|Articles|August 17, 2016

Regulatory Pros Spend More Time on Strategy

RAPS survey finds most regulatory professional have multiregional or worldwide responsibilities and are spending more time on strategic activities.

The Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society (RAPS) released its biennial survey, the 2016 Scope of Practice & Compensation Report for the Regulatory Profession, featuring results from 3,358 regulatory professionals in 56 countries.

Among the most significant findings, regulatory professionals are spending more of their time on strategic activities and less time on tasks related to research and development, clinical testing, product registration and other preapproval activities. Overall, compensation has increased, but more for those at mid-level positions, than those at senior levels.

Most regulatory professionals have multiregional or worldwide responsibilities, and work with multiple types of healthcare products. More than 88% of regulatory professionals began working in another field before transitioning into regulatory, and most have significant prior professional experience, usually in a related field., and more than 20% have a doctorate.

Read the full release.

Stay current in clinical research with Applied Clinical Trials, providing expert insights, regulatory updates, and practical strategies for successful clinical trial design and execution.

Related to this article

September 30th, 2026

The Control Plane for Agentic Clinical Operations: Governing Autonomous Digital Actors in Regulated Trials

AI agents in clinical operations acquire broader autonomous capability through expanded permissions, tools, memory, and delegated authority, requiring governance focused on whether effective capability has shifted outside approved boundaries rather than whether software has changed.

September 30th, 2026

Where AI Leads in Trial Design—and Where Humans Still Need To

In this video interview, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, makes the case for AI as a sophisticated strategic advisor in trial design while arguing that humans must remain in the lead—especially when factors the model can't fully account for are at stake.

September 30th, 2026

ACT Brief: Enrollment Feasibility Pressure-Testing, RWE Infrastructure Gaps, and Peptide Rulemaking Standstill

In today's ACT Brief, we examine how data drives honest enrollment assumptions, why RWE infrastructure lags ambition, and the disconnect between FDA rulemaking and enforcement on compounded therapies.

© FlowStudio - © FlowStudio - stock.adobe.com

September 29th, 2026

Real-World Evidence Is Moving Upstream: Is the Data Infrastructure Ready?

RWE is finding a role earlier in drug development than ever before, but the data quality, integration, and organizational alignment required to make it regulatory-grade are still catching up to the ambition.

September 29th, 2026

The Data Inputs That Matter Most When Pressure-Testing a Protocol's Feasibility

In this video interview, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, explains why combining analog trial performance data with real-world patient data and site-level recruitment history gives sponsors a far more honest picture of whether their enrollment assumptions are actually achievable.

September 29th, 2026

ACT Brief: Trial Simulations and Protocol Risk, RBQM Financial Value Quantified, and Three Drug Approvals

In today's ACT Brief, we examine what AI simulations surface in trial design, how RBQM delivers measurable financial returns, and three new FDA-approved treatments across hair loss, movement disorder, and bone disease.

September 28th, 2026

Quantifying the Financial Value of RBQM: Q&A with Sylviane de Viron, CluePoints, and Abigail Dirks, Tufts CSDD

In this Q&A, Sylviane de Viron of CluePoints and Abigail Dirks, MS, of Tufts CSDD discuss the findings of a collaborative study quantifying the financial value of RBQM, why time savings emerged as the largest driver, and what sponsors struggling to justify adoption now have that they didn't before.

September 28th, 2026

The Design Flaws Trial Simulations Surface That Traditional Planning Misses

In this video interview, Claire Riches, VP of clinical solutions at Citeline, walks through the categories of hidden protocol risk that AI-driven simulations can identify—from overly restrictive eligibility criteria to patient dropout patterns and structural trial assumptions.