QA Training Senior Specialist,Nantong-QA (Nantong, JS, CN, 226000)
About this opportunity
岗位职责:
负责公司GMP培训体系搭建、落地执行与持续优化,维护并各部门岗位培训矩阵、课程体系及考核标准,适配法规更新、文件变更、岗位变动等场景。
统筹全员GMP培训管理工作,包括新员工入职GMP培训、在岗人员年度复训、法规专项培训等,保障全员上岗资质合规。
常态化开展跨部门培训需求调研,结合年度质量目标、岗位风险、审计整改要求,制定年度、季度培训计划并落地跟进、闭环落地。
负责Veeva培训管理系统日常运行,完成培训台账、培训记录、考核结果的追踪,确保培训数据真实、完整、可追溯。
负责培训模块内部自检、外部审计、客户审计迎检工作,识别培训风险,落实整改与持续改进。
建立培训效果评估机制,通过理论考核、现场核查等方式评估培训有效性,持续优化培训形式与课程内容。
按需求输出月度/季度/年度培训工作总结。
完成上级交办的其他相关工作。
任职要求:
本科及以上学历,药学、制药工程、生物技术、化工、质量相关专业 。
5年及以上制药行业GMP工作经验,2年及以上专职GMP培训体系管理经验,有完整培训体系搭建经验优先。
熟悉中国GMP及行业指导原则,熟悉药品生产、质量系统培训合规要求,熟悉培训全生命周期管理流程 。
熟练操作Office办公软件、LMS培训系统,能够独立制作培训课件、统计分析培训数据、输出报告 。
熟悉药企文件管理规范,可独立完成培训流程、记录、方案的编写与修订 。
具备良好的跨部门沟通协调能力、执行力与风险意识 具备基础英语读写能力 。
]]>
Job details
How this role compares
Computed from every other active Quality role in our database, not just this employer's listings.
We currently track 195 comparable Senior Quality roles across 49 biopharma companies.
Salary context
59 of 195 peers report a salary range (USD, annualized)
Peers share this role's job function and a matching or adjacent seniority level -- not necessarily the same therapeutic area or country.
Where these roles are based
Top locations among the 195 comparable roles
+ 21 more countries
Seniority mix
195 of 195 peers have a known seniority level
Therapeutic area mix
0 of 195 peers have a known therapeutic area; the rest are genuinely unlabeled, not hidden
No peers with a known therapeutic area yet.
Similar opportunities
The closest matches from our peer group, ranked by how similar they are, not how well you'd qualify for them -- treat this as market context, not a guaranteed shortlist; a weak match is labeled as one below.
Notify me about similar jobs
Get an email when we spot other openings like this one – same job function, comparable seniority, roles you'd actually want to see.
How we calculate "similar"
No black box, no LLM guesswork: a deterministic score built from four normalized attributes. Here's this role's own peer group at different match levels, so you can see the mechanism, not just the result.
Every comparison starts from the same 100-point budget: 25 for working in the same function, 40 for the same therapeutic area, 20 for the same or adjacent seniority, 15 for the same country. A dimension we can't confirm on both sides contributes nothing, never a guess, never a free pass.
0 points, never a partial guess. A role we know almost nothing about beyond its function bottoms out at 25%; it never inflates to 100% just because there's little to compare against. Seniority uses a defined ladder (Associate → Manager → Associate Director → Senior → Principal → Director → Senior Director → Executive/VP) so "Director" and "Senior Director" count as adjacent, but "Director" and "Executive/VP" do not.