Research sites are experiencing more pressure each day to adopt technology systems, but every technology isn’t a fit for all sites and their unique workflows.
Implementing new systems isn’t just a workflow change, it’s change management, new training, new SOPs, and new responsibilities for your team.
If your site is considering changing workflows to include new technologies, you should deeply investigate your site’s specific needs and then evaluate new technology based on your needs and use cases.
If tech doesn’t fit your day-to-day, it won’t stick.
Here are 5 steps to evaluate your internal workflows before you choose your next technology vendor:
1. Start with what’s actually painful
One site told Clinical.ly – “We had 13 different logins for one trial.”
Instead of looking for features, map out the exact workflow that’s breaking down.
- Is it ICF versioning?
- PI oversight?
- Remote monitoring access?
- Data centralization?
Prioritize solutions based on your biggest documented friction points, not just wishlist items. Talk to your staff using these tools or planning to use these tools. Ask what the biggest pain points are for each department and track any upstream or downstream effects that changes could bring to your current processes.
2. Audit your existing systems and workflows
“Multiple platforms across multiple studies = fatigue.” – a Site Tech Roundtable attendee commented
Sites often adopt tech reactively.
Step back and ask:
- Which systems do we use daily?
- Which are required by sponsors?
- Which tools aren’t adding value?
- Which solutions or workflows cause slowdowns?
A simple spreadsheet can help visualize redundancy and justify tech changes to leadership. Often the biggest motivators to adopt new technology are: speed, resource allocation, and quality control. If you’re able to find real examples of your current roadblocks and show how a new system would reduce or resolve team burden, include those in your plans.
3. Map your team’s real responsibilities
“In theory we define roles, but in real trials, there are disconnects between what vendors expect and what sites can deliver.”
Vendors often assume a single “study coordinator” handles all tasks. Reality is more fragmented. Understanding actual workflows helps assess whether new tech will support or strain your team.
Consider:
- Time & resource allocation across team members
- Downstream impacts to other departments or processes
- Current bottlenecks in streamlining your workflows
4. Balance tech with simplicity
“We live in the Stone Age. We’re interested in simple tools that promote efficiency.” – one regulatory manager mentioned
Not every site needs a full-stack solution. Start with tech that replaces the most time-consuming manual task whether that’s wet-ink signatures, filing logs, or consent version tracking.
Many sites feel the pull to adopt specific tech, but tech will only support your team if it fits your needs. We often see adoption for the sake of new technology, but the wrong system can slow down your team and create even more bottlenecks if it’s not the right fit.
5. Define who owns onboarding and upkeep
“It shouldn’t be on the site to move these processes forward, lessen the site burden.”
Many vendors leave implementation logistics to site staff. Assign clear internal roles for adoption (e.g., one “power user”) and require the vendor to support admin setup, training, and routine updates.
One issue we commonly see is responsibility shared across an entire team. While it may seem helpful to have many hands to support, it can also create the mentality that someone else will resolve / follow-up / etc. and the required action drops in priority. This can also lead to discrepancies and a fragmented source of truth for the team. Dedicating one manager and assigning ownership for onboarding & upkeep resolves these issues.
Adopting new technology isn’t just about picking software, it’s about protecting your clinical trials, workflows, your staff’s time, and ultimately your patients. By grounding your evaluation in real pain points, existing processes, and clear ownership, you’ll know if a system is truly built to support your team, or if it will add to the burden.
At Clinical.ly, we believe technology should adapt to you, not the other way around. Our approach has always been to listen first and build with sites, not just for them. So as you’re mapping your needs and weighing options, ask yourself: does this solution make my day easier, my team stronger, and my site more inspection-ready?
And if you’re still asking, “how can we help?”… that’s exactly the question we’re here to answer.