Section 9 extends the reach of the guidelines beyond the pharmaceutical company's own organisation to encompass its external parties—contractors, partners, and wholesale distributors. Even when a company's own management systems are robust, the quality of information reaching patients and healthcare professionals deteriorates equally if an external partner engages in inappropriate information provision. This section is the rule that prevents that chain of responsibility from being broken.

Key point: Senior management bears an obligation to "encourage" contractors, partners, and wholesale distributors to conduct appropriate activities. The distinctive feature here is that this compliance engagement extends to parties with whom there is no direct employment relationship.

01Encouraging Contractors and Partner Companies

Senior management must encourage contractors and partner companies to conduct appropriate sales information activities. Contractors typically include companies that use contract sales organisations (CSOs) to outsource promotional activities. Partners include companies engaged in co-promotion or co-marketing arrangements. Concrete means of "encouragement" include incorporating compliance requirements into contractual terms, providing training to contractors, conducting periodic monitoring, and reviewing activity records.

So what: Delegating activities to an external provider does not sever the compliance responsibility. The commissioning pharmaceutical company retains an obligation to actively encourage the contractor's activities to be appropriate. This is not merely a best-efforts expectation—it is positioned as active engagement that must be assumed at the senior management level.

So why: Contract MRs and sales personnel from partner companies are frequently perceived by healthcare professionals as representatives of the pharmaceutical company. If they engage in inappropriate information provision, society attributes that responsibility to the pharmaceutical company. The guidelines apply to compliance management the same logic as vicarious liability in law, ensuring that outsourcing does not create accountability gaps.

02Encouraging Wholesale Distributors

Wholesale distributors (wholesalers) are also included among the parties to be encouraged. Wholesalers are intermediaries in the supply chain, delivering medicines from pharmaceutical companies to medical institutions and pharmacies, and they sometimes function as a conduit for medical information as well. Where pharmaceutical companies provide information to wholesalers who then convey it to medical institutions, companies are required to take steps to ensure the accuracy and appropriateness of that information throughout the chain.

So what: It is not sufficient to verify only that the product information and scientific materials provided to wholesalers comply with the guidelines; companies must also engage with how wholesalers convey that information to clinical settings. Information provision channelled through wholesalers must meet the same quality standards as information provided directly by the company's own MRs.

So why: In the reality of pharmaceutical distribution, wholesalers sometimes go beyond a pure logistics function to serve as a bridge for information. If materials provided by a pharmaceutical company are used inappropriately as they pass through a wholesaler, the impact ultimately reaches patients. The right of healthcare professionals "to obtain appropriate information"—the protected interest underlying the guidelines—does not change depending on the distribution channel used.

03The Breadth Implied by "Etc."

The guideline text reads "contractors, partner companies, wholesale distributors, etc."—and the "etc." at the end matters. It is understood to encompass not only the parties specifically enumerated above but all external entities that materially participate in a pharmaceutical company's sales information activities. For example, third-party content providers that carry medical information, or advertising agencies commissioned for digital promotion, may fall within scope depending on the nature of their activities.

So what: The interpretation of "etc." expands as business models evolve. As digitalisation and outsourcing advance, cases where information provision activities are carried out without the company's direct involvement are increasing. Interpreting "etc." narrowly risks conflicting with the regulatory intent. When engaging a new external partner, compatibility with the guidelines must be verified in advance.

So why: Limiting the regulatory scope to specific business types would create a loophole through which pharmaceutical companies could effectively circumvent the guidelines by using external parties outside that scope. Using the inclusive term "etc." prevents the circumvention of the guidelines through outsourcing that merely changes the formal structure, ensuring that the protective purpose of the guidelines remains operative at all times.