Here is what was shared with me. 3 reps per territory, less if access or dollar volume warrants it. Who goes/who stays is based on what is less litigious for Merck. Most decisions made by a third party looking at legal risk. The talk about performance is garbage, said "we know performance structure would never stand up in a legal environment, the metrics are not reliable." 12 reps per CTL, do the math. Territories will not change. Less DCO's and much less CTL's DF different structure.
I find it hard to believe there will be 3 reps per geography. We currently have 4 in most. Maybe the DCO is speculating? I believe 2 is a more appropriate number per geography.
This was posted pretty much exactly.in another thread awhile ago. Tough to know if you're being persistent with what you know or bent on faking everyone out.
You have to presume territories will shrink from 4 to 2 reps but hope it will shrink from 4 to 3. Last week's teleconferences were poorly done. It introduces more questions than providing answers. The only thing they revealed was A & D for the most part will remain. This is freaking out everyone else. Everyone else is at risk. Maybe they want this scenario. It would of been better if they did not identify the survivors. They should hold another teleconference this week to clarify if they can, the strategy. Merck is a very conservative company, Far from a maverick. That being said, cutting from 4 to 2 reps is a very aggressive move for Merck. It also will hasten the sales curve decline. The bottom line the level of drama was extremely elevated.
Going from 4 to 2 reps will have virtually no impact on sales and management knows it. ALso, I'd believe nothing that the DCO says. That same loser told you there were no planned layoffs only 8-10 months ago,
I continue to laugh at the reps who have been hypnotized into believing that their current efforts out on territory somehow translate in measurable market share/sales growth. Like it or not, doctors now represent a relatively minor component in what drugs a patient receives. We all know this, but continue to hang on blindly to the notion that physicians, who you have all these "great relationships" with, are going to take the time, effort and expense and fight the behemoth called managed care. With that being said, do you really think that going from 4 reps to 2, in an environment where everyone is just pissing into a 30 mph headwind, is going to have drastic negative effects and hasten the sales curve decline? PLEASE!
"There will always be a need for customer/representative interactions." Yeah sure ass licks You'll believe anything they'll tell you wont you?
You are totally incorrect. If you were correct layoff 100% of sales and see what happens. You have no clue man. I guarantee salesl will tumble when they execute this layoff play. 100% guaranteed!
Ohhhh frightened little rep. Keep telling yourself that if it'll make you feel better. The truth is that there are still too many of you even after this next round of lay-offs.
I promise. The research is evident. 90% of today's reps could be removed from the earth without a whisper. The impact a rep has in nominal in the current market. Time and economies change. It has changed to the point of "silly". We shot ourselves in the foot during the 90s and are now paying the price. This was once one of the best jobs in America. Not so much, now.
This is the fact! Reps have minimal impact... it's been well known for a very long time. You've been rewarded on a myth for as long as you've been an employee. But the myth has served its purpose. You worked. The fact that so many reps have not figured this out says a lot about reps. As for layoffs, let's look at what's been communicated. A&D reps will be retained as long as their reviews are mid pack or above. B&C reps will be cut. DF will be placed in new structure although their numbers are small. In essence, you have at least a 50% cut. Novartis has done something similar in the recent past. Why is this a surprise to so many? Well, we're talking about people who've spent a career believing the myth. The more I talk with managers, insiders, etc... the more I realize that "Significant" means significant which means greater than 50%. All that being said, I still wish everyone the very best. Cuts hurt us all in some way. On the bright side, I have yet to meet someone that has left Merck and claims to miss it. I take them at face value.
Sales are in a tailspin now genius, and that's with the ridiculous over-the-top army of reps and managers we currently have in place. The reps primary function today is (and has been for quite some time) to support a management structure above, plain and simple. We all wish this wasn't the case, but if it gives you any solace, the house of cards that is about to collapse, will finally take a lot of empty suited management stiffs with it
