Paper-based processes and spreadsheets can support basic tracking. As requirements increase, they introduce inconsistency, reduce visibility, and make compliance more difficult to demonstrate.
- Already in use across the organization
- Low initial cost
- No change to existing ways of working
- Data inconsistencies and duplication
- Limited control over document versions
- Manual approvals delay critical processes
- Audit trails are incomplete or difficult to verify
- Collaboration breaks down across teams and sites
- Controlled, configurable workflows aligned to your processes
- Real-time visibility across documents, CAPA, audits, and training
- Automated approvals with full traceability
- Complete, audit-ready history of all activity
- A single, scalable system for managing quality end-to-end
Trackmedium provides the structure, control, and visibility required to scale with confidence.
SharePoint is widely used for document storage and collaboration.
Managing quality requires structured workflows, control, and traceability beyond file sharing.
- Centralized document storage
- Team collaboration
- Familiar Microsoft environment
- Requires significant configuration to support quality workflows
- Not designed for end-to-end QMS processes (CAPA, audits, training)
- Limited visibility across quality activities
- Difficult to enforce consistency and control at scale
- Purpose-built for quality management, not adapted from collaboration tools
- Integrated workflows across documents, CAPA, audits, and training
- Clear ownership, accountability, and full audit traceability
- Configurable without reliance on custom development
Adapting collaboration tools introduces complexity and cost.
ERP platforms are essential for running business operations. Managing quality requires structured workflows, flexibility, and traceability that ERP modules are not designed to provide.
- Finance and procurement
- Inventory and production
- Operational planning
- Limited support for end-to-end quality processes (CAPA, audits, training)
- Changes often require development or vendor involvement
- Not designed for quality teams or day-to-day usability
- Limited flexibility to adapt workflows as processes evolve
- Purpose-built workflows across CAPA, audits, documents, and training
- Configurable by quality teams without custom development
- Designed for usability and adoption across the organization
- Supports compliance, audit readiness, and continuous improvement
ERP systems run operations. Trackmedium gives you control over your quality system.
Tools like Dropbox, OneDrive, and Box are useful for sharing files. Managing quality requires structured workflows, control, and traceability that file-sharing tools do not provide.
- Store and share documents
- Simple collaboration
- Easy access across teams
- Controlled document approval workflows
- Complete audit trails and traceability
- CAPA and nonconformance management
- Integration across quality processes (documents, audits, training)
- End-to-end control across quality processes
- Built-in workflows for documents, CAPA, audits, and training
- Full traceability with clear ownership and accountability
- A centralized, scalable quality system
Sharing files is not the same as controlling quality processes.
Homegrown systems can feel tailored at the start. Over time, they become harder to maintain, slower to evolve, and increasingly dependent on internal resources.
- Need for a solution tailored to internal processes
- Existing in-house development capability
- Perceived cost savings upfront
- Reliance on key individuals creates knowledge risk
- Changes are slow and require developer involvement
- Limited scalability across teams, sites, and processes
- Inconsistent user experience reduces adoption
- Ongoing maintenance introduces hidden costs
- Purpose-built for quality processes across documents, CAPA, audits, and training
- Configurable by quality teams without custom cevelopment
- Consistent user experience drives adoption across the organization
- Continuously supported and improved without internal dependency
- Scales with your processes, teams, and regulatory requirements
Custom-built systems may fit today. Trackmedium scales with your quality system over time.
Most organizations rely on a mix of spreadsheets, email, and shared folders.
It functions - but lacks control, visibility, and scalability.
- Documents stored across multiple locations
- Actions tracked through email and spreadsheets
- Manual audit preparation and follow-up
- No single source of truth
- Time lost chasing updates and approvals
- Inconsistent processes across teams
- Limited visibility into quality performance
- Increased audit risk and preparation effort
- Systems that don't scale with growth
- One connected system across all quality processes
- Clear ownership and accountability
- Real-time visibility and reporting
- Reduced manual effort through workflow automation
- Confidence in compliance and audit readiness
If your quality system relies on people remembering what to do next, it's not a system.
See how commonly used tools compare when it comes to managing quality effectively.
| Capability |
Paper / Excel |
SharePoint |
ERP Modules |
File Sharing |
Homegrown |
Status Quo |
Trackmedium |
| Compliance readiness |
Low |
Moderate |
Moderate |
Low |
Varies |
Risky |
✓ |
| Validation / eSignature (21 CFR Part 11) |
None |
Not compliant |
Limited |
None |
Custom (resource-heavy) |
High risk |
✓ |
| Audit trails |
None / manual |
Limited |
System-level |
None |
Inconsistent |
Disconnected |
✓ |
| Document control |
Manual |
Basic |
Limited |
None |
Custom (fragile) |
Fragmented |
✓ |
| CAPA & nonconformance |
Manual |
Not native |
Limited |
None |
Custom |
Siloed |
✓ |
| Workflow automation |
None |
Requires setup |
Limited |
None |
Custom |
Manual |
✓ |
| Training integration |
Manual |
Limited |
Weak |
None |
Custom |
Disconnected |
✓ |
| Configurability (no-code / admin-led) |
None |
Complex to manage |
Rigid |
None |
Developer-led |
Inflexible |
✓ |
| Scalability |
Poor |
Moderate |
Moderate |
Poor |
High risk |
Limited |
✓ |