Life sciences leaders know the pressure of speed. A new therapy is waiting to launch, a validation deadline is approaching, or a critical CRM integration is falling behind. The question becomes: do you build an internal team or borrow talent through staff augmentation?
It is not an easy call. On one hand, internal teams provide ownership, stability, and long-term expertise. On the other, the regulatory environment and market dynamics in pharma and biotech do not always give you the luxury of time. Projects demand talent that can get up to speed quickly, align with compliance, and deliver measurable outcomes without delay.
At Newpage, we work with pharma CIOs, delivery leads, and program managers who are constantly balancing these trade-offs. What they often tell us is this: hiring in-house makes sense for leaders, product owners, and roles tied to intellectual property. But when timelines are tight, patient outcomes are at stake, or projects need urgent scaling, staff augmentation is not just helpful, it is essential.
Think about it this way. Would you hire a full-time team of validation engineers for the entire year, even if you only need them during a sprint? Or would you keep integration experts on the payroll after a migration is done? Probably not. The smart approach is to create a lean core team while borrowing domain-ready experts for high-pressure phases.
That is where solutions like X-tend by Newpage come in. X-tend is not traditional staffing. It is a model built around life sciences, designed to deliver talent that is pre-screened for compliance, equipped with the right domain knowledge, and able to start delivering within days. In practice, this has meant biotech firms hitting go-live dates in new markets, pharma companies recovering from slipped timelines, and compliance paperwork being completed on schedule.
The biggest mistake leaders make with staff augmentation is treating it like a commodity. Bringing in generic IT skills without industry training creates more risk than reward. Life sciences projects require precision. Every system, every workflow, every document has regulatory impact. Augmented teams must understand this context from day one.
That is why the best models are hybrid. Keep leadership and strategic ownership in-house, but lean on augmentation for delivery sprints, integration work, and urgent validation needs. It is not just about adding talent. It is about increasing capability.
The real question for life sciences leaders is not “Should we build or borrow?” but “How do we design the right mix so we can move fast while staying compliant?”
We dig into that question in detail on our blog: Build vs. Borrow: When to Use Staff Augmentation in IT Projects for Life Sciences.
If you are navigating these choices right now, this guide will help you think through the decision in a structured, practical way.
Top comments (0)