Cognizant 20-20 Insights

A Rationale for a PDF Rendering

Factory Model
As life sciences organizations increasingly embrace digital models
of engagement, they need to streamline their PDF rendering
processes in order to avoid unnecessary delays and costs in
getting promotional materials to market.

Executive Summary
Its not easy to remember life before the PDF;
this file format has become the de facto standard
for reviewing and approving digital content before
it is finalized and published. But as life sciences
companies continue to favor digital engagement
models for their brand communications, the
sheer number of PDFs that need to be rendered
is outgrowing most organizations ability to scale
this function.
For most life sciences organizations today, the
PDF rendering process entails a manual and
cumbersome process of converting a complex
interactive asset developed by a marketing agency
into a PDF format that meets the required criteria
for the medical, legal and regulatory (MLR) review
process. Although most companies would not
consider this function a strategic one, the inability
to quickly and seamlessly complete this process
can significantly hamper and even delay the MLR
review process, as well as the timing of promotional materials. Additionally, it can pose a significant
drain on current resources time.

cognizant 20-20 insights | march 2015

Typical challenges that affect PDF quality and the

MLR review process include:

A lack of standard operating procedures

(SOPs).

Poor communications between the different

departments involved.

A lack of well-defined roles and responsibilities.

High turnover among responsible personnel.
Organizations that lack a standard and streamlined approach to PDF rendering from capturing
the relevant input details, to quality checks and
efficient file-sharing practices are at risk of
generating substandard PDFs and prolonging
the review and approval process. When tied with
time-sensitive activities such as a brand launch,
the delays can have huge financial implications
for life sciences companies.
One solution is for organizations to use a PDF
rendering factory model, which enables them to
benchmark their requirements and establish a
process to consistently deliver PDFs that meet

these requirements. This white paper looks at

the current PDF rendering landscape, describes
an automated and streamlined approach to PDF
rendering and looks at the benefits of using such
an approach.

Renderings

The Current PDF Rendering Landscape

The need to reduce cycle time and rework in

that are not always compatible

with marketing systems, leading to rework and
delays.

Manual processes that are dependent on one

person, regardless of workload.

order to accomodate the needs of planned and

refreshed digital projects.

Many life sciences businesses use a manual system

for rendering PDFs, wherein someone in the organization takes the digital assets from the agency
and manually converts them into a PDF. Because
there are often no formalized standard operating
procedures (SOP), the manual process often leads
to varying input request details, inconsistent
output quality, multiple iterations, and increased
time and effort requirements (see Figure 1). The
PDF rendering infrastructure also lacks scalability
to handle variable volume and types of requests.
Asking an agency to take over this task would be
costly, as it would charge the agency billing rate.

Poor accounting of PDF rendering and process

costs.

Toward a PDF Rendering Factory Model

Because many life sciences businesses do not
understand their PDF rendering process, the first
step to improving this process is for the organization to solicit inputs from individual stakeholders and then identify inconsistencies in their
understanding. They then need to convene all
the stakeholders to iron out these inconsistencies
and establish a blueprint of the current process.

The result: an inefficient and high-cost MLR

review process. In one bio-pharma organization,
we estimated that 40% of an IT commercial
operations manager-level time was spent on PDF
rendering, preventing him from focusing on more
strategic priorities. Other challenges commonly
faced by the digital promotional materials team
include:

The organization should then map out a new

process based on the following elements:

Utilize a central mailbox for PDF rendering

requests to avoid hundreds of e-mail communications.

Establish nomenclature guidelines for

requestors and a context for the entire MLR

execution team.

Outputs that are not in the correct format or fit

for the purpose (which is problematic for both
reviewers and agencies).

Typical PDF Rendering Process

Absence of nomenclature standards
for rendering requests

E-Marketing

Agency/
Internal
Creative
Services

4 Creation/revision of
asset manuscript
and wire frames for
various platforms
and channels

Commercial
Systems
Team

PSD/PDF
creation, build kit.

E-Marketing
Manager

MLR/
Facilitator

Request initiation of
promotional material
after approvals
from finance and
marketing

Agency selection

13

Review changes

PDF rendering of major

reconcilliation assets

Creation of complex
interactive asset

No

Sharing of files via e-mail

without centralized repository

New

16

14

11. 11

No changes

Not MLR ready

Figure 1

MLR ready

Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations

Major

Minor

12

Review changes

MLR system
review

Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations

No formal signoff by
agency or E-Marketing
How are reconcilliation
requests handled differently
from new items

Quality inconsistencies

10

PDF rendering of
corrected asset
post-proofreading

18

15

Yes

Revision

19
PDF rendering of minor
reconcilliation assets

Creation of complex
interactive asset with
reconcilliations

Is the
complex interactive
asset correct?

Pre-MLR live or SFLR review

(facilitator captures in Adobe PDF,
interactive viewable on development site)

cognizant 20-20 insights

Proofread

Changes

PDF rendering of
pre-MLR assets

Developer

17

Proofread

No formal PDF
rendering input
request form

Multiple iterations of process

with different requirements

Manual PDF rendering process

Minor

Promotional
material inputs

Major

Brand

Reconcilliation
No changes

Asset release

 Create a standard incoming request sheet

Entrusting the PDF rendering process to an

external agency or vendor could be an optimal
solution, especially for organizations that want
to avoid the additional overheads of licensing
automated solutions and staffing to support a
process with fluctuating demands. The external
partners can provide expertise in gaining operational efficiencies while providing a lower cost
solution than the manual, agency-driven model.

template to ensure specifics are correctly and

accurately captured to minimize potential
rework.

Determine standards for PDFs to ensure they

are fit for purpose in review, submission and

archival systems, and meet the immediate and
near-term needs of MLR stakeholders.

Categorize content needs by type and usage

of output, and render output on target device

directly.

The benefits of such a model extend across the

enterprise:

Develop

pre-request gating filters to allow

content owners to validate representative
samples of output before running iterations of
full-scale execution for new content types.

Business IT can shift focus from execution to

optimizing processes and building core IT capabilities to support brand needs.

MLR

process owners gain rapid rendering

turnaround times, with consistency and documentation to facilitate validation of outputs.

Establish a project coordinator to act as liaison

with appropriate stakeholders, and be responsible for request validation and process/accountability to track requests through iterations and
closure.

E-marketing

managers can handle requests

across many types of digital engagement
models and devices to meet evolving digital
tactics.

By mapping out a transition from the old process

to the new one, we believe life sciences companies
will realize significant improvements in the
process, time and quality of the PDF rendering
process (see Figure 2).

Other stakedholders gain input/output quality

criteria, scalability, standardization, minimized
rejections and request metrics.

PDF Rendering Process Using the Factory Model

Commercial
System Team

11

Request form
for PDF rendering

Request form
meets standards?

Yes
Meets all the
request criteria?

Received and
reviewed

No

Project
Coordinator

12

E-Marketing/
brandmanager
approval

E-Marketing
Manager

3
Yes

Further review
and approval

No

10
Move request
criteria and source
files to a central
repository

Weekly status
report

Complex asset
received from the
developer

Identify request
criteria not met

No

Incoming QA

Uploading in
central repository

QA of final PDF
rendered asset

Meets all the

request criteria?

No

Figure 2

cognizant 20-20 insights

Meets all the

request criteria?

PDF rendering
of the asset

PDF
Rendering
Team

Yes

QA of final PDF
rendered asset

Yes

Implementing a PDF Rendering

Factory Model
A PDF rendering implementation can follow a
phased approach and realize benefits all along the
way (see Figure 3):

Phase

1a: Reduce costs and implement a

highly efficient and cost-effective global PDF
production model.

Create

a central repository for submission,

tracking and management of PDF rendering
requests.

Establish a common nomenclature for PDF

rendering requests.

Obtain key stakeholder rendering standardization requirements.

Create, review and confirm request qualifying

criteria; develop fit-for-purpose
develop job tracking template.

>>Establish incoming and outgoing quality control criteria to resolve issues prior to work
and validate output against standards.

>>Ensure rapid turnaround time (24 to 72 hours)

Phase 1c: Provide assistance to implement

process improvements.

on any device and in a format fit for purpose.

>>Prioritize process efficiencies.

>>Evaluate efficacy of automated tools.
>>Implement request/fit-for-purpose standards.
>>Roll out optimized processes.

>>Develop a simple cost structure with ability to

capture and bill individual projects.

>>Send weekly status reports to key

stakeholders.

>>Establish on-site request coordinator as liaison.

Phase 1b: Provide consultation to address

standards;

Phase 2a: PDF rendering steady state.

>>Provide ongoing PDF rendering requests
as needed.

current pain points.

>>Maintain optimized process.

Implementation Phases
Reduce Cost in
Current Process
(Day 1 30)

Implementation Details

Address Current
Pain Points
(Day 31 60)

Lift and shift existing

deliverable.
Scalable resources to
render PDFs typically
in 24 hours.

Immediate cost savings

Metrics for status

reports and project cost
allocation

Figure 3

cognizant 20-20 insights

Creation of a central repository

Prioritize process efficiencies

Establish common nomenclature

Obtain key stakeholder rendering

standardization requirements

Evaluate efficacy of
automated tools

Create, review and confirm

Request qualifying criteria
Develop fit-for-purpose
standards
Develop job tracking template

Implement request/
fit-for-purpose standards

Roll out optimized process

Minimize reworks

Reduce PDF rendering

processing time

Quicker MLR approval time

Continuous improvement
opportunities

Key Benefits

Process
Improvements
(Day 61 90)

Redirect commercial IT efforts

to process management

Stream internal
communications

Reduce rendering request

review time

Identify process
optimization tools

Looking Forward
Even before the movement to digital content,
PDF rendering was a manual and cumbersome
process for many life sciences organizations. But
as marketing tactics evolve to encompass a broad
spectrum of digital engagement models, its
become crucial for companies to find a scalable

PDF rendering solution that meets the needs of

an evolving content review and approval process.
By embracing a PDF rendering factory model, life
sciences organizations will be equipped to move
forward into a digital future, unencumbered by
delays to their MLR processes and with freed-up
resources to apply to strategic initiatives.

About the Authors

Andrew Isaacs is a Principal in Cognizants Analytics Life Sciences Practice. He has over 25 years of life
sciences experience, focusing on leading global commercial operations and technology optimization
teams, marketing excellence, brand management teams, life cycle planning, stakeholder management
and governance/change management. Previous to Cognizant, Andrew was the commercial processes
and practices lead for a global pharmaceuticals company and chief strategy officer for a life sciences
medical communications agency. He also introduced marketing excellence at a global life sciences
company and launched multiple products and services and oversight for global new product development. He has an undergraduate degree in biomedical engineering, an M.B.A./M.S. graduate degree and
post-graduate certificates in project management and new product development. He recently authored
the point of view Accelerating Bio-Pharmas Marketing Transformation. Andrew can be reached at
Andrew.Isaacs@cognizant.com.
Bharat Menghani is an Engagement Manager in Cognizants Analytics Life Sciences Practice. He has
over 12 years of experience in the life sciences and healthcare industry. He has led multiple initiatives in
process optimization and recommended sales force effectiveness strategies, including resizing, restructuring, vacancy management, call plan and sample optimization. He has also been involved in developing
and deploying technology platforms that could be leveraged as an enabler for faster reaction to market
events and to gain process efficiencies. He has an undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering and
an M.B.A. in marketing and strategy. Bharat can be reached at Bharat.Menghani@Cognizant.com.

About Cognizant
Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technology, consulting, and business
process outsourcing services, dedicated to helping the worlds leading companies build stronger businesses. Headquartered in Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction,
technology innovation, deep industry and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative workforce that embodies the future of work. With over 75 development and delivery centers worldwide and
approximately 211,500 employees as of December 31, 2014, Cognizant is a member of the NASDAQ-100,
the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and
fastest growing companies in the world. Visit us online at www.cognizant.com or follow us on Twitter: Cognizant.

World Headquarters

European Headquarters

India Operations Headquarters

500 Frank W. Burr Blvd.

Teaneck, NJ 07666 USA
Phone: +1 201 801 0233
Fax: +1 201 801 0243
Toll Free: +1 888 937 3277
Email: inquiry@cognizant.com

1 Kingdom Street
Paddington Central
London W2 6BD
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7297 7600
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7121 0102
Email: infouk@cognizant.com

#5/535, Old Mahabalipuram Road

Okkiyam Pettai, Thoraipakkam
Chennai, 600 096 India
Phone: +91 (0) 44 4209 6000
Fax: +91 (0) 44 4209 6060
Email: inquiryindia@cognizant.com

Copyright 2015, Cognizant. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission from Cognizant. The information contained herein is
subject to change without notice. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners.

Codex 1248