Simplifying the Review and Approval Process

Life Science Marketing Radio

The process of content review, approval, and distribution is often perceived as a "necessary evil" in life science marketing. If you're reading this, you probably know how challenging this process can be. In this episode, I had the pleasure of chatting with Annalise Ludtke, Senior Manager for Marketing Communications and Strategy at Vodori, and host of the Amend and Progress podcast. She offered some great insights on how to streamline and improve this process while still keeping everything compliant, fast, and efficient.

Right out of the gate, Annalise laid out the core problem Vodori aims to solve: the complexity of managing content in life science organizations. Companies need to develop a lot of promotional and educational materials, and getting those materials reviewed, approved, and distributed is a complicated process. The challenge is not just about creating great content—it’s about managing the feedback loops, the endless rounds of revisions, and the hurdles of compliance.

Without a solid process for reviewing and approving content, life science companies can’t effectively market their products. Of course, you need to make sure everything you put out there meets legal and regulatory standards.

Best Practices

Annalise shared some best practices that Vodori advocates, and these tips stood out to me as practical and actionable regardless of any platform you might deploy or none at all.

* Parallel vs. Sequential Review: One of the key strategies Annalise mentioned is the benefit of parallel review processes, where all the necessary stakeholders—whether it's medical, legal, or regulatory teams—are reviewing content simultaneously rather than sequentially. This can save a lot of time because it encourages open dialogue between the different reviewers. If someone has an issue with a piece of content, they can discuss it with the other reviewers in real-time, instead of waiting for feedback to trickle in one department at a time.

I appreciated her point that while parallel review might seem more chaotic at first glance, it actually fosters more collaboration. Reviewers can resolve conflicting feedback before it gets back to the content owner, which can speed things up dramatically.

* Clear Ownership and Communication: Clearly defined roles and responsibilities make everyone’s job easier. Annalise emphasized that it's critical for each reviewer to stay in their lane and provide feedback based on their specific area of expertise. This helps avoid confusion and unnecessary edits, which can slow down the process. Additionally, it's essential for reviewers to communicate clearly—indicating whether a comment is a required change or just a suggestion, for instance. This small change can remove a lot of friction and keep the process moving forward smoothly. Color-coding comments to signify importance is a simple yet effective way to clarify expectations.

* Real-Time Collaboration: I imagine most companies now have the ability for multiple stakeholders to collaborate on documents in real-time, where everyone can log in, see the comments being made by others, and even have discussions within the document itself. This not only saves time but also reduces the likelihood of conflicting feedback, which would require another round of calls or emails to resolve.

Is this content helpful?

Where is the data for that claim?

If someone has a question about a claim, you’d like to know where to find the data that supports it. It seems a simple idea to have a claims library. Vodori’s platform allows companies to store and manage approved claims, making it easier to track where and how certain claims are being used in marketing materials. Likewise when claims are updated with new data, you’d like to know where they have been used in the past to find all the places where the claim was referenced.

How does your process compare?

Beyond best practices, setting goals and understanding benchmarks is another step toward making the content review process less painful.

Let’s invite our industry peers out for drinks after work to compare our review processes! - No one said that.

Fortunately, Vodori publishes an annual Benchmarks Report that looks at various metrics like average review time and number of review cycles, giving companies a way to see how they stack up against industry standards.

By comparing your metrics to industry standards, your company can decide what might realistically make the most impact and set goals for improving your review process.

For instance, some teams might set goals around reducing the number of review cycles content has to go through or improving the speed at which content gets approved. Compliance is another area —perhaps setting a goal to reduce the number of compliance issues flagged during the review process.

Reducing time to market

In my experience, content was always the last thing on the list before a product launch. The impact of improving the content review process is huge. By reducing the time it takes to get content through review, life science companies can get their products to market faster, which ultimately benefits customers/patients. Vodori’s platform not only helps streamline the process but also provides peace of mind by ensuring compliance every step of the way.

As Annalise pointed out, the goal is not just to make the process easier for marketing teams but to improve outcomes across the board—for the company, the team, and, most importantly, the patients.

Annalise’s Podcast: Amend and Progress

Toward the end of our conversation, we touched on Annalise’s podcast, Amend and Progress, which focuses on improving content review processes in the life sciences. She’s been hosting conversations with experts both inside and outside of Vodori, tackling topics like best practices, industry trends, and even the potential role of AI in content review. You should definitely check it out.

Her podcast is a great example of how even niche topics can have a dedicated audience, offering valuable insights for those navigating the complexities of content management in regulated industries. I think there’s a lesson here for all of us in the podcasting world—if you’re solving a real problem for people, there’s always an audience, no matter how specialized the topic is.

Final Thoughts

I’ve been thinking a lot lately of my second episode way back around 2014 or 2015 about how marketing communications can change an organization. This is one of those opportunities. By taking the lead on setting standards and implementing best practices for the review and approval process, marketing can improve the work lives of their colleagues in other parts of the company as well as their own. The added benefit of developing processes with rigor lets marketing communications be seen as more than a service provider, but rather a leader in unlocking innovation and success in an organization.

Your deepest insights are your best branding. I’d love to help you share them. Chat with me about custom content for your life science brand. Or visit my website.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cclifescience.substack.com