Pharma Digital Transformation: Insights from Paul Tunnah on Content, Innovation & What’s Next 

The current content system isn’t just slow — it’s structurally flawed. And meaningful change is unlikely to come from those who built it. There are many challenges we face today, and it takes a lot of time to come up with the right solution.  

Nataliya Andreychuk, CEO of Viseven, sparked an important discussion in Episode 9 of Pharma Talks. She was joined by Paul Tunnah, whose 25 years of experience in pharma consultancy — specializing in content and communications — brought significant weight to the conversation on pharma digital transformation. 

How Pharma Content Supply Chains Have (and Haven’t) Changed 

Nataliya Andreychuk explained that if you look back, content supply chains haven’t really changed in the past 20–30 years. These supply chains were set up before any talks of digital transformation in pharma. Channels were limited: field reps with printed detailers, meetings, maybe a few emails. Content was designed for a narrow range of channels and didn’t evolve much. 

Today, market dynamics are completely different. Expectations from doctors, patients, and other stakeholders have shifted toward personalized engagement that meets specific needs. At the same time, attention spans have shortened, which means stories are now told in smaller chunks. The combination of more channels, greater personalization, and shorter attention spans has created a demand for content that simply didn’t exist two decades ago. 

Who Is Really in Control? 

Nataliya asked whether there is a recipe for maintaining control — who is really in control today? 

“The first element is creativity,” Paul said. “While agencies don’t always deliver enough of it, creativity is essential. Even in a clinical environment, it’s about more than just medicines and data — you still need to excite doctors about those medicines. Creativity drives that excitement.” 

The challenge arises when scaling content: taking the original creative idea and producing all the different assets needed. Technology, Paul explained, can help tailor and scale content, though the balance between human creativity and AI is still evolving. 

He also stressed that compliance is critical. Content must follow the process, gain MLR (Medical, Legal, Regulatory) approval, and stay consistent across regions to avoid confusing doctors. Alignment with brand narrative and positioning is essential. 

Being “in control,” he added, means ensuring relevance, compliance, safety, and ultimately, patient focus — while keeping pace with emerging trends. 

Where Does the Human Touch Fit In? 

Nataliya asked where the human touch belongs in this new model. 

“AI is best suited to manual-intensive, data-heavy tasks,” Paul responded. “It feeds on existing information, but when it comes to creating something truly new, AI is less effective. That’s where agency creativity — particularly in brand positioning — remains indispensable.” 

When scaling content such as emails, websites, and other digital assets, however, AI can play a significant role. With the right data on segments, doctors, and patients, AI can make content production much more efficient. Agencies will likely remain part of the process, Paul said, but efficiency will increase dramatically as technology is used more effectively. 

Paul also raised a thought-provoking point: why do we expect technology to be perfect while continuing to accept broken, inefficient manual processes? 

US vs Europe: Why Pharma “Throws Money at Agencies” 

Paul noted that budgets in the US are significantly larger than in Europe due to the scale of the market. This often results in US pharma relying more heavily on agencies simply because resources are available. But whether in the US or Europe, all markets are under pressure to find efficiencies and integrate AI. 

Nataliya agreed, highlighting that in the US the focus is on efficiency: delivering new experiences to the market while figuring out how to do more with less. The challenge, however, lies in integrating AI into established, approved processes. Some tools that aren’t available today may quickly become necessary tomorrow. 

She emphasized that humans must remain at the center — deciding how to start communications, selecting relevant topics, and setting the narrative. Once that foundation is in place, AI can multiply and personalize content at scale. Paul agreed, reinforcing the importance of combining human oversight with technology. 

The Role of Conversational AI in Pharma Content 

“It’s important, when talking about conversational AI, to think about the end result — what we’re trying to achieve,” Paul said. “It’s very easy to get defensive about AI, asking questions like: Will we need agents in a few years? Will marketers, reviewers, and proofreaders still have jobs?” 

The reality, he explained, is that the focus should remain external. Everyone in the industry works here because they believe in the power of pharma — the medicines that make a real difference. With that as a guiding light, the goal should be to communicate the value of those medicines: ensuring doctors understand how to use them and patients understand how they work. 

Paul described this as a blended approach. Agencies will continue to spend time on positioning and brand impact, while AI can help scale and tailor the content. He emphasized that AI will not take jobs away but will change them, creating efficiency that benefits everyone — including patients. 

Nataliya agreed, stressing that patients must remain at the center. She noted that this principle already provides the answers, even for areas like MLR (Medical, Legal, Regulatory), which she said may be the most disrupted by AI because of the volume of structured data involved. 

Accelerating the MLR Process with AI 

Nataliya asked Paul about MLR acceleration with AI, questioning whether humans would still remain in control. 

Paul responded that the MLR process is essential for meeting regulations, staying on-label, and ensuring safety. But the process today is slow — it can take weeks or months to get content through multiple rounds of manual review. All the data already exists, he said, but the people involved aren’t stepping out of the process. 

AI, in his view, can automate 60–70% of the work, but human oversight will remain critical. He compared it to using GPS while keeping a paper map just in case. Grey areas will always require human judgment. 

Nataliya added that her team experimented with one approach where rules and algorithmic checks validated content against legislation and tracked changes. She also described simulation as a new development: creating a “digital worker” with MLR experience that could review content and provide feedback. She explained there are two paths — algorithmic tools guided by humans, or digital personas designed to replicate human reviewers. 

Paul found the idea compelling. He noted that while efficiency is the usual focus, consistency is also a major issue. Different reviewers may interpret the same content differently, creating inconsistency across regions and teams. A digital twin could help reduce subjectivity while improving efficiency. 

Nataliya agreed, saying these digital reviewers could be trained differently, evolve with changing regulations, and scale human expertise. 

Is Pharma Leading AI Innovation in Content Production? 

Nataliya then asked whether pharma itself is driving AI innovation in content, given that many professionals are now discussing their experiments at events and behind the scenes. 

Paul answered that while some companies have dedicated innovation teams, others rely on external partners. He sees repeated challenges when pharma tries to innovate alone — such as frequent reorganizations that disrupt projects, and the difficulty of attracting top tech talent. He recalled a comment from a Roche executive that some AI experts are being offered millions in stock, making it difficult for pharma to compete in the talent war. For these reasons, Paul believes pharma will struggle without external technology partners. 

Nataliya agreed that pharma’s core mission is health — medicines and cures — and that should remain its focus. However, she also acknowledged doubts about whether vendors can keep up with rapid technological change, noting that some may rely on weaker versions of AI. Still, she agreed that all tech partners must continue evolving to meet pharma’s growing appetite for technology. 

Paul stressed the importance of anticipating change and working closely with external partners who can focus deeply on solving specific problems. He said good customer experience depends on these collaborations, given the complexity of pharma workflows. 

Nataliya fully agreed, adding that agencies and vendors themselves must also collaborate to provide stronger, more comprehensive solutions. She emphasized that we are now in a good position to focus on how AI will force content transformation and bring real value to customers. 

A Final Reflection on Pharma’s Content Transformation 

Paul concluded by reflecting on digital transformation in the pharma industry. He noted that companies have already invested heavily in CRM systems, data, digital channels, and next-best-action technologies. But the missing piece, he said, is the content supply chain: the ability to produce personalized, smaller chunks of content. 

He emphasized that pharma’s efforts are working, but not yet reaching their full potential. When companies blend creative agency expertise with technology that can scale and develop personalized content, the result will be a powerful shift — delivering an “Amazon-like” experience for doctors and driving major transformation in the coming years. 

Nataliya closed by stressing the need for collaboration across the field. She called on agency partners to set aside excessive competition and instead work together to bring faster, better solutions to pharma. By doing so, the industry can strengthen the content supply chain and truly regain control. 

---