People & leadership4 min read
A study shouldn’t depend on one person.
A planned leave reminded me that coverage takes more than a name on a schedule. It takes preparation, trust, and room for other people to grow.
“Ask them. They’ll know.”
If you work at a research site, someone probably came to mind.
The coordinator who knows which email has the answer. Who remembers the conversation that explains why something changed. Who can help with a question while already working through three of their own.
Having someone like that is a gift. It also makes it easy to miss how much of the work depends on them being there.
Leave should be something a team can plan for
When our lead coordinator at WCR was preparing for maternity leave, we ramped up hiring ahead of time. We also gave coordinators already on the team the opportunity to take on more responsibility.
We knew they were capable. They weren’t all quite sure yet.
During her leave, they came through. Watching them become more confident was one of the best parts of the experience. They got to see themselves handling responsibilities they had previously looked to someone else to handle.
The ability was there. Being trusted gave them a chance to recognize it. 🙌
That experience stayed with me because it was about more than covering an absence. It made me think about how often we keep turning to the same dependable person while other people are waiting for a chance to grow.
A name on the schedule is only the beginning
It’s easy to say, “Someone else can cover.” The harder question is what that person needs before they can actually do it.
Have they had time to understand the study? Do they have the right access? Have they practiced the work with someone available to help? Do they know what they can handle and what needs the investigator’s attention?
And what are we taking off their plate so they have room?
Those are the questions I’d want us to work through early. A capable coordinator can still need study-specific training, the appropriate responsibilities assigned to them, and a clear person to call when they’re unsure.
Trust sounds like: “We believe you can do this. Let’s make sure you have what you need.”
Sponsors and CROs have a part in this conversation
I understand why a sponsor or CRO values a familiar contact. Someone who knows the study, follows through, and can explain what’s happening at the site makes everyone’s work easier.
A change in that contact can bring reasonable questions. Who owns the open items? Will the new person have the context? Where should an urgent question go?
Sites should be able to answer those questions. It helps when the conversation happens while there is still time to prepare.
Before a planned handover, a few practical questions are worth asking together:
- Who is covering which responsibilities? Give people a clear picture of who handles what and when to involve the investigator.
- What needs to be ready? Work through training, required delegation, system access, and open items before the handover.
- Is there time for overlap? Consider the workload and support needed for the outgoing and incoming team members to work together.
- Who is the backup for the backup? The person stepping in will have questions and other responsibilities, too.
This is useful for maternity leave, vacation, illness, and the ordinary changes that happen in any team. People should be able to have lives without the study depending on their constant availability.
Give people a chance before you urgently need them
I keep coming back to the confidence part.
We can see potential in someone and still keep handing the important work to the person who has always done it. It feels efficient. But it leaves fewer opportunities for anyone else to become comfortable doing that work.
Let someone lead a handover while support is nearby. Give them a manageable responsibility to own. Ask what still feels unclear. Make time to work through it.
The goal is a team that can support each other, including the person everyone usually turns to.
💬 What helped your team prepare for a key person’s leave, and what do you wish you had done earlier?
I’d like to hear from sites, sponsors, and CROs. There’s probably something in your experience the rest of us could use. Please leave names and identifying study details out of it.
Enmanuel CorvoEngineer. Site leader. Always learning.I write about the practical work behind clinical research and what sites, sponsors, and CROs can learn from each other.