September 10, 2025
A little while back, an agency partner brought us into a high-pressure situation. Their client, a major pharmaceutical company, was preparing for a product launch in Canada following regulatory approval. They needed a full suite of HCP-facing materials: several slide decks, marketing collateral, and talking points.
With their internal writers already stretched thin, the agency pulled in some freelancers as a stopgap. These were experienced writers, but they were new to the therapeutic area and unfamiliar with the brand’s guidelines on tone, editorial preferences, and compliance protocols. With the tight deadlines, there was no time for a proper onboarding process.
We were brought in, as we often are, halfway through to help “clean up” the deliverables.
What we found was what many in the industry have likely experienced:
The content wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t ready either. The internal team was overwhelmed, the freelancers were out of bandwidth, and the launch was fast approaching.
We pulled our in-house editor and QC lead to edit, streamline, and finalize the work, quietly and on time.
But it was a clear reminder: even brilliant freelance writers can’t replace structure.
Freelancers are often skilled and efficient. For the right projects—short-term, one-off, or low-risk—they’re a valuable resource.
But for multi-layered scientific deliverables, especially in regulated sectors like pharma and biotech, the lack of built-in structure becomes a liability. You risk:
And the data support this shift toward structure.
McKinsey & Company’s research across workforce models found that companies using gig labor reduced direct labor costs but saw a 20% higher turnover rate and up to 30% operational cost increases due to onboarding, coordination, and inconsistencies. According to L.E.K. Consulting’s 2023 report on Medical Communications Outsourcing, nearly 80% of biopharma leaders expect to increase investment in medical communications over the next three years, with a particular focus on medical affairs and market access deliverables. These growing investments signal a rising demand not just for output, but for strategic alignment, scientific depth, and reliability in communication partners.
As expectations increase, so does the need for systems that support consistent quality, something most freelance models aren’t built to provide.
Scientific content isn’t just about being technically correct. It’s about being:
Freelancers work independently. Most don’t have access to a shared editorial framework, reference library, brand voice guide, or QC team. They’re rarely brought into internal discussions.
That’s not a flaw, it’s just the nature of freelance work.
But when the stakes are high and timelines are tight, ad hoc content creation isn’t enough.
What’s needed is a system.
At Craft Science, we operate like a precision content engine—behind the scenes but fully aligned with your goals.
We’re not a freelancer collective. We’re a structured, best-in-class team of high-performing PhD-level writers, scientific editors, and QC specialists. Our work is:
When you’re overwhelmed, launching, or simply need high-volume content without sacrificing quality, we scale to meet the need, without the inconsistencies of fragmented freelance support.
Our clients don’t just get writers. They get:
Freelancers absolutely have a place in medical communications. We’ve worked with many brilliant ones—and still do. They’re ideal for short-term overflow, narrow-scope deliverables, or standalone content.
But when it comes to reliable, strategic, high-stakes communication in the life sciences, structure isn’t optional. It’s what separates content that gets delivered from content that actually makes an impact.
When the stakes are high and the timelines are tight, the right partner makes all the difference, not just in the written content, but in your confidence to deliver.