Abstract
Background: Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) play a critical role in pharmaceutical organizations; however, performance measurement systems for MSLs are often oriented toward activity-based metrics rather than value creation. This paradigm fails to capture the strategic contribution of MSLs to patient outcomes and organizational objectives.
Objective: To examine the limitations of traditional MSL performance metrics and propose a framework for patient outcome-focused key performance indicators (KPIs) that better reflect the true value of MSL activities.
Methods: A comprehensive analysis of existing literature on MSL performance measurement was conducted, incorporating recent global survey data and industry position statements to identify current challenges and opportunities for improvement.
Results: Current MSL evaluation systems exhibit significant misalignment between measured activities and strategic value creation. The proposed framework shifts focus from quantitative activity metrics to qualitative patient outcome indicators, emphasizing the direct connection between MSL activities and healthcare improvements.
Conclusions: A fundamental redefinition of MSL performance measurement is necessary to align organizational evaluation systems with the strategic value MSLs provide to patients, healthcare providers, and pharmaceutical organizations.
Keywords: Medical Science Liaison, Key Performance Indicators, Patient Outcomes, Value Creation, Performance Measurement
Introduction
Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) have evolved from product-focused sales support roles to strategic scientific partners within pharmaceutical organizations (Battaglia & Landi, 2023). Despite this evolution, performance measurement systems have largely remained anchored to traditional activity-based metrics that fail to capture the true value MSLs provide to healthcare ecosystems. This disconnect creates organizational challenges in demonstrating MSL value and optimizing resource allocation for maximum patient benefit.
The pharmaceutical industry increasingly recognizes the need for MSL performance measurement systems that align with strategic objectives and patient outcomes (Theron et al., 2021). However, the complexity of MSL activities and their long-term impact on healthcare delivery create unique measurement challenges that traditional KPI frameworks inadequately address.
Current Challenges in MSL Performance Measurement
Recent global survey data reveal significant dissatisfaction with current MSL performance measurement approaches. Dyer et al. (2025) found that 67% of medical affairs professionals reported difficulty in accurately measuring MSL performance, with only 3% considering current KPIs “very effective” in capturing MSL contributions. This dissatisfaction stems from fundamental limitations in existing measurement paradigms.
Traditional MSL metrics typically focus on easily quantifiable activities such as the number of key opinion leader (KOL) engagements (92% of organizations), scientific presentations delivered, or conferences attended (Dyer et al., 2025). While these metrics provide operational visibility, they fail to address critical questions: Did these activities improve patient outcomes? Did they enhance healthcare provider decision-making? Did they contribute to advancing medical science?
The Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (2019) consensus statement emphasizes that MSL activities should contribute to progress in medical science and the development of medical care. However, current measurement systems inadequately capture these contributions, creating a paradox where MSL success is measured by activities that may have minimal correlation with their intended outcomes.
The Paradigm Shift: From Activity to Value
The proposed paradigm shift requires redefining MSL performance measurement from activity documentation to value creation assessment. This transformation involves three fundamental changes in measurement philosophy:
First, KPIs must transition from retrospective activity counting to prospective value planning. Rather than measuring how many interactions occurred, organizations should assess how these interactions contributed to predefined patient outcome objectives. This requires establishing clear causal links between MSL activities and healthcare improvements.
Second, measurement systems must incorporate the temporal dimension of MSL impact. Unlike sales metrics with immediate quantifiable results, MSL value creation often manifests over extended periods through improved clinical decision-making, enhanced healthcare provider knowledge, and ultimately, better patient outcomes. Performance measurement systems must accommodate these extended impact timelines.
Third, qualitative value indicators must receive equal or greater weighting than quantitative activity measures. Dyer et al. (2025) found that 52% of respondents favored mostly qualitative metrics, yet organizations predominantly use quantitative measures due to measurement convenience. This misalignment undermines the validity of performance evaluations.
Discussion
The transition from activity-based to value-focused MSL performance measurement presents both opportunities and challenges. The primary opportunity lies in better alignment between organizational investment in MSL activities and demonstrated value creation. When MSLs are evaluated based on patient outcome contributions, their activities naturally orient toward maximum healthcare impact.
However, implementation challenges include establishing reliable measurement methodologies for patient outcome contributions, managing the temporal lag between MSL activities and measurable outcomes, and developing organizationally feasible data collection systems. These challenges require systematic approaches to measurement system design and implementation.
The benefits of value-focused measurement extend beyond improved performance evaluation. Such systems provide clearer strategic direction for MSL activities, enhance organizational understanding of MSL contributions, and facilitate more effective resource allocation decisions. Additionally, they support MSL professional development by providing meaningful feedback on value creation rather than activity completion.
Conclusion
The current state of MSL performance measurement represents a significant missed opportunity for pharmaceutical organizations to optimize their investment in scientific engagement activities. The proposed shift from activity-based to patient outcome-focused KPIs addresses fundamental limitations in existing measurement approaches while better aligning performance evaluation with MSL strategic value.
Successful implementation of this paradigm shift requires organizational commitment to measurement system redesign, investment in appropriate data collection capabilities, and acceptance of more complex but more meaningful performance indicators. The potential benefits—improved patient outcomes, enhanced MSL effectiveness, and better organizational resource allocation—justify the required investment in measurement system transformation.
Future research should focus on developing standardized methodologies for measuring patient outcome contributions and establishing industry benchmarks for value-focused MSL performance indicators.
References
Battaglia, V., & Landi, F. (2023). MSL role and key performance indicators (KPIs): From traditional to the future. Journal of Medical Science Clinical Research, 11, 6-28.
Dyer, S., Hyder, C., & Kraemer, J. (2025). Challenges of key performance indicators and metrics for measuring medical science liaison performance: Insights from a global survey. Pharmacy, 13, 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy13020051
Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. (2019). Consensus statement on medical science liaison activities. JPMA.
Theron, P., Britland, M., Holder, D., Ikeda, Y., Rewers, R. F., & Tiku, A. (2021). Promoting best practices for medical science liaisons position statement from the APPA, IFAPP, MAPS and MSLS. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 55(6), 1139-1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-021-00310-y
About the author:
Yusuke Izumi, MBA
He is a results-driven Medical Operations and Excellence leader with nearly 20 years in pharma and biotech, spanning Senior MSL, MSL Lead, Field Medical Excellence, Medical Operations, and Medical Excellence & Medical Information leadership roles. He specializes in optimizing medical operations, orchestrating cross-functional delivery, and leading digital transformation to boost efficiency, compliance, and customer value, particularly in rare diseases. With deep expertise in medical information management, system implementation, and global–local regulatory alignment, he consistently designs cost-effective solutions that streamline processes and elevate stakeholder satisfaction.
A strategic, collaborative leader, he builds high-performing teams and embeds continuous improvement, standardization, and best practices across organizations. Known for reliability and pragmatism, he advances enterprise initiatives, strengthens field medical impact in rare disease portfolios, and delivers measurable outcomes aligned with organizational and customer objectives.
Have an opinion on this article? Send a message to the editor.