| Main Subject |
Hubs | Hubbers | Topics | Request |
| #1 in Business | Subscribe Email Print |
|
You are here: Home > Business > Sales Training > 5 Ways to Detect a Phony Ph.D. |
|
Main Subject - 5 Ways to Detect a Phony Ph.D.
I was sharing the regional Toastmaster’s International podium with a fine, enthusiastic speaker. He was fun, his stories were crisp, and the audience loved him. So, when one of my clients asked if I knew a spe According to USFDA, a combination product is one composed of any combination of a drug and device; biological product and device; drug and biological product aker they could hire for an annual sales meeting in Palm Springs, I mentioned this guy. But as I did, I felt just a little uneasy about recommending him, so I decided to perform a little due diligence by researc ; or drug, device, and biological product and fixed dose combination would include two or more combinations of drug. Examples of combination products may in hing his credentials. What really stood out for me was the fact that he called himself “Doctor.” In itself, this is no big deal, as my trade name is Dr. Gary S. Goodman, so who am I to take issue with this? If lude drug-coated devices, drugs packaged with delivery devices in medical kits, and drugs and devices packaged separately but intended to be used together. you have a Ph.D. or an M.D. or other “doctoral” credentials, you’ve earned the right to use them, especially in professional settings. Dr. Robert Schuller, for example, earned his degree in ministerial studies, here is enormous increase in the number of combination products entering the market in the recent years. Combination products have proven advantages but fixe so he is entitled to use it, and of course, he does. But I felt the speaker I was recommending wasn’t the real deal. So, I called him and asked where, when and in what subject area he earned his doctorate, and d dose combinations are still in the process of convincing regulatory authority on their advantages over the single ingredient formulations. Combination pro he mentioned a place I had never heard of before. I contacted the research librarian at USC, where I earned my Ph.D. from the Annenberg School for Communication, and I asked him to look into this obscure school ucts have become life saving products for the pharmaceutical companies who doesn’t have many innovative molecules in their product pipeline and have been inc After a few hours, he phoned back and said, flatly: “It’s a degree mill!” In effect, you buy your degree for so many thousands of dollars, possibly attend a class for a few days here and there, and then write easingly used in the product life cycle management. Even the companies having product patents are trying to extend their product life cycle through the combi a thesis or dissertation that is rubber stamped and filed away, or conveniently misfiled, as the case may be. So, this speaker was a phony, at least from an educational vantage point. But what were the clues th nation products and maximize the revenues. But the companies involved in this practice are overlooking that they are burdening the patients both economically at made me suspect this? There were at least five: (1) He seldom quoted respected authorities in his “field.” If you have studied in a rigorous academic program, you are steeped in a tradition and you “stand on and physically. They need to rightly judge the benefits of the combination products and they have to even look at the risks involved when combining the produ the shoulders” of others who came before you. I refer, for example, to Peter F. Drucker on many occasions in speeches and in print because I studied directly with the management guru for two and a half years, em ts. Some of the combination products were well accepted by physicians while others suffered. Companies involved in development of combination products are fi erging with an MBA for my efforts. Moreover, I was his informal chauffeur on Saturdays when I used to shuttle him from class back to his house, about a mile from the Claremont University campus, which named thei ding difficulty in defining their combination products and facing various challenges from selecting a combination to marketing it. Following aspects would a r Management school in his honor. (2) When he mentioned research, he was sloppy and over-generalized the scope of its findings. Give a hammer to a phony Ph.D. and he’ll treat everything he sees as if it is a na dd to the challenges in developing combination products: Which markets to tap where the combination products can do fairly well? Which combination prod l. Trained minds don’t do this. (3) His grammar and syntax were far from flawless. Clear expression is one of the marks of a scholar, and someone who makes obvious grammatical errors, that the trained academic cts are meaningful and rational? Which therapeutic categories to select? Which Combinations can address unmet needs of the patients? Do combin ear will detect, will either be corrected or never reach doctoral status. (4) His biography should have shown about three years invested in a Ph.D. program, but his was silent with regard to where and how long tions increase the patient compliance? What would be the developing cost? How to tackle the risks encountered during combination product developmen he studied. Most doctors are proud of the institutions that spawned them. Remember, I had to ask him where he went. (5) If someone’s ideas seem totally unoriginal, reflecting mere borrowings from others, this p t? As combination products don't fit into the traditional categories of drugs, medical devices, or biological products, the USFDA is in the process of devel rson has probably never been required to think deeply for himself and to create new insights and techniques. The mark of a true Ph.D. is originality in thinking. It is someone who was compelled under intense aca ping new procedures for reviewing their safety, efficacy and quality. Professional from academic institutions, pharmaceutical industries, health care indust demic scrutiny to come up with something new, fresh, and significant, and then to defend the significance of that contribution. So, what did I do? I contacted my client, who had reviewed the speaker’s demonstr y and representatives from various regulatory agencies are working out to design the regulatory requirements for manufacture and sale of combination products ation audio, and wanted to hire him. I said, “This guy is a good presenter, but he isn’t what most people would consider a genuine Ph.D.—Does this bother you?” “No, I’m okay with it,” the sales manager replied. . As there is an increasing trend of the combination products companies manufacturing such products should be able to tackle the problems involved in the de The meeting came off without a hitch, the speaker was a hit, and everybody was happy. I suggested to this guy that he eliminate his doctoral references, that some day they would probably embarrass him, and tha elopment. They need to be wiser in analyzing the market trends and the regulatory requirements. Companies that provide selfless information through particip t his career didn’t require them. Soon after that, he stopped using “Doctor.” And then he went on to become a best-selling author and a celebrity, demonstrating that he really didn’t need this extra credential tion in industry events and feedback to regulatory authorities would be able to face the challenges and will be successful in developing combination products
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
Related Articles:Implicit & Explicit Communication What You Tolerate Can Hurt Your Business Four Ways To Make the Case For Outsourcing
|