This document proposes several classifications to analyze doctors: 1. It first proposes a basic classification based on current and potential product usage, but notes this provides limited information. 2. It then expands the classification to also assess doctors' cooperation with the company. 3. Further, a "double classification" is suggested that crosses current usage and potential usage, identifying doctors in different categories. 4. Finally, a "triple classification" is put forth, adding a dimension on doctors' styles to provide a more complete understanding. This triple approach is said to be the most informative for strategic planning and engagement.

1. Dr. Ammar Hasan Beck

2. PU : potential use by customer .
0 – 4 rating of both

3. PU classification
0 1 2 3 4
C B B+ A A+
Or ( 2 – 3 ) (4 – 5 ) >=10
Doctors patients / patients / (6 – 9 ) patients /
have day day patients / day
dissolved day Or
Or
problem Or Key person
against Company
B+company Or
company friend
friend Leader
doctors

4. i. This classification gives good information about
doctor’s job volume .
ii. This classification is blind about doctors’
cooperation with company .
iii. This classification is useless in follow up .
iv. This classification gives no information about
doctor style , needs , and attitudes

6. Double classification
• Cu : current use by product .
• Pu : potential use by customer .
0 – 4 rating of both

7. Doctor adoption process
4
3 advocacy
Repeat usage
2
1 usage
0 trial
0 evaluation
00
interest
awareness

8. PU classification
0 1 2 3 4
C B B+ A A+
Or ( 2 – 3 ) (4 – 5 ) >=10
Doctors patients / patients / (6 – 9 ) patients /
have day day patients / day
dissolved day Or
Or
problem Or Key person
against Company
B+company Or
company friend
friend Leader
doctors

9. Double classification
4 4–0 4–1 4–2 4–3 4–4
3 3–0 3–1 3–2 3–3 3–4
Cu 2 2–0 2–1 2–2 2–3 2–4
1 1–0 1–1 1–2 1–3 1–4
0 0–0 0–1 0–2 0–3 0–4
0 1 2 3 4
Pu

10. Double classification
MED HIGH VIP VIP VIP
MED HIGH HIGH VIP VIP
MED MED MED HIGH VIP
Cu
LOW LOW MED HIGH VIP
NO LOW MED HIGH VIP
Pu

11. Double classification
MED HIGH VIP VIP VIP 4–0 4–1 4–2 4–3 4–4
MED HIGH HIGH VIP VIP 3–0 3–1 3–2 3–3 3–4
MED MED MED HIGH VIP 2–0 2–1 2–2 2–3 2–4
LOW LOW MED HIGH VIP 1–0 1–1 1–2 1–3 1–4
NO LOW MED HIGH VIP 0–0 0–1 0–2 0–3 0–4

12. Double classification
Maintain and Highest 4–0 4–1 4–2 4–3 4–4
recognize
priority 3–0 3–1 3–2 3–3 3–4
2–0 2–1 2–2 2–3 2–4
Service when Priority
target
1–0 1–1 1–2 1–3 1–4
Stop Able
0–0 0–1 0–2 0–3 0–4

13. 4,4
4,3 3,3 3,4
4,2 1,4 2,3 2,4
4,1 0,3 0,4 1,3
3,0 3,1 3,2 4,0
0,2 1,2 2,0 2,1 2,2
0,0 0,1 1,0 1,1

14. 4,4
4,3 3,3 3,4
4,2 1,4 2,3 2,4
4,1 0,3 0,4 1,3
3,0 3,1 3,2 4,0
0,2 1,2 2,0 2,1 2,2
0,0 0,1 1,0 1,1

15. i. This classification gives good information about
doctor’s job volume .
ii. This classification gives good information about
doctors’ cooperation with company .
iii. This classification is useful in follow up .
iv. This classification gives no information about
doctor style , needs , and attitudes

17. Triple classification
• CU : current use by product .
• PU : potential use by customer .
0 – 4 rating of both
• SU : style usage .
Positive or Negative

19. TRIPLE CLASSIFICATION
Full details & perfect indicator
Negative Positive
Style Needs Style Needs
Driver Salary Analytical Good products
Expresser Samples Emotional New product
Economic support Driver Good MR
Scientific support
Psychiatric support

20. Triple classification
+ + + + +
(4 – 0) (4 – 1) (4 – 2) (4 – 3) (4 – 4)
4
(4 – 0) - (4 – 1) - (4 – 2) - (4 – 3) - (4 – 4) -
(3 – 0) + (3 – 1) + (3 – 2) + (3 – 3) + (3 – 4) +
3 (3 – 0) - (3 – 1) - (3 – 2) - (3 – 3) - (3 – 4) -
CU (2 – 0)
+
(2 – 1)
+
(2 – 2)
+
(2 – 3)
+
(2 – 4)
+
2
(2 – 0) - (2 – 1) - (2 – 2) - (2 – 3) - (2 – 4) -
(1 – 0) + (1 – 1) + (1 – 2) + (1 – 3) + (1 – 4)+
1
(1 – 0) - (1 – 1) - (1 – 2) - (1 – 3) - (1 – 4) -
(0 – 0) + (0 – 1) + (0 – 2) + (0 – 3) + (0 – 4) +
0
(0 – 0) - (0 – 1) - (0 – 2) - (0 – 3) - (0 – 4) -
0 1 2 3 4
SU PU

21. 4,4
(4,4)+ 4,3 3,3 3,4
4,2 1,4 2,3 2,4
(3,3)+ (3,4)+ (4,3)+ 4,1 0,3 0,4 1,3
3,0 3,1 3,2 4,0
(4,4) - (4,3) - (3,4) - (3,3) -
0,2 1,2 2,0 2,1 2,2
0,0 0,1 1,0 1,1
(4,2)+ (1,4)+ (2,3)+ (2,4)+
(4,1)+ (0,3)+ (0,4)+ (1,3)+
(3,0)+ (3,1)+ (3,2)+ (4,0)+
(0,4) - (1,4) - (2,4) - (0,3) - (1,3) - (2,3) -
(4,0) - (4,1) - (4,2) - (3,0) - (3,1) - (3,2) -
(1,0)+ (2,0)+ (1,1)+ (1,2)+ (2,2) - (2,1)+ (2,2)+
(2,1) - (1,2) - (1,1) - (0,2)+ (0,2) - (2,0) - (1,0) - (0,1)+ (0,1) - (0,0)+ (0,0) -

22. (4,4)+
(3,3)+(3,4)+ (4,3)+
(4,4) - (4,3) - (3,4) - (3,3) -
(4,2)+ (1,4)+ (2,3)+ (2,4)+
(4,1)+ (0,3)+ (0,4)+ (1,3)+
(3,0)+ (3,1)+ (3,2)+ (4,0)+
(0,4) - (1,4) - (2,4) - (0,3) - (1,3) - (2,3) -
(4,0) - (4,1) - (4,2) - (3,0) - (3,1) - (3,2) -
(1,0)+ (2,0)+ (1,1)+ (1,2)+ (2,2) - (2,1)+ (2,2)+
(2,1) - (1,2) - (1,1) - (0,2)+ (0,2) - (2,0) - (1,0) - (0,1)+ (0,1) - (0,0)+ (0,0) -

23. i. This classification gives good information about
doctor’s job volume .
ii. This classification gives good information about
doctors’ cooperation with company .
iii. This classification is useful in follow up .
iv. This classification gives good information about
doctor style , needs , and attitudes

24. Strategic planning