Measuring Whether Site Support Investments Are Actually Working

In a recent video interview with Applied Clinical Trials, Kevin Williams, EVP and Chief Strategy Officer at Ledger Run, discussed how sponsors must rethink operational strategies in 2026 to better support clinical trial sites amid rising complexity. He explained why sourcing models, system design, and workflow automation must be evaluated together to reduce operational switching and site burden. Williams also outlined how sponsors can introduce new engagement tools without overwhelming sites, emphasizing neutrality-first adoption and consistency across processes. He explored how AI-enabled workflows can automate existing processes rather than impose new ones, and concluded by identifying the metrics sponsors and CROs should track to assess whether site support investments are improving performance, satisfaction, and long-term collaboration.

The below interview transcript was lightly edited for clarity.

ACT: What metrics should sponsors and CROs track in 2026 to gauge whether site-support investments are improving site performance and satisfaction?

Williams: Sure. You’re not improving unless you can measure it. There are a couple of ways to do that.

You could do simple surveys to find out whether sites are happy. I’ll give an example. I have a son in college, and my wife and I spend time taking some of his friends to dinners. We find it interesting when they try new foods. Some are picky eaters, and they’ll say, “Yeah, it’s not bad.”

The real question is, would you order it again? Would you choose it in the future?

For sponsors, when new initiatives are introduced, there’s a simple evaluation approach: what did you think? That can be captured through surveys or discussions with CRAs or clinical operations teams.

There are also more scientific approaches, like NPS scoring. Beyond that, it’s about engagement and performance. At the end of the day, it’s about getting drugs to patients.

From an operational standpoint, it’s about staying off the critical path. Are you staying off it, or are you improving how things are done? Do sites feel it’s not creating extra burden—and ideally that it’s reducing burden?

And do sites want to work with you again? Sponsors want to be the sponsor of choice. What do sites think about that, and would they put you in that category?

There are awards for best sponsors and best CROs, and those kinds of recognitions contribute to understanding performance and satisfaction metrics.