Marina Hickson Managing Director, Vivanti February 24, 2026
Pharmaceutical innovation exists to improve patient outcomes. Yet between laboratory discovery and patient benefit lies a critical intermediary: conversation. The way clinical evidence is explained, challenged and contextualised in discussions with healthcare professionals (HCPs) plays a meaningful role in how new therapies are understood and adopted in practice.
At the same time, the profile of those leading these conversations is changing.
A Broader Talent Model
Pharmaceutical commercial models across Europe have shifted towards hybrid engagement structures and greater use of Contract Sales Organisations (CSOs), increasing flexibility in how field teams are deployed.¹ ²
Recruitment patterns have diversified in parallel. In the UK, representatives are not required to hold medical, pharmacy or nursing qualifications. Regulatory assurance is instead provided through completion of the ABPI Medical Representatives Examination within two years of appointment.³
This structure prioritises commercial literacy and compliance certification rather than formal clinical training. As field teams become more diverse in academic background and deployment more flexible, ensuring consistent applied readiness becomes increasingly important.
The commercial model has evolved structurally. Field teams are more diverse. Deployment is more flexible. Therapeutic environments are more complex. Yet governance mechanisms have not evolved at the same pace.
Certification, Cost, and the Training Burden
The ABPI examination establishes a regulatory baseline. It confirms knowledge of compliance frameworks and core scientific principles.³
Certification, however, does not eliminate the need for structured onboarding and ongoing therapeutic education. For representatives entering the profession without formal clinical qualifications, training and rehearsal are operational necessities rather than discretionary investments.
Pharmaceutical companies already commit significant resources to preparing their field organisations. Benchmark research across 25 pharmaceutical companies conducted by Best Practices, LLC found that sales training functions operate with average annual budgets of approximately $5.9 million, with more than one-third of that investment dedicated to onboarding new representatives.⁸ This reflects the operational reality that field teams require structured education, rehearsal and ongoing scientific development before they can confidently engage healthcare professionals.
Training is therefore embedded within the commercial model as an unavoidable cost. The question is not whether organisations train, but whether that investment translates efficiently into demonstrated readiness.
The Gap: Knowledge Versus Readiness
Pharmaceutical organisations measure training completion and knowledge recall effectively. What remains harder to measure is applied readiness – the ability to perform credibly in a live, evidence-based discussion.
Meta-analytic evidence supports the role of simulation and structured rehearsal in strengthening applied competence and communication performance in healthcare contexts.⁶ ⁷
Traditional training confirms understanding. It does not consistently validate performance under challenge. Field coaching provides insight, but retrospectively.
The structural gap is pre-deployment validation.
Beyond Launch: Continuous Knowledge Pressure
Therapeutic landscapes evolve rapidly. Industry data show sustained shifts in innovation geography, R&D intensity and competitive dynamics across global markets.⁸
Healthcare professionals operate in time-constrained and increasingly data-dense environments. Evidence from systematic reviews demonstrates that pharmaceutical company interactions can influence exposure to therapeutic information and prescribing patterns.⁹
The clarity and integrity of scientific communication therefore matter. Development cannot be episodic; it must be continuous.
Why This Area Is Ripe for Automation
Industry analysis highlights increasing complexity in customer engagement models and growing pressure on life sciences organisations to demonstrate measurable performance across commercial functions.¹ ²
Where training is already embedded as a structural cost, automation offers optimisation rather than disruption. Simulation-enabled rehearsal tools can integrate alongside existing learning systems, functioning as a capability layer rather than replacing established governance frameworks.
Extending structured rehearsal into regulated commercial environments is therefore not a paradigm shift, but an efficiency shift.
From Knowledge to Demonstrated Readiness
AVA Trainer was developed to strengthen clinical conversations before they occur. Its significance lies not only in its technical capability, but in its structural role: AVA functions as a foundational layer beneath clinical dialogue.
It does not replace certification; it operationalises it. It does not duplicate training content; it validates performance.
Through scenario-based simulations, representatives rehearse clinical discussions, objection handling, compliance-sensitive messaging and stakeholder-specific engagement in a controlled environment. The focus is applied performance under challenge – the dimension that ultimately determines credibility in front of an HCP.⁶
In hybrid commercial ecosystems, a shared readiness tool introduces transparency across internal and CSO teams. It reduces variability and embeds verification before exposure.
Looking Ahead
Certification confirms baseline knowledge; it does not guarantee applied competence under scrutiny.³
When readiness is assumed rather than validated, variability enters scientific dialogue. That variability influences interpretation, confidence and ultimately therapeutic integration.⁹
Where trust in science must be actively maintained, erosion of credibility does not remain a commercial issue; it becomes a patient issue.
Leaders who formalise applied readiness as a measurable capability (rather than an assumed outcome of training) safeguard scientific integrity at the point where innovation meets clinical practice.
Delay carries risk. Incremental variability, conversation by conversation, gradually weakens credibility. Rebuilding trust is invariably more costly than verifying readiness in the first place.
If this article helped you, we’d love to help you further. Reach out to our team today:
Info@vivanti.eu
References
Deloitte. (2025). 2025 Life Sciences Executive Outlook. https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/health-care/life-sciences-and-health-care-industry-outlooks/2025-life-sciences-executive-outlook.html
Deloitte. (2025). Unlocking the Future of Customer Engagement in Pharma. https://www.deloitte.com/ch/en/Industries/life-sciences-health-care/analysis/unlocking-the-future-of-customer-engagement-in-pharma.html
Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI). (2024). Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry 2024. https://www.abpi.org.uk/publications/code-of-practice-for-the-pharmaceutical-industry-2024/
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Wholesale and Manufacturing Sales Representatives – Occupational Outlook Handbook. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/sales/wholesale-and-manufacturing-sales-representatives.htm
Salas, E., et al. (2012). The science of training and development in organizations. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436661
Cook, D.A., et al. (2020). Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: systematic review and meta-analysis. Advances in Simulation. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-020-00138-9
Cheng, A., et al. (2020). Improving the quality of simulation-based research in healthcare. Simulation in Healthcare. https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000416
Best Practices, LLC. (2014). Pharmaceutical Sales Training Excellence: Tools, Processes & Resources That Drive Effectiveness (PSM-292). Best Practices, LLC. (Proprietary benchmarking report; available from the publisher).
Spurling, G.K.P., et al. (2010). Information from pharmaceutical companies and physicians’ prescribing. PLoS Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000352
