Eunomia Pharma Services
← All resources

Eunomia case study · August 2026

Fair Market Value Methodology for HCP Compensation

Published by Eunomia Pharma Services · Updated

What did Eunomia’s five-market FMV project deliver?

Eunomia developed a documented FMV methodology, stakeholder tiering and rate cards for a pharmaceutical company operating in the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The published August 2026 case study covers six stakeholder categories and reports improvements in payment consistency and contracting time. Its figures describe that engagement; they are not recommended HCP rates or predictions for another organisation.

What the published evidence covers

  1. Scope: five European markets and six stakeholder categories, with a common methodology and documented inputs.
  2. Implementation: independent benchmarking, objective tiering and validation sessions with Compliance, Medical Affairs, Finance and Legal.
  3. Reported results: payments within the defensible FMV range rose from 66% to 98%; average hourly rates moved from £520 to £385; contracting time fell from 14 to 6 days.
  4. Evidence limits: the public case study does not provide the underlying transaction dataset, sample size or measurement window. The reported rates should not be reused as a market benchmark.

The practical steps above are Eunomia’s operational guidance. See the source notes below for the scope of the external references.

The client and challenge

A multi-market pharmaceutical company needed a consistent fair market value (FMV) framework across the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The scope covered general practitioners, specialists, nurses, pharmacists, payers and patient contributors. Fragmented benchmarks, inconsistent tiering and individually negotiated rates made decisions difficult to explain and audit.

Designing the FMV methodology

Eunomia developed a five-step calculation framework covering base compensation, available hours, practice displacement adjustment, a composite adjustment factor and tiering premia. Each rate could be traced to the methodology and its source data.

Independent benchmarking and objective tiering

The project used independent compensation and working-hours sources, including NHS pay circulars, ONS ASHE, ERI, WTW and national sources. A four-tier framework distinguished global key opinion leaders, national leaders, regional experts and local practitioners using documented criteria such as publications, trials, role and experience.

HCP rate cards and internal validation

Compliance, Medical Affairs, Finance and Legal reviewed the inputs through structured working sessions. The deliverables included rate cards for six stakeholder categories across all five countries, with an audit trail and an approach to annual indexed recalibration.

Outcomes reported in the case study

The August 2026 case study reports that payments within the defensible FMV range increased from 66% to 98%. The average hourly rate decreased from £520 to £385, and time to contract fell from 14 days to 6 days. These are results from this engagement, not general benchmarks or promised outcomes.

What this means for HCP engagement

A documented methodology connects the engagement rationale, stakeholder expertise, rate-setting inputs and approval process. It gives teams a consistent basis for explaining compensation and supporting transparency reporting. The published case study describes the project approach; it does not publish a universal HCP rate table.

Discuss your compliance requirements

Explore our outsourced pharma compliance services or contact Eunomia.

Download the original case study (PDF)

This page summarises Eunomia’s published case study. Results are specific to the engagement. The material describes our capabilities and does not constitute legal advice.

Sources and scope

External sources accessed 28 September 2026. Check the applicable country rules and current source text for a specific engagement.

Put this into practice