Life Science Tech Trends SupplementBack to Survey IndexHow do you select vendors?
How have relationships with vendors changed?
Criteria Used To Select Vendors
Respondents rated 19 factors on their importance in selecting vendors of biochemicals, instruments, and equipment. Factors such as technological innovation and initial purchase price (which are undeniably key in the decision process) were only selected by one-third as being "extremely important."
|
% Respondents
|
|
Extremely Important
|
Somewhat Important
|
Relatively Important
|
Unimportant
|
| Vendor’s technical knowledge |
62.5
|
32.9
|
3.9
|
0.7
|
| Support after purchase (technical help, responsiveness, etc.) |
55.1
|
36.6
|
5.9
|
2.3
|
| Applications specific to your research |
52.1
|
37.4
|
7.9
|
2.6
|
| Proven performance/reliability (functionality, efficiency, productivity, ROI, etc.) |
50.7
|
43.0
|
5.3
|
1.0
|
| Price/value relationship |
48.7
|
43.5
|
5.9
|
2.0
|
| Product availability/on-time delivery |
37.1
|
46.4
|
15.2
|
1.3
|
| Vendor’s overall reputation |
36.0
|
54.7
|
7.7
|
1.6
|
| Understanding your organization’s needs |
35.9
|
46.4
|
12.7
|
4.9
|
| Training on products/equipment/systems |
34.9
|
46.7
|
16.4
|
2.0
|
| Ease of system use |
33.9
|
53.9
|
11.2
|
1.0
|
| Caring about your organization’s problems and needs |
33.9
|
46.9
|
14.3
|
4.9
|
| Initial purchase price |
33.2
|
52.6
|
11.8
|
2.3
|
| Compatibility with existing equipment/systems |
33.0
|
52.5
|
11.6
|
30.0
|
| Compatibility with equipment/systems 2 - 3 years from now |
32.1
|
45.6
|
17.7
|
4.6
|
| Technological innovation |
30.8
|
50.0
|
16.6
|
2.6
|
| Product/equipment safety (packaging, usage, etc.) |
28.0
|
49.7
|
17.1
|
5.3
|
| Ease of installation/deployment |
24.8
|
55.4
|
18.8
|
1.0
|
| Vendor’s financial stability |
17.3
|
52.3
|
24.5
|
5.9
|
| Breadth/depth of product line |
11.8
|
43.6
|
32.8
|
11.8
|
Ways in Which Relationships with Vendors Have Changed
Researchers indicated they’re now holding vendors more accountable for performance, are now requiring vendors to stay more involved after the sale, and are negotiating harder on price.
| |
% Respondents
|
| Now hold vendors more accountable for performing as promised (product capabilities, compatibility, efficiency, etc.) |
51.6%
|
| Now require vendors to stay involved after the sale (implementing, training, consulting, etc.) |
43.5%
|
| Now negotiate harder on price |
43.5%
|
| Now require vendors to develop more custom solutions to our problems/opportunities |
35.8%
|
| Now make more objective decisions about products/brands (projected ROI, etc.) |
35.2%
|
| Now have more business-like relationships with vendors and reps |
33.2%
|
| In making decisions, we now focus less on personal relationships with vendors |
29.4%
|
| Now measure the ROI of vendor systems more closely after implementation |
14.8%
|
| No changes in our relationships |
12.6%
|
About This Survey
This survey was prepared and conducted by Martin Akel & Associates, Chester, N.J. for the Advantage Business Media Science Group’s publications, Bioscience Technology and Drug Discovery & Development magazines. The survey was sent to a random sample of readers in November, 2007.
