E-Folder - Business

In the sales profession, not everyone you interact with will be an ethical negotiator. And a difference in standards can potentially cause serious problems in the negotiation process. Some people enter negotiations with no interest in forging mutually beneficial agreements. These types are only interested in getting wh

According to USFDA, a combination product is one composed of any combination of a drug and device; biological product and device; drug and biological product

at’s good for them, and they don’t mind abusing other people in the process; they play hard ball. So if someone won’t meet you on your level, you need defense tactics that will keep you from getting steamrolled.

When you meet with someone at the bargaining table who doesn’t want to play fair, y

; or drug, device, and biological product and fixed dose combination would include two or more combinations of drug.

Examples of combination products may in

ou can protect yourself without trickery or manipulation. Use the four following defense tactics to prevent an unethical negotiator from swindling you out of a mutually beneficial sales agreement:

Defense Tactic #1: Maintain Your Standards

If a person approaches negotiations aggressively out of ignor

lude drug-coated devices, drugs packaged with delivery devices in medical kits, and drugs and devices packaged separately but intended to be used together.

ance, you may be able to win them over eventually. Most people don’t really want to make enemies; they just fear being cheated. If you can demonstrate to them that you’re interested in a fair deal, they will usually drop the aggressive routine and work with you.

But never compromise your own standards, eve

here is enormous increase in the number of combination products entering the market in the recent years. Combination products have proven advantages but fixe

n when tempted by an unscrupulous counterpart. Keep in mind the saying, “When you fight with a pig, you both get dirty – but the pig likes it.” In other words, even if you win, you’ve lost by stooping to their lower level. So maintain your own high standards; and if the other side refuses to pla

d dose combinations are still in the process of convincing regulatory authority on their advantages over the single ingredient formulations.

Combination pro

y by the same rules, you may need to try the next tactic.

Defense Tactic #2: Don’t Fight Back Directly

Fighting with others is always difficult and usually less productive than working together to produce an acceptable agreement. When you’re pitted face-to-face with an aggressive counterp

ucts have become life saving products for the pharmaceutical companies who doesn’t have many innovative molecules in their product pipeline and have been inc

art, don’t resist their attack by being belligerent or aggressive in return. If they insist on their position, don’t counterattack with yours. Try asking them, “Why do you feel that’s the only option?” or “How do you think that will affect me?” By asking them to provide an hone

easingly used in the product life cycle management. Even the companies having product patents are trying to extend their product life cycle through the combi

st explanation for why their offer is the best solution for both parties, you make them rethink their position.

When your negotiating counterparts attack your position or your ideas, ask for more specific input. Ask them to explain exactly what they don’t like about your offer. By inviting their criticism, you f

nation products and maximize the revenues. But the companies involved in this practice are overlooking that they are burdening the patients both economically

orce them into working with you.

Another important point to keep in mind is that you’re a human being and you deserve to be treated like one. More often than not, if you refuse to play by their aggressive rules, they’ll eventually back down.

Defense Tactic #3: Call in a Third-Party Arbitrator
and physically. They need to rightly judge the benefits of the combination products and they have to even look at the risks involved when combining the produ
ong>

Negotiation situations rarely get to the point where a third party is needed because one side refuses to play fair. But you may encounter a situation where you need a completely impartial person with no links to either side of the negotiation to guide the process.

The benefit of bringing in a third party is that
ts. Some of the combination products were well accepted by physicians while others suffered. Companies involved in development of combination products are fi
they can shift the negotiations from positional bargaining to interest-based bargaining. By viewing all sides objectively, the party can plan agreements that take into account everyone’s interests and help prevent one side from manipulating the other. Ideally, two sides should be able to overcome differences, bu
ding difficulty in defining their combination products and facing various challenges from selecting a combination to marketing it.

Following aspects would a
t a third party involvement is the best option when progress becomes impossible.

Defense Tactic #4: Bail Out

When you can’t persuade your counterparts to negotiate honestly and openly, and a third party mediator doesn’t help, then abandon the negotiations, at least temporarily. Sometimes
dd to the challenges in developing combination products:

Which markets to tap where the combination products can do fairly well?
Which combination prod
deals aren’t meant to be made, but you can also strengthen your position by walking away from the bargaining table. And sometimes, both parties need to reconsider what they really want and what they are willing to give. Certainly, walking away is a drastic last resort measure, but sometimes it’s the only wa
cts are meaningful and rational?
Which therapeutic categories to select?
Which Combinations can address unmet needs of the patients?
Do combin
y to get your counterpart to play fair. And the way you walk out also makes a difference in the result you produce.

For example, if you say, “I need more time to think this over,” or “I need to consult with my superior,” you imply that you’ll consider your counterpart’s position. Th
tions increase the patient compliance?
What would be the developing cost?
How to tackle the risks encountered during combination product developmen
is tactic works well if you’re dealing with people who negotiate in good faith. It gives you more time to plan a new strategy and gather additional information. But if you’re dealing with a negotiations shark, then saying you need more time is tantamount to raising a white flag. You send a message that says
t?

As combination products don't fit into the traditional categories of drugs, medical devices, or biological products, the USFDA is in the process of devel
, “I realize that my only option is to go with your proposal.” Then when you return to the bargaining table, your position is very weak.

On the other hand, if you withdraw by saying, “Let me know if you decide to take my offer,” that’s like saying, “This is my offer, take it or leav
ping new procedures for reviewing their safety, efficacy and quality.

Professional from academic institutions, pharmaceutical industries, health care indust
e it.” This statement effectively ends the negotiation process and lets your counterpart know that they have no choice but to take your offer.

Another option for walking out would be to say something like, “Obviously we’re getting nowhere. Let’s take some time to rethink things and if either of
y and representatives from various regulatory agencies are working out to design the regulatory requirements for manufacture and sale of combination products
us comes up with a new idea we can meet again.” With this method, either party can call another meeting without weakening their position. And most important, you leave your options open.

Using Your Defenses

Negotiations can be a complex process, even under the best circumstances. But dealing w
.

As there is an increasing trend of the combination products companies manufacturing such products should be able to tackle the problems involved in the de
ith an unethical counterpart can be impossible if you don’t know and use your defenses. When you maintain your high negotiating standards and protect yourself by not directly fighting back, you help to maintain a mature level of communication at the bargaining table. If that doesn’t work, you may need to ca
elopment. They need to be wiser in analyzing the market trends and the regulatory requirements.

Companies that provide selfless information through particip
ll in a third party mediator to oversee the process. And keep in mind that you can always bail out as a last resort.

When you use these four defense tactics against an unethical negotiator, you can protect yourself and your interests, and successfully reach more beneficial sales agreements.

Biography

tion in industry events and feedback to regulatory authorities would be able to face the challenges and will be successful in developing combination products

Tags

Links

E-Folder - How to Avoid Being Manipulated During Negotiations

Related Articles: