From engagement metrics to meaningful experience: Why pharma digital measurement still falls short

Pharma digital success is still largely defined by top level engagement metrics such as page visits, time on page, and downloads. But interaction alone does not reveal whether a product or service has actually met the needs of the end user, which is the true measure of performance.

What these metrics fail to show is where experiences succeed, where they quietly fall short, and what teams could be learning from that gap. Without that understanding, decisions are made with only part of the picture, and the most valuable signals remain unseen.

The comfortable lie: Engagement equals success

Engagement metrics are often labelled as ‘performance’, not because they demonstrate impact for the user, but because they are readily available. They are easy to capture, standardise, and report at scale, fitting with existing reporting models.

But engagement only describes activity. It does not tell us if an experience was useful, trusted, or supported the decision-making of the end user – and is therefore an unreliable proxy for value.

These activity metrics, all based on quantitative data analysis, can be easily misinterpreted. Whilst high dwell time could represent engagement, it could also indicate confusion. Downloads demonstrate intent, but it is impossible to understand whether reports were actually read and, if they were read, whether they were impactful.

The conflation of engagement with performance creates a false sense of confidence about success, but, in reality, the experience could be falling short, offering only limited value for the user, if any.

Measuring the wrong things

This leaves us with a problem. Engagement metrics have become the foundation of dashboards used to assess success across teams, but they only prioritise consistency and comparability over meaning. These are not true indicators of performance.

Without meaning, the data is difficult to act on, so internal teams often struggle to use it to inform decisions and drive value. They often lack the resources and guidance to access the data they need, leaving them feeling lost.

It’s important to remember that different teams need different signals to deliver against their objectives

• Global teams: Need confidence that experiences are delivering value at scale to enable them to better support markets with internal resources or design improvements
• Local markets: Require insights that reflect their context, so that they can support brand teams and share learnings
• Brand managers: Need to monitor the performance of campaigns and see impact across channels, which guides optimisation and drives continuous learning and impact, both within their team and with other markets

Engagement-led performance metrics cannot meet any of these needs, because they reflect volume, not outcomes. When they do not clearly link to a decision or next step, they function as reporting artefacts, rather than tools for improvement.

From activity to experience: Redefining performance

The answer is not more data, but a clearer definition of success. Meaningful measurement starts by understanding user intent and experiences, rather than tracking isolated actions.

Experience-led performance provides a holistic view, representing experience from a user perspective. This approach can help teams understand if a digital experience helped users achieve their intent, increased understanding or confidence, and supported informed decision making.

These metrics may be more challenging to capture than clicks or visits, but they provide meaningful and valuable signals that reflect the impact of the experience on the user, going above and beyond their interactions.

UX research changes the game

Interpreting behaviour and understanding what engagement patterns represent in terms of experience can be a challenge. This is where UX research can augment typical engagement metrics, by providing insight into user intent, expectations, and decision-making that website, app, and download data alone cannot surface.

Using quantitative data can reveal where certain behaviours manifest, as well as how often, and qualitative findings explain why they occur. The combination adds depth to teams’ understanding of the overall user experience and creates a clear picture of which experience signals matter for different audiences at defined moments in the user journey.

An approach that brings together research and analytics helps teams move beyond engagement as a measure of performance. It enables measurement that reflects real impact. By connecting these metrics to real user needs and behaviours, teams can make better, more-informed, decisions.

From reporting to learning: A mindset shift

There will be some friction. Moving away from engagement-led performance requires a shift in mindset. UX research used in tandem with analytics provides insights that measure success on an ongoing basis, requiring teams to learn from experience, rather than reporting activity after the fact.

But it will be worth it. The cycle of testing, understanding, and improvement defines success differently, providing a detailed picture of how products and services support users’ needs, and where teams can act to enhance their experiences. By continuously reviewing metrics and improving understanding, teams can make better decisions, responding to insights in real time to deliver meaningful experiences for users.

This combined approach also supports clearer conversations across global, local, and brand teams, increasing confidence and helping them to apply relevant learnings to their own areas of responsibility.

When performance is defined in terms of experience, measurement stops being a justification exercise and starts enabling better outcomes, building trust amongst users, and keeping them coming back for more.