Exploring traditional vs mission-style launch planning
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.
– Mike Tyson
Tyson’s famous quip has long been mythologized and applied to every field from market trading to business to military strategy. But while the quote has become immortalized, its context is often forgotten. Tyson delivered the line – actually “everyone has a plan until they get hit for the first time” – in 1987, in response to questions about his upcoming heavyweight title fight against Tyrell Biggs. Biggs was outspoken in the buildup to the fight, talking up his superior technical ability, height, and reach, and claiming that Tyson was “strong, but his strength will not hurt me.” In the event, Iron Mike was both vindicated and victorious. Biggs’ pre-fight strategy was demolished beneath a barrage of Tyson power shots; the seventh-round Technical Knockout a formality. Whatever plan the Olympic champion may have had, it did not stand up to scrutiny.
The reason Tyson’s quote endures is that it asks a timeless question: what happens when your best-laid plans fail? If your strategy isn’t working, what do you do next? That question remains extremely pertinent for pharma companies, for whom months of pre-launch planning can be undone by a single unexpected market signal.
In their latest whitepaper, Impatient Health identifies two distinct approaches to launch planning. Traditional launch planning is “shackled to the 30-day post-mortem, a cadence that assumes the market remains static between meetings” – leaving teams vulnerable to an unexpected punch in the face. Mission-style launch planning, by contrast, is “less of an exercise in anticipation and more of an exercise in practical adaptation.” When the blows begin to fall, will you have the agility to bob, weave, or recover when a punch inevitably lands?
Traditional vs mission-style launch planning
Primary goal: prediction vs preparedness
Traditional launch planning relied on scripting the 24 months immediately post-launch. Real life, however, rarely follows a script. Competitors enter the market, patients and HCPs react in unexpected ways, and payers restrict access more than originally forecast. What happens when teams suddenly find themselves off-script? Mission-style launch planning advocates preparedness over prediction – it’s all about building the capacity to act. Instead of sticking rigidly to the tactical script, teams become adept at improvising in pursuit of strategic objectives when unexpected market signals occur. Impatient Health describes how “new decision strategies must be more objective-based, granting decision-makers greater freedom to determine how those objectives might be achieved.”
Command style: tactical vs intent-based
Traditional launch planning focused on the when and the how. In a mission-style launch environment, “leadership must shift from being ‘micromanagers of the how’ to ‘architects of the why’,” says Impatient Health. “This is the difference between putting an emphasis on instruction versus an emphasis on objectives.” Traditionally, pharma teams have been good at planning but weak at strategy. Per Impatient Health, “commercial teams don’t actually do launch strategy – not as any other industry would recognize it.” A plan is tactical, focused on the fine details of launch, whereas strategy is big-picture. When leadership focuses on strategic thinking, teams have a clear north star to guide them – regardless of what happens in the market. An overarching strategy clarifies your objectives when a plan goes off track.
Risk approach: mitigation vs forecasting
The approach to risk management in mission-style launch planning is akin to ‘hope for the best but prepare for the worst’. Traditionally, teams would aim to prevent friction by mitigating risk as far as possible. What this approach fails to take into account, however, is that launching a new drug is an inherently risky endeavor. There’s no hope of mitigating risk completely – it’s like stepping into the ring to face Iron Mike with a plan to evade every punch. Mission-style launch planning advocates pre-authorizing responses. A few hits are unavoidable; this approach assumes that what matters is how you react when they land. Beyond simply having a plan, a mission-style approach means giving team members the authority to action a response as soon as market signals indicate the plan is off track – resulting in a rapid reaction to changing circumstances.
Review tempo: Calendar-led vs insight-led
Impatient Health highlights how “traditional launch planning is shackled to the 30-day post-mortem, a cadence that assumes the market remains static between meetings.” The market, of course, does not remain static – and so plans must change to reflect shifting market realities. Mission-style launch planning, by contrast, employs “a continuous series of micro-adjustments” that allow for immediate tactical shifts – no waiting around for the appropriate monthly meeting or review window. These micro-adjustments must be informed by continuous market intelligence; a real-time view of the market that allows teams to act at the pace of change.
Drawing from over a decade of military intelligence training, Tony Page, Within3’s Senior Vice President of Insight Analytics and a former military intelligence officer, stated that:
“While planning is critical, no plan survives contact with the enemy. The key to maneuvering under fire is a continuous flow of intelligence that allows for rapid course-correction based on changing conditions.”
Unlike Tyrell Biggs preparing to face a fit and motivated Mike Tyson, launch teams needn’t be stunned by the first blow. Instead, they can enter the ‘ring’ with a dynamic, real-time market intelligence tool that enables them to quickly adjust their plans. Within3’s Launch Intelligence™ gives teams the intel to get their bearings and fight back when things start to go wrong. Rather than enter the market with a rigid, highly tactical, calendar-led plan, teams get precise answers to their most critical questions, anchored in their unique strategic plans and market reality, within minutes – empowering them to respond while there’s chance to impact outcomes. Planning is certainly essential, but its most important role is to provide the baseline understanding that enables quick reactions. Success is not about sticking rigidly to the launch plan – it’s about responding to setbacks and opportunities in the most agile, adaptable way possible. For that, teams need Launch Intelligence™.
Explore Launch Intelligence™ today – book a demo.
