Background context:

Clinical trials rely on detailed protocols—guidelines that dictate how a trial is run. At Slope, our users depend on accurate, easy-to-manage protocol configurations to ensure quality and regulatory compliance. This is the foundation of or product, and every aspect of the Clinical trial management in Slope connects to the protocol. 

However, managing protocols in our platform was slow, error-prone, and misaligned with how trials are structured in the real world. With upcoming partnerships with global pharma companies, we needed to rethink our approach to scale effectively.

The Problems: Our legacy protocol management system couldn't support:

• Full protocol lifecycle

• External user acceptance testing (UAT)

• Easy versioning (amendments)

• Data accuracy and control at scale

This limited our ability to grow and required heavy manual intervention.

Goal: Redesign protocol management so it:

• Scales without manual work

• Reflects real-world clinical trial workflows

• Reduces risk of data and configuration errors

Solution:

We built a new protocol management structure in our platform that mirrors how clinical trials actually operate—streamlining processes, reducing risk, and improving user experience. We introduced a new protocol management structure that included:

• Lifecycle-based protocol statuses (e.g., Draft, UAT, Active, Locked)

• Support for versioning and protocol amendments

• Better data integrity and tracking across the trial lifespan

This foundation created a scalable, user-friendly experience that aligned with industry standards and unlocked Slope’s ability to support larger, global trials.

How did we get there?

• Identified core problems and aligned on business value

• Validated ideas through stakeholder interviews and small-scale testing

• Determined that short-term fixes (like manual file uploads) wouldn't scale

• Designed a foundational solution that supports long-term growth and enterprise needs

Product methods used:

• Opportunity Solution Mapping

• Requirements Gathering & Prioritization

• User Flow Design

• Competitive & Industry Analysis

• Stakeholder Alignment

Lessons Learned:

1. Quick fixes can cost more than foundational change.
Early on, there was pressure to “just patch what we have” rather than rebuild. But after evaluating both paths, it became clear: temporary fixes were more expensive long-term and didn’t solve our scalability or data integrity issues. Rebuilding the protocol structure from the ground up was the most strategic and cost-effective choice. Once aligned, we launched an MVP with a structured rollout to minimize disruption.

2. Identify root causes, not just symptoms.
We collected 50+ user complaints and requests—but many were symptoms of deeper issues. By zooming out, we uncovered recurring themes around lifecycle gaps, lack of version control, and limited UAT capabilities. Solving these root problems avoided wasteful investments in isolated features that wouldn't scale—or worse, introduced new risks.