3194 Workforce Engagement and Resilience (WE-R): A Framework for Innovating Clinical Research Careers

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: 1.Assess changes in clinical research workforce landscape at Duke 2.Optimize and evaluate efficacy of a tier advancement process for clinical research career progression at Duke 3.Implement CRP engagement as a change management mechanism for workforce innovation METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We evaluated 857 clinical research positions at Duke to understand changes in the workforce (demographics, numbers in each position and tier) since implementing the tier advancement process in 2016. To understand the efficacy of the tier assessment process, data from a subset of this population (n=84) who underwent the advancement process was examined for success rate. Individual employees and their managers were surveyed to understand their perception of the advancement process and identify areas for improvement. We also describe implementation of multiple mechanisms of community engagement to manage expectations around the tier advancement process and to provide opportunities for employees to self-manage their career planning, including portfolio planning and leadership opportunities. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Whereas the clinical research workforce has grown by 5.5% since tiering began (2016, n=810; 2018 n=857). Nearly 13% of that growth has been in managerial or senior positions (2016, n=111; 2018 n=127). Distributions across job classifications changed only slightly, representing realignment of positions with study-level responsibilities over department-level responsibilities. Notably, clinical research nurses (CRNC & CRNC Sr.) was the only category including tiered and non-tiered positions to drop overall numbers between 2016 (n = 136) and 2018 (n=115), representing a shift in the workforce from research nurses to research coordinators. General demographics (gender, age) remained largely the same. A total of 359 positions have been hired during this time frame, nearly half of which were entry-level positions (175/359): 47 of these positions represent expansion of the workforce. Of 359 new hires since 2016, 271 currently still work in one of the research roles. Of the 84 employees who underwent the tier advancement process, 84% (43/51) succeeded in tier 2 advancement, 70% (14/20) succeeded in tier 3 advancement (CRC, CRNC, and regulatory coordinators), and 77% (10/13) of research program leaders (RPLs) succeeded in achieving tier two, which is the highest tier for this group. Fifty-five employees (65%) and 32 managers responded to a voluntary feedback survey. Overall confidence in the process improved in both groups from 2016 to 2018, most notably with managers. Both groups indicated a 10 hour reduction (employees = 35hr, 2016 and 25hr 2018; managers 25hr, 2016 and 15hr 2018) in time required to complete the tier advancement process. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The use of objectively-assessed competencies is an important step in the development of a workforce. By 1) maintaining alignment with industry standards for competencies, 2) upholding high standards, and 3) offering a consistent approach to career growth, Duke is working to develop and maintain a workforce that supports high quality research. Since the implementation of standardized job classifications and competency-based tier advancement, the positions have undergone rigorous competency-based needs evaluation. This leads to better matched jobs to study needs as well as increased standardization across the clinical research workforce. We believe that the subtle workforce shifts represent alignment of our positions with the business needs of our clinical research enterprise. Additionally, approximately 15% of our clinical research workforce has taken advantage of the opportunity to advance their own careers. We have made significant improvements in the following tier advancement processes: standardization of assessments, scoring guides, and modes; changes from LMS to a REDCap delivery of the knowledge assessments; streamlined the utilization of electronic documentation; and additional guidance for employees and managers regarding portfolio inclusions. These improvements have increased satisfaction and acceptance with the advancement process and were made possible through strategic communication across the workforce. Regular town hall meetings and focus group feedback sessions have included the clinical research community in discussions of WE-R initiatives and provided a much-needed feedback loop for process improvement and change management. Moreover, inclusion of WE-R discussion in our Research Professional Network events has provided opportunities to discuss career advancement strategies as well as volunteer opportunities to grow and demonstrate leadership competencies.