Custom Objects
Support for custom objects such as studies, subjects, experiments, and specimens so research entities can be modeled directly in the CRM with tailored fields, relationships, and lifecycle workflows to match protocol needs.
A clear proposal reduces ambiguity, aligns cross-functional teams, and provides criteria for vendor evaluation and regulatory compliance, supporting better decision-making and predictable project outcomes.
Leads research direction, defines data collection needs, and specifies outcomes. They review CRM features for participant tracking, data integrity, and reporting while coordinating with IT on integration and access requirements.
Manages technical scope, vendor evaluation, implementation timeline, and resource allocation. They ensure APIs, authentication, and backups meet organizational standards and align the CRM rollout with existing infrastructure.
Project proposals for CRM in research and development are usually developed collaboratively by project managers, IT, research leads, and compliance officers to ensure technical and regulatory alignment.
Final approval workflows commonly involve finance and executive sponsors who evaluate cost, risk, and strategic fit before moving to procurement and implementation.
Support for custom objects such as studies, subjects, experiments, and specimens so research entities can be modeled directly in the CRM with tailored fields, relationships, and lifecycle workflows to match protocol needs.
Configurable workflows and approval chains that automate status transitions, notifications, and escalations for tasks like consent collection, sample tracking, and protocol amendments to reduce manual coordination overhead.
Ability to send batch communications and documents to cohorts or multiple sites with templated content and per-recipient personalization to streamline participant outreach and document distribution.
Comprehensive APIs and webhook support for real-time data exchange with laboratory systems, LIMS, and analytics platforms to ensure timely synchronization and event-driven automation across the research ecosystem.
Custom report builders and dashboards that surface enrollment metrics, study progress, and data quality indicators to stakeholders and sponsors with exportable formats for audit and analysis.
Immutable logging of record changes, user actions, and document signatures that supports forensic review, regulatory audits, and demonstrates compliance with U.S. legal requirements for research documentation.
Enable live document collaboration and versioning for protocols and consent forms while linking documents to CRM records so research teams maintain a single source of truth and reduce duplicate file handling across projects.
Define required CRM fields, custom objects, and triggers for research entities such as studies, subjects, and experiments to ensure accurate tracking and automated status updates across stakeholders and downstream reporting.
Specify secure storage locations for large datasets, raw files, and backups with controlled sharing and audit logs, ensuring data accessibility for approved users while supporting retention and deletion policies.
Establish metadata sync between files and CRM records so that document attributes follow the experiment lifecycle, simplifying search, compliance, and reproducibility checks across research phases.
| Workflow Setting Name and Configuration Header | Default configuration value used for initial setup and later refinement |
|---|---|
| Reminder Frequency for Approvals | 48 hours |
| Automatic Record Lock After Approval | Enabled |
| Data Export Window | 30 days |
| Failed Integration Retry Policy | Exponential backoff |
| Retention Notification Threshold | 90 days before deletion |
Ensure the proposal lists supported client platforms and minimum browser or app versions so users across devices can access CRM functionality reliably.
Specify any limitations for offline operation, recommended network bandwidth, and accessibility accommodations to ensure the deployment meets institutional IT policies and user expectations across research sites.
A mid‑stage biotech firm needed centralized participant management and site coordination
Resulting in faster study onboarding and clearer audit evidence for regulators
A public university required a system for tracking collaborative grants and data access
Leading to improved compliance and simplified reporting for sponsors
| Criteria | signNow | DocuSign | Adobe Sign |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk Send Capability | |||
| API Access | Robust REST API | Comprehensive REST API | Extensive REST API |
| HIPAA Support | Available with BAA | Available with BAA | Available with BAA |
| Enterprise SSO | SAML 2.0 | SAML 2.0 | SAML 2.0 |
Gather stakeholder input and document needs
Define data models and integration approach
Evaluate options against requirements
Deploy with limited scope for validation
Complete audits and remediate findings
Scale to all users and sites
Monitor, train, and iterate on feedback
Document outcomes and lessons learned
Target date for executive review
Date to finalize procurement
Begin testing with sample data
Finalize security assessments
Planned production deployment
| Plan / Vendor | signNow (Recommended) | DocuSign (Featured) | Adobe Sign | HelloSign | OneSpan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starting Monthly Price (per user) | $8–$15 | $10–$30 | $15–$35 | $15 | Custom enterprise pricing |
| API Included | Yes, standard | Yes, standard | Yes, standard | Yes, limited | Yes, enterprise |
| Bulk Send Included | Yes | Add-on in some tiers | Yes | Add-on | Enterprise feature |
| HIPAA / BAA | Available with BAA | Available with BAA | Available with BAA | Available with BAA | Available with BAA |
| Enterprise SSO Options | SAML and SCIM | SAML and SCIM | SAML and SCIM | SAML | SAML and advanced options |