This blog is part of the Month of CIRM series
CIRM adopted the mantra of “operational excellence” as a way to strengthen our problem‑solving, teamwork, and overall results.
Getting better
The Business Dictionary defines operational excellence as:
“A philosophy of the workplace where problem-solving, teamwork, and leadership results in the ongoing improvement in an organization.”
Moving faster isn’t always the right approach—just ask anyone who’s been ticketed for doing 65 mph in a 30 mph zone. But at CIRM, working with greater speed and efficiency has had a major payoff.
Evolving operation
When CIRM launched in 2004, we were a truly unique organization. That meant we had to build nearly everything from the ground up: how we requested applications, how we reviewed them, how we funded them, and more. Ten years later, it became clear that—even though those early systems served us well—there was still significant room to improve how we operated.
So we made changes. Big ones.
We didn’t want to simply tweak our processes; we wanted to rethink and redesign every part of our operation. And to do that, we included everyone. Through a series of all‑staff meetings, every person at CIRM—literally everyone—was invited to contribute ideas on how to make our organization better.
CIRM 2.0
The result was CIRM 2.0—a transformation so sweeping that calling it “a radical overhaul” almost understated it. We increased the speed, frequency, and volume of our programs, making it easier and more predictable for researchers to apply for funding, and much faster to receive it once approved.
Before 2.0, the path from applying for clinical trial funding to receiving it took nearly two years. Today it takes about 120 days.
But speed wasn’t our only focus—we also wanted to work smarter. Previously, if a clinical trial application wasn’t approved, a researcher might wait another 12 months for the next opportunity. For many diseases, that delay could be devastating. So we changed the rules. Now, any project ready for a clinical trial can apply at any time. And instead of a simple “yes” or “no,” our independent reviewers now provide constructive feedback for promising but incomplete applications, allowing researchers to revise and resubmit within 30 days.
This shift has increased not only the number of clinical trial applications but also their quality.
Patients
We made similar changes in our Discovery and Translation programs: more frequent award cycles, clearer timelines, and new incentives to move strong projects forward. Our goal was to build a steady pipeline of promising therapies progressing toward the clinic.
Our motivation is our patients. At CIRM, we are in the time business. Many patients counting on stem cell treatments don’t have time to spare. We owe it to them to shorten the path from discovery to therapy—without ever compromising safety.
By the end of 2016, the results were unmistakable. We were reviewing more projects, holding reviews more frequently, and completing those reviews more quickly than ever before.
But we are not done yet. We have done a good job of improving the way we work. But there is always room to be even better, to go even faster and be more efficient.
We are not done accelerating. Not by a long shot.