A staffing shortage needs a workload model leaders can act on

The workforce concern ASCP reports

ASCP's December 2, 2025 discussion of its 2024 vacancy survey describes persistent staffing shortages and lengthy hiring timelines. It also identifies training and adaptation challenges around AI adoption. These survey findings provide context; they are not a staffing formula for an individual laboratory.

A local business case needs to connect available people and skills with the work arriving by hour, shift, and test system. It should explain both the patient-testing workload and the quality work needed to sustain the service.

Measure capacity without hiding necessary work

Keep the familiar test-volume metric, then add observed hands-on time for exception handling, maintenance, QC, calibration, required review, troubleshooting, and training. Account for minimum coverage and skills needed to keep the service open. Use locally observed data and disclose assumptions.

Separate changes within a manager's control from those requiring corporate action. Scheduling, task assignment, escalation, purchasing, vendor support, recruitment approval, and technology decisions may sit with different owners. A fair analysis makes those responsibilities visible without dismissing individual performance.

• Demand by time period and type of work
• Available coverage and skill mix
• Queues, interruptions, repeated steps, and bottlenecks
• Outcome, quality, overtime, and staff-capacity measures

Give corporate leadership a decision, not just a ratio

A useful proposal compares options, their costs, quality protections, and dependencies. Test one improvement in a defined pilot and measure its effect before expanding. Released staff capacity is not automatically a cash saving, particularly when coverage requirements remain unchanged.

AssayIQ can scope this review within its cost and quality or department-efficiency services. A corporate agreement can use a common measurement framework with a separate site baseline and improvement plan. Directors receive a practical workflow recommendation; executives receive the resource decision and its evidence.