Process validation, connected to the work.

Coordinate process validation in Seal, from the agreed validation basis and PPQ protocol to execution, exceptions and review. Trace each conclusion to the evidence that supports it.

Explore this workflow
Illustration of a seal comparing study vessels and their recorded response curves.

From the validation basis to continued verification.

Coordinate process performance qualification (PPQ) as executable work: the protocol, readiness, campaign evidence and scientific conclusion stay connected.

New process knowledge informs the next assessment.

Start with the claim you need to support.

Record the product, process version, site and scale. Configure the PPQ protocol with its scientific sampling rationale, required process and quality evidence, acceptance criteria and planned analysis. Keep the development and characterization basis attached.

Review prerequisite evidence and the protocol before execution. The selected campaign design needs its own justification.

PPQ protocol

Scope
Process, site, scale and campaign
Requirements
Sampling, criteria and analysis plan
Readiness
Facilities, equipment, methods and personnel

The campaign finished. Is the evidence complete?

This example PPQ package has recorded execution, reviewed laboratory results and an open protocol exception. A completed batch count does not settle the validation conclusion.

PPQ-014 / evidence review

Example records. Select a row to inspect its source.

Protocol exception

PPQ014-EX
Exception
EX-014
Issue
Planned sampling time missed
Impact assessment
Open

EX-014 concerns a missed planned sampling time. The exception remains open. The package contains no approved assessment of its effect on the evidence or campaign conclusion.

What follows

Assess the missing evidence and any justified additional work before finalising the conclusion.

Prepare the PPQ review agenda.
neil

Execution and reviewed laboratory results are present, but EX-014 has no completed impact assessment. I would put that sampling exception and the evidence-population check at the front of the review.

Keep the detail that matters.

Sampling has a reason.

Retain the scientific basis for the selected batches, locations, times and measurements.

The design should address variability and the intended claim. Do not replace a justified campaign design with a universal batch-count rule. Preserve changes to sampling and their effect on the interpretation.

Continue with the same process knowledge.

Carry reviewed controls, residual risks and monitoring commitments into continued process verification.

Define what will be monitored, which population and methods apply, and how signals trigger review. Future changes or new evidence can prompt reassessment without replacing the original PPQ record.

Connected to the surrounding work.

Process characterizationContinued verificationElectronic batch records

Keep specialised systems where they belong. Agree the source of each record, the permitted actions and the reconciliation at each handoff.

Explore integrations

Before you get started.

No. The campaign and sampling design need a scientific justification for the process and intended claim. Batch count alone does not establish process performance.
Yes. Keep the selected dataset, analysis version, exclusions, assumptions and diagnostics linked to the protocol and reviewed conclusion.
Not automatically. The authorised team assesses its significance and the adequacy of the evidence. Preserve the exception and decision; do not silently mark it resolved.

Try it with your own work.

Bring a PPQ protocol and one requirement whose supporting evidence is difficult to assemble.

Book a demo