Legacy tools and processes no longer support the business objectives for pharma. The only way to meet the growing demands for more content, faster, is to adopt a structured content ecosystem.
There is no such thing as a perfect structure because it is going to change over time. With new products and services should come new content types. And new content types often require new structures.
The first thing to decide about special statements is how you will use each category. What type of information goes into a note? A caution? A warning? What really is the difference between a caution and a warning? Most companies that I work with have not defined caution versus warning,
“We cannot change the authoring experience.” This, more than anything else, is the message we used to be told (and still hear often) when we suggest a component-based structured authoring environment for medical writers at pharmaceutical companies. The authoring experience using Microsoft Word reigns supreme. Any changes to this interface
We can no longer afford the costs of traditional, document-based content management in the pharmaceutical industry. We need pharma companies to prioritize content reuse and automation rather than manual, error-prone legacy processes.
One of the first and most important questions I ask any customer who cares about content quality is, “Do you have a terminology list?” About 70% of the time, the answer is, “Yes, we have a glossary.” Though they both have their uses, glossary and terminology are not the same