Blog

Within the clinical research enterprise, as can be seen elsewhere in business and regulatory landscapes, the terms “quality” and “compliance” often intersect, creating what some feel is a symbiotic relationship crucial for organizational success. However, despite their frequent association, these terms embody distinct philosophies and practices. 

Hosting a robust onboarding process for introducing entry-level hires to their job responsibilities is clearly a best practice for any industry. Taking things one step further by onboarding both new and promoted employees who are at any step on their career ladder is proving to also be a wise move for the clinical research enterprise, says one experienced observer of trends in the profession. 

Study sites and sponsors could both benefit from learning to convert data from investigator meetings and other sources into meaningful metrics and actionable insights that can impact business strategy, a seasoned observer of the clinical research enterprise says. 

The more things change, the more they stay the same, especially when it comes to the clinical trial site selection process. Despite all the technological advances since the dawn of industry-sponsored research, sponsors are still facing many of the same challenges when trying to predict which sites will perform the best on their study.

It’s difficult enough sometimes to find qualified and motivated candidates for clinical research job openings who are following all the rules. So, when competition gets so cutthroat that an entire shadow network of fake references springs up to help foist illegitimate new hires on short-staffed or over-eager employers via skullduggery, caution should be the hiring manager’s byword.