Recruitment Isn’t Just Hiring — It’s a Reflection of Your Systems

One of the most overlooked indicators of a company’s internal systems is how it handles recruitment.

What stands out to me is the consistency of communication during the process, or rather the lack of it.

Over the past decade, I’ve kept a fairly consistent log of recruiter interactions.  One pattern stands out: communication is strong at the beginning of the process with the position discussed, candidate alignment established and engagement is positive. Continue reading

post

Comparison of PIC/S PE009-13 and PE009-14

Introduction

The PIC/S Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice PE009-13 was published January 1, 2017.  Edition 14 was published on 1 July, 2018.

The TGA adopted version 13 of the guide in 2018 and “just given” notice that it intends to adopt the current version of the PIC/S Guide (PE009-14) by July 1st 2020.

So you know what changes, if any you need to make to be in compliance with PE009-14, what are the key differences between these two guidance documents? Continue reading

post

Book Review of “Eliminating the Gobbledygook” by Kathy Walsh

Clear documentation is one of the most underrated technical skills within regulated manufacturing environments. Over the years I’ve written, reviewed, updated, and maintained large volumes of SOPs, work instructions, investigation reports, validation protocols, and controlled quality documents across pharmaceutical and food manufacturing operations.

As part of maintaining and refreshing those skills, I revisited Eliminating the Gobbledygook – Secrets to Writing Plain Language Procedures by Kathy Walsh, a book focused on practical plain-language documentation within Quality Management Systems. Continue reading

Review of Draft Standard: AS 2828.2 Health records, Part 2: Digitized health records

One way I keep myself up to date with developments within laboratories and related areas is by reviewing draft standards.  This keeps me appraised of the current state of affairs, keeps my documentation audit skills fresh and potentially allows me to contribute to the content of standards.  For this draft standard, I have some knowledge of IT and IT security so am able to critically review the draft standard and offer comment.

Notes: refer to the conditions for comment stated towards the beginning of the draft standard.

DR AS 2828.2 Health records, Part 2: Digitized health records Continue reading

Review of Draft Standard: AS 2243.2 Safety In Laboratories – Part 2: Chemical Aspects

One way I keep myself up to date with developments within laboratories and related areas is by reviewing draft standards.  This keeps me appraised of the current state of affairs, keeps my documentation audit skills fresh and potentially allows me to contribute to the content of standards.

Notes: refer to the conditions for comment stated towards the beginning of the draft standard.

Update 20190103: After proceeding to submit comments, I observed page numbers were required.  That is important to note for future reviews.  Page numbers added.

DR AS 2243.1 Safety In Laboratories – Part 2: Chemical Aspects Continue reading

Review of Draft Standard: AS 2243.1 Safety In Laboratories – Planning and Operational Aspects

One way I keep myself up to date with developments within laboratories and related areas is by reviewing draft standards.  This keeps me appraised of the current state of affairs, keeps my documentation audit skills fresh and potentially allows me to contribute to the content of standards.

Here I step through the draft standard making comments.  Where a comment is answered later in the standard, I go back to my original comment and make notes.  An uncommented comment is potentially worthy of becoming an official comment on the standard.

Update 20190103: page nubmers added.

Section 1 Continue reading

IMM3022 Immunocytochemical and Lectin Labelling of Acid Secreting Cells in the Stomach and Kidney

IMM3022 Immunocytochemical and Lectin Labelling of Acid Secreting Cells in the Stomach and Kidney

Paul Yeatman

Partner/s: Rachael Davies, Tanya De Jong, AnnalieseSampey, Adreana Lambrinakos, Anna Rentoulis, Steve Argirio, Spiros Foscolos.

Date: 24th August -> 5th October 1994.

Introduction

Certain organs in the body contain cells, which are involved in acid secretion. In the stomach such cells are called parietal cells and exist in gastric pits contained in the stomach body. (Diagram.1 and Diagram.2). In the kidney such cells are known as intercalated cells, and line the collecting ducts of the kidney. (Diagram.3 and Diagram.4) In both cases, a two-subunit ATP dependent (ATPase) proton pump controls the acid secretion. Continue reading

Science In Australia

There was an advert for a science communicator / project manager this week.  The twitter post said must love science (*tick*) and have skills (*tick*).  I checked it out.  The role was skewed towards science communication and requires someone with a history of producing media reports, blogging, liaison with the science industry etc.  Enthusiasm alone would not cut it, though it would make the role a challenge, and that’s what I’m here for – challenges.

One requirement was to be able to name at least 10 science organisations in Australia.  Hmm, thought I cannot do that.  That’s embarrassing.  So, here’s what I could name off the top of my head and then here’s what I could find using the great advertising machine known as Google.

Off the top of my head with lots of brain racking

  1. Australian Synchrotron – http://www.synchrotron.org.au/
  2. CSIRO – https://www.csiro.au/
  3. Australian Signals Directorate – https://www.asd.gov.au/ (actually intelligence, thought this was science, or science based)
  4. Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (WEHI) – https://www.wehi.edu.au/ (I should know more of these)
  5. Florey, aka the Howard Florey Institute – https://www.florey.edu.au/
  6. The Australian International Gravity Observatory – http://www.aigo.org.au/ Everyone who visits should do the solar system walk.  Pluto is so far away!  Take water.
  7. The Australian Telescope National Facility – http://www.atnf.csiro.au/ – technically CSIRO.
  8. The Australian Antarctic Division – http://www.antarctica.gov.au/
  9. The Australian Association for Microbiology – http://www.theasm.org.au/
  • CSL before it went private (so not counting it).
  • Many pharma companies (which I’m not going to count).
  • Museums (Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney) – do these count.  They should count.
  • I could name ScienceInPublic, as they posted the advert.  That would be cheating!
  • All our universities.  Again, cheating if I named them.

Nine’s not bad, though I should know at least 20.

Ones I needed to look up (shame on me)

After four, I felt I was scraping the bottom of the Google barrel.  I soon discovered that while many about pages may list the organisation name in the header meta, the names were missing from the body of the page.  I also found that in lots of articles about science produced by Australia, the organisation producing the science was not named. Not how you build brand recognition.

  1. Australian Science Communicators – http://www.asc.asn.au/
  2. Australian Academy of Science – https://www.science.org.au/ Tad worried I’d forgotten about them.  I remember them as the premier science outfit and I had an old photo ruler from here.
  3. Innovation and Science Australia (ISA) – https://www.innovation.gov.au/page/innovation-and-science-australia
  4. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority – http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/ – I knew something existed, but could not name it.
  5. Woodside Australian Science Project – www.wasp.edu.au/
  6. The Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering (ATSE) – https://www.atse.org.au/
  7. The Royal Institution of Australia – http://riaus.org.au/
  8. Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science – http://cpas.anu.edu.au/ Perhaps needs to work harder?  Three Google pages down using “australian science” as my search term.
  9. The Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) – http://www.tern.org.au/
  10. Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity – https://www.doherty.edu.au/  Most disappointing I did not know this given I’ve an immunology degree!
  11. Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics (ACAP) – http://www.acap.net.au/

Related to this, I could name lots of science Australia has produced or is working on.  The various inventions reportedly to come out of Australia, (Hills hoist, the ute, the stump jumper), stomach ulcers being caused by Helicobacter pylori, matter transport/Quantum entanglement, eradicating rats by using dogs from an Island off the coast of Warrnambool (awww, Oddball died in February.  I’ve also merged this with Macquarie Island where dogs were used to eat all the rabbits, rats and mice – Oddball was a fox eaterupperer), wi-fi (CSIRO), the joint US-Australian military research project called Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation (HIFiRE) testing hypersonic engines, the people developing organs in a petri dish, various cancer research and I’m sure I could come up with more.

On the topic of Australian science, have a read of Australia’s National Science Statement – 2017.  It states science means “Natural, physical and life sciences, including medical and health sciences, mathematics, engineering and technology‑related disciplines.”

That’s not a proper description.  Science is the methodical and rigorous study of phenomena to understand them and the application of such methods and results to produce things.  The results can be knowledge, TV’s, vaccines, better car tyre rubber, ducks that go woof, less harrowing cancer treatments, key hole surgery, the “discovery” that fat is turned to water and CO2 and expelled in order to lose weight – even if it is obvious, it needs proving.

Making sure I had some idea my above description in bold was more or less correct, I checked our a dictionary and it said “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.”  Yup – within acceptable error limits.