When evaluating learning management systems (LMS), organisations in regulated industries face a tricky choice: shared or private SaaS hosting.
Shared SaaS delivers cost efficiency and speed, but it can struggle to satisfy the strict validation, security, and compliance requirements demanded by pharmaceutical companies, healthcare providers, and other highly regulated businesses.
Private SaaS hosting, on the other hand, offers control and customisation but raises questions of cost and complexity.
For industries governed by MHRA, FDA, and ISO standards, the implications of this decision are significant. The wrong choice can lead to failed audits, delayed product launches, or costly remediation.
Before making the decision, it’s important to understand the differences between the models and their implications for validation and compliance.
The key difference between shared and private SaaS lies in architecture and resource allocation.
Shared SaaS runs on a multi-tenant architecture, where multiple organisations share the same servers, databases, and storage.
In LMS hosting for pharma or life sciences, these limits can create challenges in meeting sector-specific validation requirements.
A private SaaS LMS uses single-tenant infrastructure, giving each organisation its own dedicated resources.
There are also differences in how a private SaaS can be deployed:
For regulated industries, the real decision is about cost versus control — and the regulatory risks that come with less oversight.
In regulated environments, validation is not an add-on benefit. It’s a basic requirement for an organisation to operate.
Systems must be completely validated, proving their intended use, and the hosting model directly shapes how that validation is achieved.
Shared SaaS providers typically validate their core platform: functionality, security, and compliance with general frameworks. Many even provide standardised validation packages.
But limitations arise because:
For regulators requiring Installation Qualification (IQ), Operational Qualification (OQ), and Performance Qualification (PQ) documentation, these gaps can be a problem.
For example, a pharma company may need to demonstrate not just that a training record exists, but that every system change affecting that record was validated and documented. In a shared environment, you may lack visibility into those layers, which can undermine inspection readiness.
It’s no surprise that LMS hosting for pharma often favours private SaaS.
Private SaaS or self-hosted environments give organisations end-to-end validation control, allowing documentation, testing, and change management at every layer of the system.
Advantages include:
A validated LMS in a private model makes it possible to tie training workflows directly to SOP updates, ensuring every revision is automatically captured in audit-ready documentation.
This tight integration is a key reason private hosting remains the preferred choice in highly regulated settings. For organisations seeking a validated LMS UK solution, this level of control proves critical for regulatory compliance.
Security expectations in regulated industries go far beyond encryption and access controls. Regulators demand evidence of how systems secure, isolate, and retain sensitive data.
In practice, this means a hospital relying on shared SaaS may be limited to standard authentication options, such as username-password. A private SaaS environment, however, could support additional validation layers, such as tying LMS user roles directly to their status in a hospital’s HR system.
Auditability is not just a compliance box to tick. It’s the backbone of demonstrating control during inspections. With a private SaaS LMS, organisations can configure log retention policies to align directly with regulatory expectations, rather than relying on a provider’s defaults.
Shared SaaS is often appealing due to its lower upfront cost and predictable subscription fees. But in regulated industries, the hidden costs of compliance gaps can quickly outweigh savings.
Private SaaS requires higher investment but assures organisations that validation, auditability, and data governance are under their control.
The question becomes not just “What does this cost today?” but “What might it cost if we cannot prove compliance tomorrow?”
ISOtrain recognises that no two regulated organisations face identical needs. That’s why it offers both SaaS cloud and self-hosted deployment options, each built on a foundation of validation and compliance.
With over 30 years of serving pharma, biotech, and medical device manufacturers, ISOtrain ensures that whichever hosting model you choose, compliance comes first. Features include:
Both shared and private SaaS LMS models have merit. Shared hosting offers efficiency and cost savings, while private hosting provides the control and assurance demanded by regulated industries.
The key is to partner with a validated LMS provider that supports compliance across either model.
ISOtrain supports both shared and private SaaS LMS hosting, each designed to satisfy the unique requirements of regulated organisations.Book a demo today to see how ISOtrain ensures validation, security, and audit readiness, regardless of which model you prefer.