Considerations for Hiring Remote Regulatory Affairs Teams

The pros and cons of hiring remote regulatory affairs professionals?

In a recent interview with MedTech Recruiter Mitch Robbins, Founder/Managing Director, The Anthony Michael Group, discussed how many MedTech companies are grappling with the issue of whether to continue with remote work for regulatory affairs teams or return to the traditional office setup.

According to Robbins, while some employers believe that working in the same physical space promotes collaboration and enhances productivity, others have realized the benefits of remote work, including access to a larger talent pool and increased flexibility. During this interview, he discussed the challenges that organizations face in deciding whether to adopt a remote or hybrid work model, particularly in highly cross-functional fields like Regulatory Affairs. Robbins argues that being a good leader involves providing necessary resources and fostering engagement and productivity, whether employees work from home or in an office cubicle.

Ultimately, he said, organizations need to weigh the opportunity cost of insisting on on-site work against the potential benefits of a more flexible work arrangement.

What most MedTech regulatory employees want

The post-pandemic regulatory affairs team has three options for how they can work, said Robbins:

1.????Onsite

2.????Hybrid

3.????Remote

Onsite means coming to the office five days a week. Hybrid combines days in the office and at home, such as two days in the office and three days at home or vice versa. Remote means more than 90% of your time is spent working from a different location.

Robbins has conducted surveys of employees, particularly in the regulatory affairs field, that reveal a preference for remote work.

He said that sixty to seventy-five percent cited such a preference, while some prefer hybrid work. Very few expressed a desire to be in the office all five days of the week. The consensus among employers on remote work is that companies should shift towards a hybrid working environment. The idea of having everyone back at the office has resurfaced, with many businesses wanting to have their teams in one place for convenience and control.

However, he said, this isn't always feasible, and organizations are happy to settle for remote positions when needed.

What most MedTech employers want

Generally, Robbins said, many organizations are pushing for some combination of in-person and remote working. I think bosses want to believe that COVID is behind us so we can return to how things used to be. Employers need to use their office space, and they'd prefer everyone was in the same area so they can stay on top of the business. I also suspect there's an element of control involved—let's get everybody back where we can keep tabs on them.

Most employers, he said, would like to have a combination of remote and on-site employees, but if they must use remote staff, they'll accept it.

In the last few years, many people saw the advantages of working remotely: they could stay in the same job but move to a location that suited them better. Employers also began searching for talent across the US. When they found a senior regulatory affairs specialist in Florida, they suddenly introduced a hybrid model which required the person to relocate their family to Minneapolis, Minnesota. This was not part of the agreement and created tension between employees and employers.

It’s also limited recruitment opportunities as these hybrid models only offer positions within a 50-mile radius of the company office.

If the job requires an on-site presence, no matter the number of days a week, they must be physically at your location. Your recruitment radius goes from across the country to those who live within 50 miles or an unlikely person willing to move to your area.

Organizations are having trouble deciding whether to hire remote workers or not, with the main issue being that Regulatory Affairs is a highly cross-functional field.

Robbins said that many employers want everyone to be in the same room discussing and collaborating on products, which is deemed more effective. But I would ask if that's really the case. During the pandemic, when they didn't have a choice, were they still able to get work done?

You probably were able to get business done.

Recently, Robbins said, many leaders had to go through the process of managing a distributed workforce for the first time. They were not only dealing with their own struggles related to COVID but also suddenly needed to figure out how to lead a team they no longer saw every day. It has been difficult, especially when some members attempted to take on additional tasks or secretly worked second jobs on the side.

At the end of the day, he said, one must remember that being a good leader doesn't change due to circumstances.

Lead by example, trust until trust is broken, and supply everyone necessary resources to do their jobs—whether from home or from an office cubicle. The main challenges are no longer technology-related; rather, it's about finding ways for a team to stay engaged and productive even when apart.

Are there companies that are putting together remote teams with success?

Absolutely, said Robbins. Does this mean they'll have to fly people in occasionally, perhaps once a quarter or every few months? Probably, if it's critically important to have everyone in one room. Given the current level of technology, it is quite possible to have essential conversations and make necessary decisions during an online meeting. Jobs that are either hybrid or completely on-site instead of being remote stay vacant for months, as opposed to being filled within a few weeks.

What is the opportunity cost of being steadfast and saying this person has to be on-site with us in some capacity regularly? What is the opportunity cost of waiting for that versus having your position vacant for months on end? And subsidizing that with contract work, which is three to four times the cost of somebody full-time.

Weighing the pros and cons of remote hiring

Ultimately, Robbins said, the decision to adopt a remote, hybrid, or in-person work model is one that organizations must make thoughtfully, considering the benefits and drawbacks of each option.

According to Robbins, while there are advantages to having employees in the same physical space, such as promoting collaboration, remote work also offers benefits such as access to a larger talent pool and increased flexibility. Ultimately, good leadership involves providing necessary resources and fostering engagement and productivity, whether employees work from home or from an office cubicle. With the current level of technology available, it is quite possible to have essential conversations and make necessary decisions during an online meeting. Organizations need to weigh the opportunity cost of insisting on on-site work against the potential benefits of a more flexible work arrangement.

By finding ways to stay engaged and productive even when apart, organizations can create a work environment that works best for them and their employees.