In 2016, Duke reconfigured its clinical research job descriptions and workforce to be competency-based, modeled around the Joint Taskforce for Clinical Trial Competency framework. To ensure consistency in job classification amongst new hires in the clinical research workforce, Duke subsequently implemented a Title Picker tool. The tool compares the research unit’s description of job responsibility needs against those standardized job descriptions used to map incumbents in 2016. Duke worked with human resources and evaluated the impact on their process as well as on the broader community of staff who hire clinical research professionals. Implementation of the tool has enabled Duke to create consistent job classifications for its workforce and better understand who composes the clinical research professional workforce. This tool has provided valuable workforce metrics, such as attrition, hiring, etc., and strengthened our collaboration with Human Resources.

Several reports have shown that doctoral and postdoctoral trainees in biomedical research pursue diverse careers that advance science meaningful to society. Several groups have proposed 3-tier career taxonomy to showcase these outcomes. This 3-tier taxonomy will be a valuable resource for institutions committed to greater transparency in reporting outcomes, to not only be transparent in reporting their own institutional data but also to lend greater power to a central repository.

The development of a high-quality primary healthcare system requires multidisciplinary perspectives and collaborations between clinicians and non-clinicians. Academic primary care departments across the United Kingdom and Ireland employ academics from a range of disciplines. However, questions remain about the parity of opportunity for career progression with a consistent trend to focus more on clinicians than non-clinicians. In this paper, we analyse the employment and careers of non-clinical primary care academics working in Ireland and Scotland. We draw on survey data from the island of Ireland and conference workshop discussions among Irish- and Scottish-based academics. We highlight problems with career progression and identify some strategic actions. We argue for a renewed attempt to ensure that all academics who are contributing to the discipline of primary care are appropriately acknowledged and supported to continue their endeavours to develop high-quality primary care health systems.