilizing the final true F&B and the HCPs who consumed F&B at the meeting. A few key takeaways for the approach outlined are that consistency in the approach to the calculation is key and having a complete set of business rules to address each expense category and its impact on Transfer of Value is a must. A complete, itemized receipt will provide the best information for your calculations. AHM is a leading global provider of technology and service solutions designed to manage compliant Interactions with healthcare professionals and assist clients in managing accurate data collection and reporting on a daily basis. Thus, utilizing this tried and true methodology can ensure the most accurate, defendable Transfer of Value for our clients and yours.

Contributed by:


Lori Cottrell, Vice President, Account Management, AHM

Lori is a Vice President and has been part of AHM’s Account Management for 10 years. During her tenure with AHM she has successfully guided many accounts, including 2 of the top 10 US pharmaceutical companies. Prior to joining AHM, Lori spent over 6 years in operational management in other industries. Lori has a BS from the University of Vermont and a MBA from Columbia University.

November 10, 2015

My recent flight to Shanghai provided plenty of opportunity to reflect on the challenges that exist for pharmaceutical companies operating in China. Top of mind are the logistical challenges in a country of such...

Read More
Disclaimer

Compliant HCP Interactions: Tactical Necessity or Strategic Imperative?
My recent flight to Shanghai provided plenty of opportunity to reflect on the challenges that exist for pharmaceutical companies operating in China. Top of mind are the logistical challenges in a country of such scale and diversity and how this impacts compliance initiatives, specifically managing HCP interactions.
With Corporate Integrity Agreements in the US commonplace and the increasing focus on the expansion of transparency reporting initiatives around the world, it seems reasonable to assume that managing HCP interactions in a compliant manner has become a strategic imperative. Or is it?
The Open Payments reporting obligations created equal amounts of concern and frustration in the US, as Life Sciences companies tried to determine the most effective and cost efficient way to consolidate data from multiple disparate systems. Many millions of dollars later, I believe most companies have declared a victory of sorts, with data being submitted as requested to various regulatory bodies, albeit with a certain fragility to the process.
So, with the transparency reporting obligations under control, can’t we all now relax and breathe a collective sigh of relief? Well, not so fast. The journey has only just begun. What may have been viewed as a “tactical necessity” and a somewhat unique requirement of the US market is now spreading steadily across other important global markets. This tactical necessity is rapidly becoming a strategic imperative in many companies, where global or regional Compliance, IT and Procurement teams are trying to control the proliferation of local market initiatives to solve for their own in-country legislation.
Their macro-level challenge is extensive and goes beyond the foundational need for strong master data management. The requirement is for an enterprise level compliance approach to HCP interactions which includes standardization on an IT platform to support both data and process considerations. Add to this a material governance and change management initiative and you will begin to understand the complexity.
This challenge is not unique to China or other emerging markets, it’s global in nature and solutions are best approached from that perspective. Having been fortunate enough to have visited China on other occasions and to have travelled to the birthplace of Confucius, l felt compelled to seek some of his wise words that may be applied to these global compliance challenges. The following seemed to resonate.
“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.”
When it comes to gaining wisdom about globally managing HCP interactions, the goal must be to achieve through methods one and two. As Confucius concludes, the third method should be avoided, as the bitterness will manifest itself in increased costs and compliance risk!

Contributed by:


Nigel J. Whitehead, CEO, AHM

Nigel J. Whitehead joined AHM as the CEO in 2013. Nigel brings 30 years experience providing technology enabled business solutions to the Global Life Sciences market including senior positions at CSC, First Consulting Group and Cegedim (formerly Dendrite International).

October 16, 2015

It was nice while it lasted. The US-EU Safe Harbor system, a triumph of diplomacy, commonsense, and rationality, was a simplified process that US companies were able to adopt to comply with the EU...

Read More
Disclaimer


It was nice while it lasted. The US-EU Safe Harbor system, a triumph of diplomacy, commonsense, and rationality, was a simplified process that US companies were able to adopt to comply with the EU Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of personal data.
A product of the US Department of Commerce and the European Union, Safe Harbor was a boon to all until earlier this month. Driven by Edward Snowden’s exposure of the NSA’s domestic data gathering activities, the European Court of Justice invalidated the measure (Maximillian Schrems v. Data Protection Commissioner). Of concern was the possibility that under US law, federal agencies could potentially access and utilize the data, contravening European privacy laws.
Of course, Safe Harbor had been intended to allay such concerns in the first place, by preventing accidental information disclosure or loss by US companies holding data from Europe, which generally has stricter laws on the subject. Unanticipated at the time of the Law’s creation was a scenario in which the threat to the data’s privacy would be the US Government, a reality surfaced by Snowden’s actions.
The complete implications of this decision are not yet clear, but already, huge tech companies such as Facebook and Google are facing disruption. Optimists see a potential for governments on both sides of the Atlantic to administer an orderly retreat toward some new common ground, but others see a potential disaster that could result in the loss of billions of dollars in bilateral trade.
For Life Sciences organizations, which have often made large investments in consolidating information technology resources globally, this decision could be particularly painful. For example, companies that transfer personal data — health data in particular — between jurisdictions may now have to stop the practice or constrain it in an as yet undetermined way. This, of course, potentially undoes the data consolidation, not to mention the widespread adoption of compliant public cloud resources for storage and computing. Much of this technology was put in place to meet expanding global compliance guidelines regarding payments to their customers, healthcare professionals. The inability for one region to have visibility that a key thought leader physician is being utilized and paid by another region makes regulated transfer of value reporting a manual effort.
Guidance on this matter is expected from the European Commissioners in the near future. For now, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker released the following statement (reproduced in part) in response to the European decision:
“The court’s decision necessitates release of the updated Safe Harbor Framework as soon as possible. We are prepared to work with the European Commission to address uncertainty created by the court decision so that the thousands of U.S. and EU businesses that have complied in good faith with the Safe Harbor and provided robust protection of EU citizens’ privacy in accordance with the Framework’s principles can continue to grow the world’s digital economy.”
To be sure of what?, the Commerce Department had been working on improvements to Safe Harbor prior to this ruling. Presumably, some of that work can be salvaged and built upon. It is hard to imagine that mutual interest wouldn’t lead to a solution. In the meantime, however, Life Sciences companies must deal with consequence of this European court decision, namely tracking how healthcare professionals are utilized and paid around the world; which is a direct fruit of the ability to share data seamlessly.
No doubt, lawyers will be working double time, and IT people, too, in an effort to avoid running afoul of the law as it stands. The more cost effective world of third-party Software as a Service (SaaS) beckons, with the potential to actually improve security and allow Life Sciences companies to focus on what they do best, namely R&D related to improving healthcare.
In the meantime, as they say, “stay tuned.”


Contributed by:


Susan Hill, SVP, Global Products & Solutions, AHM

Susan joined AHM in June of 2013 and is responsible for the oversight and management of AHM’s Global Business Development and Solutions and Marketing team. With over nineteen years of experience in the Life Science industry, Susan brings experience in business development, product marketing, and new technology investment and optimization.

 

September 10, 2015

August 17 – 19, 2015 brought approximately 350 industry colleagues to Washington, DC where, Center for Business Intelligence (CBI) hosted the 9th Annual Transparency and Aggregate Spend Conference. My inaugural view into this conference...

Read More
Disclaimer


August 17 – 19, 2015 brought approximately 350 industry colleagues to Washington, DC where, Center for Business Intelligence (CBI) hosted the 9th Annual Transparency and Aggregate Spend Conference. My inaugural view into this conference was over five years ago, as a sole proprietor who had just hung her compliance consulting shingle out for the first time. Back then, there were a lot of the big guys in attendance: Cegedim, Deloitte, Huron, Porzio and ironically even AHM. With my knees wobbling together as a first time, independent attendee, I timidly made my way into the exhibit hall after picking up my name badge. Why was I hesitating? What was my dread? I had been working within the pharma industry focused on HCP Interactions for over a decade and had certainly heard of the then looming Sunshine Act before! What was I afraid of?
During that conference, I recall a small number of solution providers being in attendance, each proclaiming THE answer on what it was and how to prepare for Sunshine, (now the Open Payments Program). Attendees enjoyed and were inspired by the systems, screenshots, potential process flows and purchasing incentives for manufacturers. We were all wide-eyed! For me, I wondered how I was going to decipher this if there is no clear definition of requirements. Where was the line in the sand; the proverbial stake in the ground outlining what to do? Then it occurred to me – this is what I was afraid of! Fear of the unknown! And ya know what? I was not alone. Joining me in my apprehension were giant companies and experienced consultants. They, too, were trying to understand exactly where CMS was going to end up regarding their data points and collection requirements.
It was quite a different experience at this conference in 2015! As we know, CMS defined requirements in 2012 and data collection began August 2013. The life sciences industry has supplied over 2.6 million lines of identifiable general payments and CBI delivered a valuable and educational conference for the ninth year in a row! Topics of discussion during the preliminary workshop included Standardizing Processes for Validating and Verifying Data as well as one of our own, when our Global Director for Solutions Management collaborated with the panel on Leveraging the Customer Master. With over 70 attendees in this pre-conference workshop, organizations of all sizes and complexities fired off questions and collectively problem-solved using specific examples such as collecting data outside of spend sources, technology available to capture TOVs (transfer of values) across the pipeline, attesting data and scenarios of dispute resolution.
Data attestation and best practices to reduce compliance risk was another hot topic, suggesting a tiered approach involving a CMS Attester, Business Owner, Certification of Data Source and a Periodic/Ongoing Review. This best practice results in a definition of ownership, provides organizational accountability and identifies potential issues quicker and at a more granular level, allowing for improved accuracy and completeness.
A strong theme throughout the conference was globalization — and the challenges with unique country and HCP identifiers. Each country having their own rules around the identifier to capture is causing angst, inefficiencies and redundancies. A standard, best practice approach is certainly needed — but when and how are the questions that need to be answered. An additional trouble spot under the global umbrella was consent management for doctors in Europe. The speakers were suggesting that not only is soliciting consent from HCPs challenging but keeping the consent is not easy. HCPs can revoke their consent to share data whenever they want to, so companies need to consider an annual consent management strategy. There was a suggestion that if sales reps asked for the consent to share their data they would most likely receive it as compared to other people in the organization who many not interact with the rep as much. Additional coverage on CBI 9th Annual Transparency and Aggregate Spend can be found here: http://www.cbinet.com/conference/agenda/pc15156#.VeXOvPlVikr
Experiencing the development and path of Open Payments to date and looking to the horizon of global transparency, I can’t help but think of five years ago and appreciate the true pioneers and leaders from all stakeholder categories: life sciences manufacturers, HCOs, HCPs, industry associations and of course, solution providers who collectively thought out of the box, managed the unknown and put that stake in the ground leading us now towards a best practice for transparency.
At CBI and other conferences I’ve seen a strong desire among attendees to simply be “in the know” regarding practices among peer organizations. This is particularly evident when comparing audience engagement. The sessions presented by pharma company employees almost always generate the greatest level of interaction. Sometimes these folks know each other, sometimes they don’t, but regardless they are simply curious about other company’s experiences and how their “colleagues” are reacting to and addressing common industry problems. We have a lot of work to do still in perfecting in regards to financial transparency but collaborations and knowledge sharing which occur at these conferences are certainly paving the way!
Stepping back, I am taken by how all of this has evolved based on mutual concern and perhaps some enlightened self-interest. Subject matter experts built and then refined processes and technology, even when it was difficult to discern how best to proceed. Rather than being stymied by the fear of the unknown, we worked together, shared ideas, and built solutions together. In the words of Babe Ruth, “The way a team plays as a whole determines its success. You may have the greatest bunch of individual stars in the world, but if they don’t play together, the club won’t be worth a dime.” That sounds like the lesson we have all learned.


Contributed by:


Lisa Keilty, Global VP of Compliance and Strategic Solutions, AHM

Lisa joined AHM after serving as founder of the Compliance Consulting firm PMC2 and spending over 26 years in the life sciences and meeting management industry. Leading such organizations as Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb and Biogen Idec through numerous international projects, financial transparency and reporting requirements, Lisa’s industry expertise has saved Life Sciences and Meeting Management organizations over 30 million dollars. As a member of the Business Development team, Lisa’s primary focus will be Thought Leadership, Demand Generation and Solution Design.