Verba for pharmaceutical field teams
Thousands of calls. A standard you can point at.
Representatives’ recorded conversations with doctors, evaluated against the commercial criteria your medical and compliance functions already approved. The volume manual sampling can never reach becomes evidence a manager can act on.
~2,000
recorded doctor calls a day
The operating scale of a running pilot, not a ceiling and not a benchmark. Capacity is sized against recording length, analysis depth, expected volume and the completion window the business needs.
The arithmetic of sampling
Most calls are never heard by anyone but the two people on them.
A review team listening carefully covers a small fraction of the daily flow. The activity report confirms a call happened. It says nothing about how it was conducted.
Sampling does not fail because reviewers are careless. It fails arithmetically: the number of calls grows with the field force, and the number of hours available to listen to them does not. What gets reviewed ends up being what was convenient to reach.
Verba applies the same approved scorecard to every submitted recording. Reviewers stop spending their hours choosing which calls to listen to and spend them on the findings that need a human judgement — a disputed interpretation, a missed next step, a representative whose pattern is worth a conversation.
Manual sampling
- Bounded by the hours a reviewer has
- A small share of the recording flow
- Criteria applied as each reviewer remembers them
- Findings recorded as notes, if at all
Configured evaluation
- Every submitted recording assessed
- The same requirements applied to all of them
- Evidence attached to each grade
- Structured results your systems can read
Your commercial methodology
Turn what a good call means into rules a review can be checked against.
Each requirement states what has to happen, what evidence proves it, and which grades it is allowed to receive. Nothing here is a Verba opinion about pharmaceutical selling.
Understand the doctor’s situation
Were the relevant questions asked, and did a meaningful answer come back? A question asked and not answered is not the same thing as a need that was understood.
Deliver the approved message
Was the required product information communicated clearly, and did it stay inside the company’s approved reference material?
Follow the call structure
Were the required points covered — and covered at the stage of the conversation where your methodology puts them?
Handle questions and objections
Did the representative address what the doctor actually raised, rather than continuing the planned sequence around it?
Confirm understanding
Did the conversation establish that the information had landed, instead of inferring it from the absence of a question?
Agree a next step
Was a specific follow-up agreed in line with the commercial methodology — not merely mentioned on the way out?
Your definition of a good conversation
A complete review, step by step.
The same five stages behind every scorecard result, whatever the conversation was about.
Company standards
What matters, what counts as success, and what earns points.
Focused evaluation
Each requirement examined on its own and explained with conversation evidence.
Completeness checks
Software confirms the required answers, permitted grades and supporting material are all present.
Precision and arbitration
Optional. A second look at the interpretation, and a way to settle a disputed score.
Calculated scores
Totals worked out from the accepted grades using your scoring rules, not written by a model.
Evidence for review. Results for action.
From assessment to management action
Give managers somewhere useful to look.
Failed requirements, missing next steps and disputed interpretations are the short list. Everything else is already in order, and a manager does not have to read it to know that.
Verify the finding
Go back to the speaker-labelled transcript with the recording open beside it. Where the source was wrong rather than the judgement, correct the text or the speaker assignment and re-run the analysis from the corrected transcript.
Coach the specific moment
The rule explanation and the improvement guidance name the question, the message or the follow-up that needs attention. A coaching conversation starts from a passage rather than from a total.
Connect the result
Named score fields, controlled exports and supported APIs carry findings into the management reporting the organisation already runs, so a review does not end inside the review tool.
In practice
Start with one region and one scorecard.
A field organisation is not a pilot-sized thing, so the pilot is.
Bring the scorecard you already approved
The criteria, the permitted grades, the approved product messages and the review guidance become the configuration. Nothing is adopted from a template your medical and compliance functions have not seen.
Run a real batch
Submit recordings through the interface or the API against the meeting category that belongs to them, and let the configured analyses and validation run.
Compare it with your own review
Read the supporting passages beside a manually reviewed sample from the same batch. Disagreements are the useful output of a pilot — they usually point at a requirement that was written more loosely than anyone realised.
Elsewhere in Verba
Bring your own scorecard
Send a batch of real recordings, the approved criteria you review against, and one example of a review your team considers correct. We will configure the category, the instructions and the scorecard around them, and you can compare the output against your own reviewers on the same batch.
Request an evaluationEdition and scopeThis page describes implemented features as of the September 2026 product description. Interface images are demonstration views: their example content and usage values are neither customer results nor commercial terms.