The set-up cost is paid once
Access negotiation, governance approval and partner onboarding are the expensive parts of a first project. In a programme they are amortised across everything that follows.
Offering 5 of 5
A standing evidence capability, rather than a series of projects.
An ongoing relationship across a portfolio or a region: a rolling evidence plan, repeat analyses on an agreed cadence, and one team that already knows your therapy area, your markets and your internal audiences.
Programme Partnership
Why a programme costs less than the projects it replaces
Nobody re-learns your therapy area
A project team is briefed, becomes useful, and disperses. A programme team is already useful on day one of the next question.
Questions get cheaper as they accumulate
The fourth question in a market costs a fraction of the first, because the cohort logic, the approvals and the data understanding already exist.
You get a plan rather than a queue
A rolling evidence plan means the evidence arrives when the decision needs it, rather than when the procurement cycle allows it.
5
Programme Partnership
An ongoing relationship across a portfolio or a region: a rolling evidence plan, repeat analyses on an agreed cadence, and one team that already knows your therapy area, your markets and your internal audiences..
- Timeline
- Designed around your planning cycle, typically annual with quarterly review.
- Buy it when
- Evidence generation is a continuing need across a portfolio or a region, and you are tired of paying the set-up cost of a first project every time.
- Do not buy it when
- You have one question and no line of sight to the next one. Buy the offering that answers it, and come back when the pattern is clear.
Deliverables
What you actually receive.
Named, dated and agreed at scoping. Every one of these is a thing you can hold, circulate internally and be held to, not a description of an activity.
A rolling evidence plan
What evidence is needed, for which decision, by when, across the portfolio or region. Reviewed and re-cut on an agreed cycle.
Named deliverables on a cadence
Agreed outputs at agreed intervals rather than a standing retainer with vague scope.
A standing analysis capability
Cohort logic, approvals and partner relationships maintained between projects, so a new question starts from a warm state.
Regular review cycles
Monthly or quarterly stakeholder reviews, with the evidence roadmap updated against what has changed in the market.
Priority access to the team
The same senior people, retained on your programme rather than allocated per project.
An evidence roadmap you own
A living document your internal stakeholders can see, so evidence planning stops being a series of unrelated requests.
How it runs
Four steps, and you see the direction before you see the deck.
Programme design
We map the decisions coming over the next twelve to twenty-four months and the evidence each one needs.
Foundation
Access, governance and partner relationships established once, across the markets in scope.
Cadence
Agreed deliverables at agreed intervals, with the plan reviewed against what has changed.
Review and re-plan
Formal review cycles where the roadmap is re-cut rather than simply reported against.
Alongside every engagement: weekly updates, methodology agreed before work starts, quality control at every phase, interim reporting rather than a single reveal, and milestones you accept rather than discover.
What it feeds into
Start the conversation
Programme scope is designed together. The first step is a conversation about the decisions coming, not a proposal.
Is this the one you need?
Describe the decision you are trying to make. If a cheaper offering answers it, we will tell you that instead.