How We Helped a Mid-Size CRO Increase Sponsor Inquiries by 70% in 9 Months

When a mid-size contract research organization (CRO) approached our team, they had a clear problem: their sponsor inquiry pipeline was drying up. Even with strong clinical trial capabilities and deep therapeutic expertise, their digital presence was not generating the CRO marketing results they needed. Over nine months, we built and executed a strategy that increased their qualified sponsor inquiries by 70%. This article walks through the starting situation, the strategy we developed, the decisions at each phase, and the specific results with supporting data.

What Was Happening Before We Got Involved?

This CRO had roughly 200 employees, offices in three U.S. cities, and specialized in Phase I through Phase III clinical trials across oncology, immunology, and rare diseases. They had built their reputation through word-of-mouth referrals and conference networking. But as the pharmaceutical marketing space became more competitive online, those channels alone were not keeping pace with growth targets.

Their website had not been updated in four years. The content strategy was non-existent beyond a handful of blog posts written by an intern in 2021. The service pages read like internal capability documents rather than persuasive, sponsor-facing content. And when pharmaceutical or biotech sponsors searched for CRO partners online, this organization was invisible in search results.

Key metrics at the start of the engagement:

• Monthly organic traffic: 1,200 sessions, mostly from branded searches (people who already knew the company name)
• Monthly sponsor inquiries via website: 3-5 Request for Information (RFI) submissions
• Search rankings for target keywords: Zero first-page positions for non-branded terms
• Bounce rate on service pages: 72%, meaning nearly three out of four visitors left without exploring further
• Average time on site: 48 seconds

Baseline performance snapshot before strategy launch:

Metric	Baseline (Month 0)	Industry Benchmark
Monthly Organic Sessions	1,200	5,000-8,000 (mid-size CRO)
Monthly RFI Submissions	4 avg.	10-15
First-Page Rankings (Non-Branded)	0	15-25
Service Page Bounce Rate	72%	45-55%
Avg. Time on Site	48 sec	2-3 min

The numbers told a clear story: this CRO was competing for sponsor attention in a global market projected to exceed $99 billion by 2026, yet their online presence was functioning as little more than a digital business card.

Why Do Most Mid-Size CROs Struggle With Sponsor Acquisition Online?

Before walking through our strategy, it is worth understanding why so many mid-size CROs face this exact problem. The life science marketing space presents unique challenges that differ from typical B2B industries.

First, the buyer journey for clinical research outsourcing is long and complex. A pharmaceutical or biotech sponsor does not fill out a contact form on impulse. They research potential CRO partners for weeks or months, review published expertise, assess therapeutic specialization, and often begin with an RFI before ever issuing a formal Request for Proposal (RFP). If a CRO does not show up during that early research phase, they never make the shortlist.

Second, mid-size CROs often position themselves with vague value propositions. Phrases like “flexible, full-service partner” and “patient-focused approach” appear on nearly every CRO website. When every organization sounds the same, sponsors cannot distinguish one from another, and they default to recognizable names or whoever ranks highest in search.

“Most mid-size CROs deliver outstanding clinical work, but their websites read like internal capability decks. Sponsors are searching for answers to specific problems, and if your content does not address those problems directly, you become invisible during the selection process.” – Strategy Team, Emulent Marketing

Third, clinical research organizations tend to underinvest in digital marketing. Conference sponsorships and direct outreach consume most of the business development budget, leaving little for search visibility or content programs. The result is a digital footprint that does not reflect the quality of the work being done.

Common gaps we see in mid-size CRO marketing programs:

• No therapeutic-specific landing pages: Sponsors searching for CRO partners in oncology or rare diseases find generic service pages instead of targeted content
• Missing authority signals: Published research, regulatory expertise, and clinical outcomes are buried in PDFs or not referenced on the website at all
• Weak conversion architecture: Contact forms are hard to find, RFI processes are unclear, and there is no middle-of-funnel content to nurture sponsors who are not ready to reach out yet
• No entity and semantic SEO strategy: Search engines cannot connect the CRO’s website to the topics and entities that sponsors are actively researching

What Strategy Did We Build to Fix the Pipeline?

We organized the engagement into three distinct phases, each lasting roughly three months. The phases were designed to build on each other: Phase 1 focused on foundation and positioning, Phase 2 on content and authority, and Phase 3 on conversion and scaling. Every decision was guided by one question: what does a pharmaceutical or biotech sponsor need to see, read, and experience before they submit an RFI?

Phase 1 (Months 1-3): Foundation and Positioning

The first priority was rebuilding the CRO’s website design and information architecture to serve as a genuine sponsor acquisition tool. We started with research, interviewing three existing sponsor contacts and two business development team members to understand the decision-making process from both sides.

Those conversations revealed that sponsors evaluate CRO partners based on therapeutic depth, team expertise, regulatory track record, and geographic reach. Yet the existing website addressed none of these topics in a structured, findable way.

Key actions during Phase 1:

• Website restructure around sponsor intent: We rebuilt the site’s information architecture to match how sponsors actually search. Instead of one generic “Services” page, we created dedicated landing pages for each therapeutic area (oncology, immunology, rare diseases) and each service category (Phase I, Phase II/III, data management, regulatory support)
• Brand positioning overhaul: We replaced vague capability language with specific, evidence-backed positioning statements. For example, instead of “We offer full-service clinical trial support,” the new messaging read: “42 oncology trials completed since 2018 across 14 countries, with a 94% on-time database lock rate”
• Technical SEO audit and fixes: We resolved 847 technical issues including broken links, duplicate meta descriptions, missing structured data, and slow page load times. We also implemented entity SEO and semantic markup to help search engines understand the CRO’s relationship to clinical research topics
• Conversion pathway redesign: We added clear RFI submission forms to every service page, created a “Partner With Us” page that outlined the sponsor engagement process, and added downloadable capability decks as a lead capture mechanism

“The biggest shift in Phase 1 was moving from ‘here is what we do’ messaging to ‘here is the specific problem we solve for you’ messaging. That one change affected everything, from page titles to call-to-action buttons to the way service descriptions were written.” – Strategy Team, Emulent Marketing

Phase 1 investment breakdown by activity:

Activity	% of Phase 1 Budget	Primary Goal
Website Restructure and Design	40%	Improve sponsor experience and navigation
Technical SEO and Entity Markup	25%	Establish search visibility foundation
Brand Positioning and Messaging	20%	Differentiate from competing CROs
Conversion Architecture	15%	Increase RFI submission rate

Phase 2 (Months 4-6): Content and Authority Building

With the foundation in place, Phase 2 focused on creating the content that would attract sponsors during the research and evaluation stages of their CRO selection process. This was not about publishing blog posts for the sake of volume. Every piece of content was mapped to a specific sponsor question, a target keyword cluster, and a stage in the buyer journey.

We developed what we call a “sponsor decision content map,” which plots the questions sponsors ask at each stage of CRO evaluation against the content types most likely to answer them.

Sponsor decision content map used to guide production:

Sponsor Decision Stage	Typical Sponsor Questions	Content Type We Created
Awareness	“What CROs specialize in rare disease trials?”	Therapeutic area landing pages, educational guides
Evaluation	“How do mid-size CROs compare to large global CROs?”	Comparison articles, case-study-driven service pages
Consideration	“What should I include in a CRO RFP?”	RFP planning guides, capability overviews
Decision	“Can this CRO handle our specific protocol?”	Team profiles, regulatory track record pages, study examples

We produced 24 pieces of content over three months, ranging from long-form therapeutic area guides (2,500+ words) to shorter FAQ pages addressing common sponsor concerns. Every piece was built with entity-based SEO principles, connecting the CRO’s name and expertise to relevant clinical research entities that search engines associate with sponsor intent queries.

Content categories and their purposes:

• Therapeutic depth articles: Long-form content demonstrating the CRO’s expertise in oncology trial design, immunology endpoint strategy, and rare disease patient recruitment. These pages targeted sponsors searching for niche clinical research capabilities
• Process transparency content: Articles explaining how the CRO approaches study startup, site selection, data management, and regulatory submissions. This addressed sponsors’ need to understand operational methodology before reaching out
• Team and E-E-A-T authority pages: Detailed profiles of senior scientific staff, published research citations, and regulatory approval histories. These pages built the experience, expertise, authority, and trust signals that both sponsors and search engines look for
• Industry perspective content: Commentary on clinical trial trends like decentralized trial models, AI in drug development, and evolving FDA guidance. This positioned the CRO as a forward-thinking partner, not just a service vendor

Phase 3 (Months 7-9): Conversion Optimization and Scaling

By month seven, organic traffic was growing and new visitors were spending more time on the site. But we knew that traffic alone does not fill a sponsor inquiry pipeline. Phase 3 focused on turning that growing audience into qualified RFI submissions.

We analyzed user behavior data from the first six months and identified three critical drop-off points in the sponsor journey: service pages with no clear next step, the “About” section where visitors went to evaluate credibility but found thin content, and the RFI form itself, which asked for too much information upfront.

Conversion improvements made in Phase 3:

• Simplified RFI form: We reduced the form from 14 fields to 6, with optional fields for protocol details. This single change increased form completion rates by 38%
• Added social proof throughout the site: We placed sponsor testimonials, trial completion statistics, and therapeutic area credentials on every service page and the homepage. This addressed the trust signal gaps we had identified
• Created a mid-funnel nurture pathway: For sponsors not yet ready to submit an RFI, we created downloadable capability decks, therapeutic area fact sheets, and a quarterly clinical insights email. This gave the CRO a way to stay connected with prospects over the long evaluation period
• Refined internal linking and content gap coverage: We connected related content pieces through strategic internal links, so sponsors who landed on a blog article about oncology trial challenges could move naturally to the oncology services page, then to team profiles, then to the RFI form

“Sponsors do not convert in one visit. The typical path we tracked was three to five website sessions spread over two to four weeks before an RFI submission. That meant every page had to reinforce credibility and move the visitor one step closer to reaching out.” – Strategy Team, Emulent Marketing

What Were the Specific Results After 9 Months?

The results built gradually, which is typical for a pharmaceutical and life sciences SEO engagement where trust, authority, and content depth compound over time. Here is how the key metrics changed from baseline to month nine.

Performance comparison from baseline to month 9:

Metric	Baseline (Month 0)	Month 9	Change
Monthly Organic Sessions	1,200	4,850	+304%
Monthly RFI Submissions	4 avg.	6.8 avg.	+70%
First-Page Rankings (Non-Branded)	0	19	+19 positions
Service Page Bounce Rate	72%	41%	-31 points
Avg. Time on Site	48 sec	2 min 34 sec	+221%
Pages Per Session	1.4	3.7	+164%
Capability Deck Downloads	N/A (did not exist)	47/month	New channel

The 70% increase in RFI submissions translated directly to revenue opportunity. Each qualified sponsor inquiry for this CRO represented an average contract value between $800,000 and $2.5 million, depending on the trial phase and scope. Adding roughly 2-3 additional qualified inquiries per month meant a significant expansion of their sales pipeline relative to where they started.

Beyond the numbers, the business development team reported qualitative improvements. Sponsors who found the CRO through organic search arrived better informed about capabilities and therapeutic focus, which shortened initial conversations and reduced time spent educating prospects on basic qualifications.

Which Tactics Made the Biggest Difference?

Not every action we took produced equal results. Looking back at the data, three specific decisions drove the majority of the improvement.

The first was building therapeutic-specific landing pages. Before the engagement, a sponsor searching for “oncology CRO Phase II trials” would never find this organization. Afterward, the dedicated oncology page ranked on the first page for eight related search terms and became the single highest-traffic service page on the site. Therapeutic specialization content accounted for 44% of all new organic traffic by month nine.

The second was the RFI form simplification. Reducing friction at the point of conversion had an outsized impact. The 38% increase in form completion rate compounded with the traffic gains to produce the 70% inquiry increase. This reinforced a principle we apply across all of our B2B marketing engagements: making it easy for qualified buyers to take action matters as much as driving them to the page.

The third was trust and authority building through E-E-A-T signals. Adding team profiles with published research credits, regulatory approval histories, and specific trial data transformed the CRO’s website from a generic brochure into a credible partner evaluation resource. This directly reduced bounce rates and increased the number of pages visitors explored before leaving.

Traffic sources contributing to new RFI submissions (Month 9):

Traffic Source	% of Total RFI Submissions	Avg. Sessions Before Submission
Organic Search (Non-Branded)	52%	4.2
Direct / Branded Search	28%	2.1
Referral (Industry Directories)	12%	3.6
Email Nurture Campaigns	8%	5.8

The shift toward non-branded organic search as the primary source of new inquiries was significant. It meant the CRO was no longer dependent on sponsors who already knew their name. For the first time, they were reaching new pharmaceutical and biotech decision-makers during the active research phase of CRO selection.

What Can Other CROs Learn From This Engagement?

The global CRO services market is projected to reach nearly $100 billion by 2026, with mid-size and niche CROs continuing to win market share from larger competitors in specialized therapeutic areas. But winning that share requires more than clinical excellence. Sponsors are making shortlist decisions based on what they find online, and the CROs that invest in their content strategy for brand differentiation will have a meaningful advantage.

Principles that apply to any mid-size CRO marketing program:

• Lead with therapeutic depth, not generic capabilities: Sponsors search by indication and trial phase. Your content should match that specificity. A page about “our oncology trial management approach” will outperform a page about “our clinical trial services” for qualified sponsor traffic every time
• Build your RFI pipeline like a B2B content strategy: Map content to every stage of the sponsor decision journey. Awareness-stage content brings new visitors, evaluation-stage content builds credibility, and decision-stage content converts inquiry submissions
• Invest in authority signals that sponsors and search engines both value: Published research citations, named team expertise, regulatory track records, and specific trial data are not just marketing copy. They are the signals that determine whether a sponsor trusts your organization enough to start a conversation
• Reduce friction at every conversion point: If your RFI form asks for protocol details before a sponsor has even decided to talk to you, you are losing inquiries. Start simple. Gather depth during the follow-up conversation

“The CRO market is growing fast, but visibility is not keeping pace for most mid-size organizations. The firms that treat their digital presence as a sponsor acquisition channel, rather than an afterthought, will be the ones that capture the outsourcing growth ahead.” – Strategy Team, Emulent Marketing

Conclusion

Growing a CRO’s sponsor inquiry pipeline requires more than a new website or a few blog posts. It requires a connected strategy that aligns positioning, content, technical search visibility, and conversion design around how sponsors actually research and select clinical research partners. Our team at Emulent builds these strategies for life sciences and pharmaceutical organizations that need their online presence to generate real business development results. If your CRO or life sciences brand needs help building a digital marketing program that drives qualified sponsor inquiries, contact the Emulent team to start a conversation about what that could look like for your organization.