Taking the Pain Out of the Medical, Legal, & Regulatory Review…Maybe

It's like pulling teeth. I'd rather stick a needle in my eye. About as much fun as a root canal. These are phrases learning professionals often use to describe the MLR (Medical, Legal, and Regulatory) review process. And while we may laugh, the frustration behind the metaphors is real.

Why MLR Review Matters

The MLR review team — comprising Medical Affairs, Legal, and Regulatory personnel — ensures that organizational communications and training materials are medically accurate, compliant with regulations, and legally sound. This applies to both external marketing materials and internal training that ultimately reaches externally-facing staff. It's a critical safeguard, even when it feels like an obstacle.

Common Frustrations

Three primary complaints come up repeatedly:

• Time delays — Reviews can extend from weeks to months, creating bottlenecks in content development
• Content modification — Stakeholders worry that legal scrutiny "sanitizes" materials excessively, diminishing impact
• Reviewer relationships — Some review team members treat MLR duties as secondary responsibilities, occasionally displaying defensiveness or impatience

Three Constructive Solutions

1. Cultivate Positive Relationships

View the review team as collaborators rather than adversaries. Build rapport and recognize shared organizational goals. When reviewers see you as a partner — not a burden — the dynamic shifts.

2. Develop Forecasts

Create forward-looking plans that detail upcoming programs and materials, giving the review team advance notice. Surprises are the enemy of efficiency. When reviewers can plan ahead, everyone benefits.

3. Share Concept Previews

Meet with reviewers early to obtain preliminary feedback before full material development. Getting directional input upfront can reduce costly iterations later and significantly accelerate the formal review.

While the MLR process cannot be eliminated, implementing these strategies can substantially improve efficiency and collaborative dynamics over time. The goal isn't to avoid review — it's to make it work better for everyone.