Comments on: Do Good-Looking Reps Do Better?

By: lk

lk — Fri, 25 May 2007 15:15:34 +0000

I believe that reps are somewhat like the rest of us: we want to think our work is valued because we do it well, not because of how we look. It may be true that looks count, but does everyone honestly want to admit that? We’d like to think we have some abilities and value beyond looks that will be gone someday and that our self worth is tied to more than our appearance.

By: jason

jason — Fri, 25 May 2007 01:37:42 +0000

This is one of my favorite sites for getting information, but if I see one more reference to CP I am going to scream! The people on there are obviously idiots, or those going to mess with the idiots. Have you seen most of the other posts on there. I am embarrassed to read them, let alone repeat anything.

By: roccaas

roccaas — Fri, 25 May 2007 00:37:24 +0000

To John Mack’s point, as I remember, the poll’s idea of “personal relationship” was that an MD would be influenced by Reps they had known for some time. It was a measure of trust (?) and longevity. This was a late ’90’s poll, so some of that was influenced by how often we golfed/fished/dined out/took to “speaker training” programs at resorts those MD’s. All of that stopped with the PhARMA regulations.

I always got a laugh out of the personal relationship answer because we all knew Reps (mostly female, but some male) who took a job in the industry to find an MD to marry (even if they broke up a marriage!). I’ve seen this on three occassions (Trophy Wife, Man on Man, and Female Rep breaks up a marriage to live with the female spouse of the MD!!) I think these are the areas that John Mack is pointing to, and I agree with his point. I think the “enthusiasm” answer was a cover for want of a better answer( T and A!)

By: John Mack

John Mack — Thu, 24 May 2007 22:35:23 +0000

To the point made by roccaas:

What doctors say and what they do may be two completely different things. In this case, they may have been embarrassed to rank “personal relationships” (what the hell does that mean anyway?) #1, so they put something else first — something they thought the pollster wanted to hear or something a “professional” should be influenced by!

By: ed

ed — Thu, 24 May 2007 22:26:30 +0000

Hi folks,

John, you make a good point about slovenly pigs. And I agree. It just wasn’t worded that way in the poll, although maybe it should have been. If only those sales reps could do what we do all day, which is hide behind computer screens!

And to roccaas, thanks for pointing out that poll. I seem to recall something like that, but don’t remember the specifics anymore.

Anyway, thanks to both of you for writing in.

By: roccaas

roccaas — Thu, 24 May 2007 22:16:37 +0000

The better question was asked by a professional survey group several years back. They asked DOCTORS what made them more likely to Rx a particular Rep’s product(s). The DOCTORS were by far most impressed by a Rep’s enthusiasm for their product(s) than: product knowledge, looks, samples, etc. Personal relationship was a close second, so there may be some credence to the good looks theory!!

By: John Mack

John Mack — Thu, 24 May 2007 22:07:55 +0000

Hi Ed!

I’ll take you up on this.

This survey can’t possibly yield any insights.

To sell, you first have to get in the door. So, a better question would have been: Do attractive reps get better access to physicians than do slovenly piglets?

I think a lot more than 16% would answer “Yes” to that!

And if you ask the corollary: Do reps who know their products get better access than those who don’t?

Well, that’s a chicken and egg kind of situation. How does the doc (receptionist actually) know if the rep is knowledgeable about products?

Etc., etc.