Hi David,

We certainly do not intend to offend any tenured professionals! Our article means to highlight the pros and cons of hiring based on seniority alone. We do not hold discriminatory viewpoints on any of our candidates, however the instances highlighted in our article are only based on past experiences. Please note our goal is always to find the best environment that compliments each candidate’s experience (tenured or otherwise).

Thanks for your insight David!

Hi John,

Thank you for your thoughtful comment! I love your Nordstrom/Kmart rule, and I agree you always end up getting what you pay for in the end. Hiring managers need to weigh the pros and cons of hiring less tenured CRAs. For example, CROs who want to have permanent employees may be more inclined to hire less tenured CRAs so they can train them in their own proprietary systems and essentially keep them as employees. We have seen tenured CRAs excel in sponsor companies where they need that tenure and expertise to help them monitor their trials. In sponsor companies, CRAs usually have to wear multiple hats and having that experience under their belt is vital to their success. I think the only problem that could arise is sponsor companies have limited budgets compared to CROs. They run on venture capitalists and they may not have the budget to pay tenured CRAs the rate that compliments their experience. In the end, flexibility is key no matter if you are a tenured professional or not.

Thank you for your insight John!

The extra cost to hire an experienced Monitor comes from having had to solve those difficult site issues, deal with PIs that think PI means Practically Invisible. It comes from knowing the best and most efficient way to travel. They have solutions that solve issues instead of having to always involve Sponsor personnel. They’ve had the experience to see problems before they materialize and how to proactively avert them.

I’ve always followed my “Nordstrom/Kmart” rule. I would always prefer to pay a little more to get the best quality item, rather than have to replace it every year or two because of lesser quality. In the long run, following that rule, you actually pay less having bought right the first time.