Readers of one of Frost & Sullivan’s media partners were invited to participate in an online survey in September 2018 that centered around the state of their laboratories in 2018 and their expectations for 2019. Frost & Sullivan has conducted similar studies among the same targeted respondents since 2012. Where applicable, the study presents year-over-year data to illustrate yearly trend developments. To qualify for survey participation, readers had to play a role in their laboratory’s purchasing process, be familiar with their laboratory’s product budgets, and represent a laboratory that either uses or plans to use products in one or more of the seven specified laboratory product categories: instruments, equipment, chemicals, reagents and kits, general lab supplies, plasticware, and glassware. A total of 189 decision makers qualified for and completed the survey, answering questions on purchases, budgets, top companies, and purchasing preferences. Respondents were segmented by type of laboratory: academic/government, biopharmaceutical, industrial, and clinical.

This end user survey polled researchers on their preferences in order to understand the laboratory products purchasing process and how that differs among the various organization types that utilize these products in their labs. The data collected was quantitative in respect to budgets and qualitative with reference to end user trends, such as budget expectations, brand selection preferences, purchasing process steps, evaluation and sourcing of lab products, recent and expected instrument and equipment purchases, frequency of price comparisons, funding trends, unmet needs, and product purchasing preferences. Furthermore, the survey includes verbatim responses on how the United States’ reduction in corporate tax rates would impact laboratories’ spending on lab products. This survey provides companies with actionable and trending information from laboratory professionals that will help drive business strategies and develop growth expectations.

For the purpose of this analysis, respondents identifying as manufacturing, environmental testing, chemical or petrochemical, and food, beverage, or agricultural are combined as industrial laboratories. Biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and contract research organization are combined as biopharmaceutical laboratories. State government and federal government laboratories are combined as government laboratories. Hospital laboratories and clinical reference laboratories fall under the clinical segment. Respondents indicated a wide range of job titles such as researcher, scientist, investigator, director, manager, or technician. For convenience, these respondents are generally referred to as researchers in this study; however, this term should be understood to include all respondents. In total, 89% of respondents work in North America. Nevertheless, this study is considered global because the survey was open to respondents from all countries.

Author: Christi Bird Ulan