Remote Work and the Institutional Review Board: Reimagining Engagement in a

March 26, 2025

In the wake of a global shift in workplace culture, one sector that has remained particularly tethered to tradition is research compliance—specifically, the operations of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs). Universities and research institutions often double down on the idea that in-person work fosters a stronger sense of community, improves researcher engagement, and ensures tighter oversight of participant protections. But is that assumption still serving us?

Post-pandemic, we've learned a critical lesson: connection is not limited to proximity.

Remote work has proven, across sectors, to be not just feasible but highly effective—especially when built on intentional communication systems and trust-based leadership. Yet, within IRB offices and HRPP management, there's an ongoing resistance to flexibility, even as key roles remain vacant for months on end. Institutions continue to prioritize hiring local, in-person personnel while overlooking the vast talent pool of remote research compliance professionals who could bring immediate relief, innovation, and depth to struggling teams.

This approach is causing ripple effects: administrative burnout, missed deadlines, strained reviewer relationships, and delays in study activation. Ultimately, this impacts the core mission—protecting human participants in research.

The Question We Must Ask

How committed are we to our values if we continue to lean on antiquated models that no longer serve our mission? Is it truly about maintaining a sense of "community," or are we clinging to a sense of control rooted in outdated organizational culture?

HRPPs and IRBs are built on the foundational ethics of respect, beneficence, and justice. Shouldn’t those same principles extend to the very people managing these systems? Respect for flexibility, beneficence in workload distribution, and justice in accessing talent beyond institutional borders?

A Path Forward

To stay aligned with the evolving research landscape, institutions must take a fresh look at what it means to build community in research compliance. Virtual meeting platforms, collaborative tools, and digital engagement have already proven capable of supporting rigorous protocol review, investigator communication, and regulatory compliance.

It's time we acknowledge that strong communication channels, clear expectations, and a shared mission—not hallway conversations—are what make teams truly cohesive.

The longer we insist on filling roles the "traditional" way, the more we risk losing good staff, delaying important studies, and compromising the very protections we aim to uphold.

Let’s ask the community: What are we truly trying to protect—human participants or outdated institutional norms?