“Don’t Panic”: The Human-Centred Laboratory Quality System

In our previous article, I wrote about employee morale and the human side of quality. It’s how well-designed systems give people clarity, confidence, and a sense of purpose. In this follow-up article, I look at how we intentionally design and run a quality management system (QMS) that supports real human beings in real laboratories, rather than just existing to keep auditors and regulators happy? Because as every Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy fan knows, it’s no use having the Answer to Life, the Universe and Everything if nobody understands the question. In labs, we often have beautifully documented systems that answer all sorts of compliance questions… but don’t quite line up with how people actually work.

 

The “Human Interface” of Your QMS

We often talk about instrument and LIMS interfaces, and sometimes data interfaces. But the most critical interface in the laboratory is the one between the system and the person using it.

A QMS is experienced by staff through:

• The procedures they have to follow
• The forms they have to complete
• The training they receive (or don’t receive)
• The way nonconformances and issues are handled
• The tone leaders use when they talk about quality

If that experience feels confusing, punitive, or unnecessarily bureaucratic, morale drops, even if the system looks perfect in a NATA assessment report.

On the other hand, when the system makes it easy to do things the right way, helps people avoid errors rather than catch them afterwards, and provides clear, practical guidance at the point of need, then the QMS becomes what it should be: a reliable “towel” that staff can grab when things get messy. Versatile. Trustworthy. Always useful when there’s a metaphorical (or actual) spill.

 

Involve People in System Design

Too many documents are written at the desk by someone far removed from day-to-day bench work. The result? Procedures that are technically correct but practically awkward. Staff then develop their own “workarounds,” which erode both compliance and trust.

One of the simplest ways to improve morale through your QMS is to stop designing it for people and start designing it with them.

This idea is actually a well-established area of practice: human-centred design.

It’s not a linear process, and there are twists and turns along the way because, you know, humans are messy creatures. There are three phases.

• Inspiration – learn how to better understand people, observe their lives, hear their hopes and desires
• Ideation – make sense of everything you’ve heard, generate lots of ideas, identify ideas for design, and test and refine the solutions
• Implementation – bring the solution to life

There are some good online tools to help with adopting this approach at https://www.ideo.org/tools.

So next time you’re developing a new process or procedure, or reviewing an existing one, try:

• Co-creating procedures
  Bring in the people who actually run the tests, manage the samples or review the results. Ask them to walk you through what they really do. Listen to their hopes and desires. Then write the procedure together, validating each step against both the standard and reality.
• Running “human factors” reviews
  Before approving a new or revised procedure, ask a few simple questions:
  • Is this clear to someone new to the role?
  • Is there unnecessary duplication?
  • Does the sequence of steps match the physical layout of the lab?
  • Are there points where confusion, distraction, or fatigue are likely?
• Testing with real users
  Ask a staff member (ideally not the author) to follow the procedure as if they’ve never seen it before. Watch what happens. Where do they hesitate, improvise, or ask for clarification? That’s where you improve the document.

Involving staff in the creation and review of the system does three things at once:

1. Improves the quality of the documents
2. Builds ownership and buy-in
3. Signals respect for people’s expertise

Nothing says “we value your brain” quite like inviting someone to help design the system they’re required to use.

 

Create Procedures People Can Actually Use

Laboratory and quality professionals know that detail matters. But there’s a difference between enough detail and Vogon-level paperwork.

When procedures become 40-page epics, people, including the Vogon auditors, stop reading them. They skim. They rely on memory. They copy what the last person did. No one is comforted by the knowledge that, technically, all the required information is in there somewhere.

To get past this, try the following approaches.

• Develop layered documentation
  • Quick-reference flowcharts, decision trees, or checklists at the point of use
  • Clear, step-by-step instructions for core tasks
  • Detailed background, rationales, and references in appendices or supporting documents
• Plain language

Avoid jargon where you can. Use verbs. Replace “shall” with “must” or “will” where appropriate. The goal is precision and readability.

• Visual cues

Use tables, diagrams, and highlighting to make key decisions and risks stand out. If a step is critical for safety or validity, make sure it is visually hard to miss.

• “Don’t Panic” design

For complex or high-risk processes, design your documents so that the first message is effectively: Don’t panic. Start here.

Walk people through the first three actions they must take, then explain the rest. In an emergency, nobody wants to read three pages of definitions before they find the phone number for the person on call.

Good documentation doesn’t remove professional judgement; it supports it. The goal is for staff to feel guided, not micromanaged.

 

Creating a Psychologically Safe environment

These days, we are all required to ensure that psychosocial hazards in the workplace are dealt with. Did you know your lab’s QMS can help with this?

How can this happen? Well, you can have the best procedures in the world, but if staff are afraid to admit mistakes, quality and the staff will suffer.

In many labs, people have lived through times where raising an issue meant blame, extra workload, or being labelled “difficult.” Once that pattern sets in, incidents stop being reported. Morale drops. Small problems grow quietly until they become big problems.

If we want people to engage fully with the QMS, we must create psychological safety: the belief that you can speak up about errors, near misses, and concerns without being punished or humiliated.

Here are some practical ways to build this.

• Focus on “what” before “who”
  When a nonconformance occurs, start with the system:
  • What conditions allowed this to happen?
  • What barriers were missing or weak?
  • What did the documentation, training, or supervision look like?
    Only once the system has been examined should you look at individual decisions. Even then, investigate with care and fairness.
• Separate learning from discipline
  There may occasionally be behaviour that requires formal action, such as deliberate falsification of data. But these cases are rare.

The more routine events, like mislabelled samples, missed checks, and late calibrations, should be treated as opportunities for learning and improvement, not automatic disciplinary matters.

• Praise the act of speaking up
  When someone raises an issue early, thank them. Publicly acknowledge that this is what good quality behaviour looks like. This reinforces the message that the organisation values transparency more than the illusion of perfection.

Over time, this builds a culture where the QMS is not something people hide from, but a shared framework for making the work safer, more reliable, and less stressful.

 

Leadership in Practice: Walking the Quality Talk

Leaders are the ones holding the metaphorical towel and the actual budget. Their behaviour either reinforces or undermines everything the QMS is trying to do.

Here are some practical leadership behaviours that support morale and quality.

• Consistent decision-making

When deadlines are tight or clients are demanding, do you still insist on proper checks, controls, and reviews? Do you back your staff when they say, “We need more time to do this properly”? If the deadlines are tight only once in a blue moon, then most people can work through this. If it happens weekly or monthly, then you need to reassess the situation.

Each decision either strengthens or weakens your quality culture.

• Visible engagement with data

Leaders who ask smart questions about quality data, like trends in nonconformances, turnaround times, customer feedback, and PT results, signal that this information matters.

When staff see that their careful recording and reporting lead to real decisions, they’re more likely to invest in doing it well.

• Curiosity instead of blame

When something goes wrong, leaders who respond with “Help me understand what happened” build trust. Those who respond with “Who did this?” build silence.

• Making capacity for improvement

Improvement takes time. If every minute of every day is booked for routine work, there will never be space for genuine change.

Leaders who ring-fence time for root cause analysis, process redesign, or risk reviews send the message that improvement is not an optional extra; it’s part of the job.

In other words, leadership commitment isn’t a line in the quality policy; it is visible in how leaders react on the worst day of the month.

 

Keeping Morale Alive in Times of Change and Stress

Laboratories rarely have the luxury of “business as usual.” There are new methods, new regulations and requirements, new clients, restructures, reorganisations, and of course, the joyous cycle of surveillance and reassessment.

Change is inevitable. Burnout is not.

Ways to protect morale during intense change:

• Prioritise ruthlessly

Not every known improvement can be done at once. Focus on changes that:

• • Reduce risk
  • Remove frustration for staff
  • Have clear benefit for customers
    Explain what you’re not doing right now, and why.

• Communicate timelines and expectations

People handle change better when they can see the road ahead. Even if the plan shifts, a shared roadmap is better than silence.

Make that roadmap visible so everyone can see the progress.

• Recognise effort, not just outcomes

A method development and validation exercise, or a major system upgrade, may take months. Celebrate milestones along the way: draft method completed, pilot run successful, first internal audit passed under the new process.

• Use the QMS to support change, not fight it
  • Use risk assessments to decide the order and pace of implementation
  • Use change control processes to deliberately consider training needs and communication
  • Use internal audits to check whether changes are bedding in, and to gather feedback

When managed well, major change can strengthen morale. People see that their organisation is investing in doing things better, not just doing more.

 

Practical Starting Points for a More Human-Centred QMS

You might be wondering where to start, so here are some concrete actions.

1. Run a “frustration audit”
Ask staff:

• • What quality-related tasks feel like they add no value?
  • Where do you repeatedly see confusion or rework? Use the answers to identify priority improvements.

2. Simplify one high-pain procedure

Choose a process everyone groans about and redesign it collaboratively. Make it your proof-of-concept for human-centred quality.

3. Review how you talk about nonconformances

Look at your last few incident investigations. Does the language reflect learning… or blame? Adjust templates and training accordingly.

4. Add a “Don’t Panic” element

For at least one critical process, introduce a visible, calming quick-guide: a laminated card, a one-page flowchart, or a clearly labelled section in the LIMS. Make it obvious where to start when everything goes sideways.

5. Make improvement visible

Use a simple board or dashboard to show current improvement projects, their status, and who’s involved. This helps staff see that issues they raise do not vanish into a black hole.

Each of these steps sends the message: Quality is here to help you do great work, not to catch you out.

Download our Human-Centred QMS Kickstart Checklist here!

Conclusion: Quality Systems That Remember the People

The best labs are not the ones with the thickest manuals or the most colourful organograms. They are the ones where people feel supported, trusted, and equipped to do high-quality work. Even on the days when instruments misbehave, samples flood in, and accreditation visits loom.

A quality management system that nurtures morale:

• Clarifies expectations instead of adding confusion
• Encourages openness instead of fear
• Helps people recover from mistakes instead of hiding them
• Aligns leadership behaviour with the values printed on the quality policy

In short, it remembers that the system exists for the humans, not the other way around.

If The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy had a laboratory edition, its cover might still say “Don’t Panic” – but the next line would read: Make sure your people know where their towel is, and make sure your QMS helps them use it.

Because in the complex universe of laboratory work, the real engine of quality is not a standard, a form, or a flowchart. It’s a team of motivated, respected professionals who know that their system has their back, so they can focus on doing the job right, the first time, and every time.

 

BONUS: Grab your exclusive copy of How to Work With Obstacles for a Human-Centred QMS (Instead of Giving Up) here!