Separation of concerns is a design principle in computer science whereby a computer program is separated into distinct parts that each address a different aspect of the program. The basic goal is to modularize a program. In this set of articles we explore this concept in relation to building spreadsheets for critical data analysis tasks.

A spreadsheet is like a document in that all of the content - data, format and functionality - is kept in one file, so it's easy to just email it around the team for review and revision. This results in many copies to track. In these articles I talk about managing spreadsheet files throughout their lifecycle: Templates, Instances, Versions and Revisions.

You can really do almost anything within Excel. But should you? When is a spreadsheet the appropriate tool to use, and when should we be looking for something else?

We’re so used to window shopping - or I guess the modern equivalent is “swiping” - that we tend to do the same for mission-critical software and equipment. We look for features, brands, and deals rather than being explicit about what we actually require. This can mean we end up getting something that doesn't quite fit our needs. An expensive problem indeed.

This post we’re going to talk about boundaries, and make some observations that help us develop strategies for designing, analysing and troubleshooting complex systems.

In this post we're going to look at two activities: Archiving and Backup. Both of these activities are mandated by regulations and quality systems, often mentioned in the same paragraph. What exactly is the difference between archiving and backup when it comes to electronic records? Can't a backup of electronic data just be labelled as an archive?

Why would we want to validate a spreadsheet, regardless of the compliance requirements? What do we get out of the deal?

The OECD GLP Working Group has added new items to their frequently asked questions (FAQ) page for GLP. This is my opinionated take on this year's additions to the OECD GLP FAQ.

ALCOA+ is a mnemonic device for measuring the level of evidence provided by compliance records. It stands for Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original, Accurate, Complete, Consistent, Enduring and Available.

I wanted to be able to go to one place to easily search for definitions of GLP terms, so I built a GLP definitions browser.

An unfortunate mistake is turned into a lesson on Computerized Systems Validation.