Our
main concern here at P&G is to decide whether we should implement a new
process of data capture which would create greater efficiency and reduce the
lag time of our clinical trials. Our current paper-based method is effective
but causes loss of sales due to the delay of market entry. It’s imperative that
we address this issue now because our market position is critical when
competing with large pharmaceutical companies because as we all know, early entry to the market provides a significant and
sustained market-share advantage.
The
presentation by the American “A” Experts consultants was very compelling. They
offered 3 alternatives and clearly outlined the pros and cons of each.
Do
we enhance our paper-based method? Implement digital imaging? Or adapt Web enabled
EDC? Each alternative method provided a reduction in time and the concern then
is feasibility and cost.
To
summarize their presentation;
The
first alternative, enhancing the paper-based
method would require incurring the cost of daily express mail shipments and
hiring more staff. This doesn’t create a solution for increasing efficiency it
only helps facilitate the process and reduce lag time.
Second
alternative implementing digital imaging
allows documents to be electronically sent and stored digitally increases
efficiency but doesn’t reduce significant time in the process of capturing
data.
The
third alternative, web enabled EDC is
the right choice for P&G. It creates efficiency and significantly reduces
our market entry time. The weighted requirement analysis presented by the
consultants reaffirms this option is the best fit for our need. The assumption
of estimated savings outlined by the consultants are substantial and very close
to our own projection. This system will not compromise our data but provide
added security and back up. The system is feasible with training and
technological assistance.
No comments:
Post a Comment