In our recent brand performance study, we found that instrument performance took a runaway first place as the most important instrument attribute for both academic and industrial scientists.
But scientists are also highly interested in an instrument’s ease-of-use (i.e., straightforward to follow protocol/manual) and usability (i.e., no need to troubleshoot/optimize). These preferences are modulated, to some degree, by market segment as seen in the chart below, Importance of Key Drivers in the Instrumentation Purchase Decision Process by Market Segment and Total Importance Score.
For academic respondents, value for price paid ranks second, behind performance while for industrial respondents, ease-of-use ranks second. While the values of these important scores are close together, they reflect a subtle, but essential difference in how the two segments probably approach buying life science instrumentation.
Academic scientists, especially those in settings where funding may be constrained, may be more price-sensitive than ever before, likely having a preference for instruments that provide good value for the money.
Industrial scientists, seeking enhanced process efficiencies, may be more interested in having an instrument be fully functional as soon as possible with a straightforward protocol and/or intuitive interface.