The implementation of effective communication strategies in the medical-scientific and pharmaceutical business context is essential to ensure accurate dissemination of information, promote collaboration among stakeholders, and support regulatory and marketing objectives. In an industry where credibility, clarity, and compliance are crucial, strategic communication serves as a bridge between scientific innovation and its practical application. This involves translating complex scientific data into accessible content for diverse audiences, including healthcare professionals, regulatory authorities, and patients. Moreover, in the pharmaceutical sector, communication strategies must align with ethical standards and regulatory frameworks, while also fostering corporate reputation and stakeholder trust. As the healthcare landscape evolves, leveraging digital tools and multidisciplinary approaches becomes increasingly important in crafting impactful, science-driven communication tailored to both internal and external audiences.
What does “communication” mean?
In the social sciences, “communication” is broadly defined as a dense network of social exchanges shaped by cultural and conventional norms. It is not just an exchange of information but also an exchange of social relationships that depend on a shared culture or, at the very least, a shared language. A distinction is made between “language” and “speech”: language is an abstract, socially determined symbolic system, while speech (or “linguistic ability”) is the cognitive faculty that allows humans to communicate symbolically (1). Effective communication, therefore, requires more than a shared spoken language: it demands shared symbolic understandings. For example, this becomes evident in generational communication gaps, where people may speak the same language yet fail to connect due to different symbolic systems shaped by distinct cultural environments. The rapid evolution of digital media has amplified this divergence by introducing new “digital languages.” Marshall McLuhan’s theory that media shape not only the content but also the form and perception of communication remains highly relevant. He suggested that communication technologies act as extensions of human faculties and alter the way we experience the world. McLuhan’s work builds on earlier contributions by philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, especially his concept of “language games.” Wittgenstein argued that the meaning of words lies not in their direct reference to objects or ideas but in their use within specific social contexts or practices – language games governed by shared, often implicit rules (2). These rules are not static; they evolve with context and convention. Thus, language is a social tool, not a private one, and MSLs should demonstrate high flexibility to adapt to different “language games” in order to be successful in their relationships with different stakeholders.
Scientific communication by MSLs: ethics, methods, and media tools
The communicative role of the MSL, as outlined by the Medical Science Liaison Society (MSLS), is to provide ethical, professional, and non-promotional scientific communication (3). MSLs must convey evidence-based, balanced information without misleading omissions or promotional bias, and their actions must align with medical strategy rather than commercial goals. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, digital platforms have become crucial tools for MSLs, offering flexibility but also posing new challenges like reduced engagement or loss of non-verbal communication. While digital interactions are practical, in-person meetings are still often preferred (4), likely because non-verbal cues – such as warmth and perceived competence – significantly influence interpersonal trust and rapport. Digital transformation has also shifted the landscape of opinion leadership. Alongside traditional Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs), there are now Digital Opinion Leaders (DOLs), who influence peers via social media and digital channels. MSLs are encouraged to monitor but not actively participate in public social media discussions unless explicitly permitted by corporate policies.
The importance of MSL communication skills from the clinicians’ point of view
One key survey by AstraZeneca explored what clinicians value in MSLs (5). The most appreciated traits included scientific product knowledge, credibility, therapeutic expertise, responsiveness, and communication skills. Top MSL resources included unbiased product information, updates on therapeutic areas, and opportunities for research or educational collaboration. Interestingly, dissatisfaction with MSLs often stemmed not from scientific shortcomings but from poor communication or behavior, such as aggressiveness, biased questions, overly commercial tones, or infrequent contact. This suggests that interpersonal and communicative skills, often underemphasized in training, are vital for maintaining strong relationships with KOLs. In response, clinicians have recommended prioritizing communication, networking, and relational skills in MSL training, alongside continued scientific and regulatory education. In essence, successful MSLs must combine technical knowledge with the ability to navigate the social rules of the “language game”, as Wittgenstein would have said.
Building a corporate communication strategy and application for medical stakeholders
The final section argues for a structured, measurable approach to communication within organizations. Terms like “quality” or “effective communication” are inherently abstract, and using them without clear metrics risks vagueness (6). Therefore, organizations should integrate communication into strategic frameworks that define specific inputs (behaviors, tactics, actions) and outputs (results). A corporate communication strategy is the overarching set of communicative decisions based on organizational goals and anticipated stakeholder reactions. It must be proactive, adaptable, and aligned with business objectives. Importantly, it also requires recognition of diverse audiences, communication channels, and evolving norms (7).
The ultimate objective of a communication strategy in the context of the MSL–KOL relationship is to foster deep engagement, which arises from the integration of three foundational pillars: a robust cultural background, professional ethics, and the ability to establish authentic interpersonal connections. While communication must remain scientifically rigorous and impartial, the inherently social dimension, previously discussed, reminds us of an essential consideration: every act of communication inevitably conveys aspects of the communicator’s identity. As emphasized in management theory, the human dimension of business interactions must not be underestimated.
In the conceptual framework proposed here – metaphorically likened to a pantheon – alongside the central pillar of scientific knowledge, we elevate ethics and professionalism as essential structural elements. These are critical to achieving communication objectives characterized by meaningful engagement: not merely informing, but also building relationships, fostering coordination, and inspiring shared purpose. It is essential to uphold, with intellectual integrity, a clear distinction between the medical and corporate domains. Nonetheless, identifying a shared overarching goal – namely, the improvement of patient care – should serve as the linchpin of the dialogue between these two spheres, and as the primary engine driving innovation within the pharmaceutical sector.
Conclusion
To ensure deep engagement, communication must be authentic and bidirectional. Listening is as crucial as speaking, and messages must be crafted based on a thorough understanding of context and audience. This is especially true for professionals like MSLs, whose credibility depends as much on how they communicate as on what they communicate. Communication can be regarded as a true strategic lever in the MSL profession. It is not merely a tool, but a bridge connecting scientific knowledge, ethical values, and human relationships. To be effective, it must be planned, refined, and evaluated.
It is precisely through communication constructed in this way that trust, synergy, and innovation can emerge within the healthcare sector.
References
- Areté International Journal of Phylosophy, Human & Social Sciences HC Series – VOLUME 1-2021 ISSN 2531-6249
- Wittgenstein L. Philosophical Investigations. New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe (1953).
- MSLS Medical Science Liaison Activity Guidelines 2024 version 2.0
- Battaglia V, Landi F. MSL Role and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): From Traditional to the Future. JMSCR. 2023 Dec 02. doi: 10.18535/jmscr/v11i11.02.
- Moss RJ, Smith EB, Anderson G, Rozenfeld V, Evangelista C, Trahey C, Venuti C, Weiner EJ. A Survey of Key Opinion Leaders to Support Curriculum Development in Advanced Medical Science Liaison Training. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015 Jan;49(1):45-49. doi: 10.1177/2168479014549859. PMID: 30222457.
- Armstrong, M (2020). Armstrong’s Handbook of Performance Management: An Evidence-Based Guide to Delivering High Performance (7th ed.). London: Kogan Page.
- Clampitt PG (2016). Communicating for Managerial Effectiveness (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
About the authors:
Alessandro Dinatale, MD
I am a cardiology resident in the final year of my training. Actively involved in clinical research and always interested in communication and scientific outreach, I am currently exploring career opportunities in the field of Medical Affairs. I recently completed a master’s degree in Clinical Research and Medical Affairs. The article I intend to submit is derived from the thesis I wrote for that program.
Fabio Landi
I hold a degree in Pharmaceutical Chemistry and have been working with pharmaceutical companies since 1994.
I have worked with Servier, AstraZeneca, GSK, and for the last 20 years, with Takeda Italy. I have held various roles and have been part of Medical Affairs since 2012, where I currently serve as the Oncology MSL & Medical Excellence Manager.
I also collaborate as a Professor with Marconi University in Rome as part of the Master’s program in ‘Clinical Research Medical Affairs: Drugs and Medical Devices.’
Have an opinion on this article? Send a message to the editor.