What makes an insight truly usable to the client?

One of the biggest problems we see in market access consulting is not the lack of insight, but the failure to make those insights usable. A lot of good thinking gets lost in Word documents, fragmented decks, or buried in detail. The client wants to move quickly, but they can’t find the red thread. Or worse, they doubt the evidence because they can’t trace it. And this creates friction right at the moment you need to build trust.

So I asked Louise Street-Docherty, our VP of Market Access to talk about the final mile. What separates a great deliverable from a decent one? What does it take to make insights land with the client, no matter their role or level of technical knowledge? And how can we support this better with technology? Her answers below are practical, honest, and grounded in the realities of doing this work every day.

What separates a polished deliverable from a raw insight dump?

A polished deliverable tells a story with purpose. It moves beyond listing facts and instead guides the client toward understanding what matters and why. A pure insight dump, even if full of good content, asks the client to do the thinking we should have done for them. Structure is critical here, what is the question we are answering, what is the evidence supporting it, and what recommendation emerges from it?

It is also about clarity. Is the messaging tight enough that it could be repeated internally without distortion? Can a team member lift one slide into their internal deck and use it with confidence? A polished deliverable anticipates the decisions the client needs to make and arms them to do so.

How do you tailor outputs for different stakeholder types within pharma?

This is one of the trickiest aspects of our role. A recommendation that resonates with a payer-facing market access director may need reshaping for a global pricing strategist or an R&D leader. It is not about creating different truths, it is about emphasizing the parts of the insight that map to their role.

For example, when working with early clinical teams, we might prioritize mechanism of action differentiation and emerging endpoints. With commercial colleagues, we might lean into unmet need narratives and competitor activity. It takes empathy and precision. That is why we design outputs with modularity in mind so different sections can be re-used, reshuffled, or re-emphasized without rewriting everything.

What makes evidence truly defensible in a high-stakes meeting?

Three things: source, selection, and synthesis.

First, the evidence must come from trusted, recognizable sources. That includes peer-reviewed literature, regulatory reports, HTA outcomes, and real-world data. Second, the selection process must be transparent. Why this paper and not another? Can we trace how we got here? Finally, the synthesis must stand up to scrutiny. Are we over-interpreting? Have we considered the limitations?

In high-stakes environments, especially pricing and reimbursement discussions, clients are often challenged to explain not just their conclusion but how they got there. A deliverable that cannot show its homework will struggle. That is where traceability becomes a strategic asset.

What are the most time-consuming parts of turning insight into output?

Aligning across the team can be very time consuming. Different consultants may approach the same problem with different framing, different visuals, or different levels of granularity. That leads to version control issues and rework. We often spend hours reformatting, reconciling, and translating raw insights into a consistent story, especially under pressure.

The second biggest time drain is building the actual deliverable, turning a set of slides into a cohesive story with the right visuals, narrative, and backup. When each person starts from scratch, quality varies. That is why templates and embedded workflows matter. They provide a starting point that is already structured around best practice.

How does Knowledgeable integrate output building into the workflow so every deliverable is consistent, visual, and ready to share?

Knowledgeable is designed to remove the handoffs and guesswork that often slow down the final stage. Because it connects directly to the evidence base, outputs can be built with embedded traceability. Every insight links back to its source, and every chart or model is tied to an underlying dataset or reference. That builds confidence for clients and regulators alike.

The Output Builder tool helps consultants structure arguments visually, using pre-set components tailored to typical project types: TPP assessments, indication prioritization, evidence gap maps, and so on. It means we spend less time formatting and more time thinking. And because it is part of the same system used for evidence gathering and analysis, we are not exporting insights across tools or losing fidelity in translation.

Closing thoughts

What I take from Louise’s perspective is that the real power of insight lies in how well it can be acted on. If we want to help our clients drive better decisions, we need to present insight with clarity, confidence, and context. That means knowing who you’re speaking to, being honest about the strength of your evidence, and making sure your recommendations are traceable to the data behind them.

At Knowledgeable, our job is to make that process smoother, more consistent, and less reliant on heroic effort. Louise’s approach is built into the product itself, from evidence-linked output builders to workflows that respect how consultants actually think. Because in the end, a well-delivered insight isn’t just the end of a project. It’s the start of influence.