In mid-April, we discussed how despite the presence large amounts of negativity in the life science tools market, things actually appeared to be getting better. To follow that up, we conducted a brief 6-question survey last month to determine if people within the sector felt similarly and try to gauge if companies were preparing for better times or worse times ahead.
The survey was open from May 1st through May 31st. 22 respondents completed the survey. One respondent’s set of responses was removed from the survey due to not responding in the affirmative to the qualifying question which asked respondents if they worked within the life science tools and services market. Based on IP, 14 respondents were from North America, 6 were from Europe, and one was from Asia.
The questions (aside from the qualifying question) and responses are below:
1) Complete the following statement: “Thus far in 2012, my company’s sales have _____.”
2) Complete the following statement: “Compared to the last quarter of 2011, I feel _______ about the life science tools market”
3) Compared to the first half of 2012, how much does your company intend to spend on the following functions in the second half of 2012?
More | Same | Less | |
---|---|---|---|
R&D | 33.3% | 57.1% | 9.5% |
Marketing | 38.1% | 47.6% | 14.3% |
Sales | 57.1% | 33.3% | 9.5% |
4) Which of the following is presently true about your company?
Additionally, two respondents left comments at the end of the survey. One noted “The market seems stable at the moment. We are mildly optimistic about the future.” The other stated “There are significant cuts in the research budgets.” The latter statement allows for some confusion as to whether “research budgets” referred to mean the academic research budgets or the budgets for internal R&D, although use of the plural leads us to believe the respondent most likely meant academic research budgets.
We find these results very interesting. While year-to-date performance in the respondents’ companies tends towards under-performance, perceptions compared to the previous year are roughly flat but companies are hiring and will be spending more. This could be due to any of multiple factors. For example, companies could be re-hiring and increasing budgets as a rebound from previous, overly conservative budget cuts. In other words, companies may have planned for a situation that was worse than the present, and therefore even though the present situation may not be good, hiring and increased spending have become necessary. Another common macroeconomic cause for increased hiring is decreasing workforce productivity. Additionally, some companies may increase spending in response to increases in spending at competitors in order to “keep up with the competition.” This discrepancy could also simply be a flaw in the survey, or perhaps a real difference in perception between the overall attitudes of life science tools companies and individual employees. There are many possible explanations, and we simply do not have enough data to evaluate all of the possible causes. All are free to draw their own conclusions.
Regardless, while the responses about company performance and the perception of the overall life science tools market are tepid, we are encouraged by the trend towards hiring and increased spending, and hope that companies rightfully see a reason to continue to invest in future growth.
We see it again and again, and it’s often the fault of investors. A promising technology, a talented team, and what would otherwise be a great young company fail. A life science tool doesn’t become the blockbuster it was pitched as, and because the company was created with the vision of huge sales numbers that never materialized, it goes under. Often it doesn’t go under until multiple additional rounds of financing are pumped into the fledgling company. The company never goes into the black because everyone bet too big, and everyone loses.
You don’t have to have a blockbuster product to be a successful life science tools company. Realism is every bit as important as ambition. If you bet big then you often grow too fast, take on too many liabilities, and end up with a structure that relies on a great deal of success to support. If you can employ lean operations and build success a little at a time, however, your life science tools company will have far more staying power.
We know that not every company or technology is amenable to slow growth. Some take massive resources just to develop and therefore necessitate a bigger payout. However, every company can, in some way, become leaner. In doing so, you can greatly reduce your business and financial risk.
The specific ways that companies can / should lean their operations is heavily dependent on each company’s needs and situations, but we’ve provided a few ideas just to get your creative energies flowing:
• Outsource! (administrative duties, financial / billing, warehousing, manufacturing, etc)
• Leverage a contract (commission-based) sales force, or only sell through distributors
• Release beta units into the market with fewer features to test both the market and your technology prior to full product launch
• Virtual operations
With leaner operations, young life science companies can reduce the threshold to becoming sustainable and successful. Planning on rapid growth or huge sales feels good, and sounds good to investors, but often leads to unnecessary risk taking.
There’s been a lot of negativity in the life science tools market recently, at least with regards to the economic outlook. European government austerity, a possible US sequester, and cooling Asian economies have given a lot of people a sense of unease (or downright fear) about sector growth. Over the past two months, however, there’s a bunch of data that says things probably aren’t going to be so bad after all.
Back in late February, a MarketsandMarkets study projected the life science and chemical instrumentation market to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 8.4% from 2011 to 2016. Morgan Stanley analyst Daniel Brennan then noted in early March that commercial sales of publicly traded life science instrument companies had been stronger than expected and is less vulnerable to the economy than many had feared. A DeciBio study released last week projected that the life science tools market will grow by about 4% per year over the next 5 years. Sure, 4% isn’t a great growth rate, but it’s certainly enough to sustain the industry. Last Thursday, Goldman Sachs analyst Isaac Ro said that company performance in the life science tools industry for the first quarter of 2012 “appears to have trended better than initially expected” and noted that academic spending trends have improved.
While I wouldn’t go so far as to say that we’re in the clear, and there are certainly still hurdles the industry faces moving forward, we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. The life science tools market isn’t in nearly as bad of shape as many had feared.
Life science market research can be a tricky, and often expensive, endeavor. You need to find a suitable population that meets your study requirements, recruit individuals to actually participate in the study, and building the survey. You have to worry about introducing bias, sufficiently powering your study, ensuring your population is representative, and many other factors. However, there is one tool that can, in many situations, make your research easier, faster, and cheaper: AdWords.
Yes, that AdWords. Pay-per-click Google Adwords.
AdWords has many desirable qualities that one would want in a market research platform. It has a huge audience, and our in-house research has shown that it is overwhelmingly the search engine of choice within the life sciences. Google is used by a billion unique individuals every month. The audience is easy to segregate (albeit in limited ways: by keyword or by geography). It’s easy to reduce both population bias and question bias. With market research via AdWords, you often don’t have to even ask a question – the question is implicit rather than explicit since the unwilling participants are looking for information, products, services, or content. While you’ll be limited by language, in most places English is the language of science and users select themselves by using relevant keywords.
That said, AdWords is obviously not designed for market research and its capabilities as a life science market research platform are understandably limited. You only get to “ask” each participant a single question. The types of information you can gather are relatively limited. You can’t segregate the audience by job title or other useful demographic information.
Still, you can get insights on a surprising amount of questions. For example, the following information can often be reasonably obtained using AdWords:
• The relative popularity of a basket of products or brands
• Which prospective name for a new product would be better
• What method are researchers using more often
• What nations are most frequently using a particular method or type of product
• An attractive price for a particular laboratory product
• A fair deal more…
Note that some of the above information would require the use of Google Analytics (or similar) in conjunction with AdWords.
While not a fully capable replacement for traditional market research studies, a lot can be done with Google AdWords for as little as $0.10 per participant ($0.10 is the minimum cost-per-click in AdWords). Next time you’re looking for market data, especially if the data you’re looking for isn’t terribly complex, you may be able to save your life science company a lot of time and money by turning to the reliable old pay-per-click advertising platform.
We work with all sorts of life science company websites for a multitude of purposes. One thing strikes us over and over and over again. A lot of life science websites seem to be designed without a well-defined purpose in mind. Companies (and the life science marketers working for them) seemingly treat their websites like a chandelier – they want really pretty websites that you can’t really do much with. Likewise, a lot of designers know that an eye-catching, flashy site will earn the rubber stamp of the executive who needs to sign off on it, regardless of whether or not it’s particularly functional. That’s simply no good.
If you don’t know the purpose of your website, you are most likely losing lots of money because of it.
The first thing I ask our clients when designing sites is “what is the purpose of this website?” It seems like a simple question, but a lot of people don’t have a straight answer for it. Those that do often have a simple answer such as “provide information about our company and our products” or a vague answer such as “project our brand identity.” That’s not good enough.
The purpose of your website should be centered around the customer.
Ultimately, your company exists to sell a product or service to scientists and / or clinicians. What is it that your website is doing that is moving them closer to a purchase? Is it doing as much as it can? For example, if you want your website to sell your products, then ask yourself how you intend to sell your products and design your website with that in mind. Do you need them to contact a distributor? Are most of your customers going to want to talk to an application scientist? Can they purchase on-site? … Your website needs to provide prospective customers with everything they need to take the action that you want them to.
How good it looks is not the metric that measures the quality of a website. Sure, everyone like an attractive website, but at the end of the day your website is there for a purpose. How well your life science website serves that purpose is the true measure of its quality, and defining and understanding that purpose is critical. (P.S. – Don’t forget to measure how well your website is performing!)
Need to do a product launch on a shoestring budget? Is your ad budget almost expended but you wish you could do more? Don’t start worrying quite yet… There’s a few avenues to leverage FREE life science marketing that you can take advantage of at just about any time. All you need is some content.
Protocol Submissions.
While there are other sites that allow you to upload protocols, the one that carries the most weight is likely Nature Protocol Exchange. You get the gravitas of the Nature name, their signature online look and feel, and protocols are generally posted very quickly. While the benefits are a far cry from that of an actual peer-reviewed methods paper, posting protocols online is easy, relatively fast, and free. Similarly, Nature Methods has a section for suppliers to post application notes.
Press Releases
Have company news? There’s a whole host of sites out there that will either allow you to submit life science press releases directly or through an editor. LabGrab is a personal favorite, and of course there’s our own LifeSciPR, but that’s just a small sampling. More traditional “news” sites such as Lab Equipment Magazine or GEN will often accept news as well, as will many other laboratory and life science news sites. Getting a release published in a printed publication often costs money, however doing so isn’t important. There’s also a huge amount of free press release sites, but unless they’re targeted to the right audience their value is marginal at best.
Similarly, many relevant websites and publications will accept new product news as well. There are even some life science forums that allow companies to post information on new products and services.
When posting press releases or other news items, don’t forget to link back to your company or product website for a little SEO kick!
Blogging
Have content, will write? When done well, blogging is great for both branding and SEO. You have an opportunity to project your company’s expertise in relevant areas by writing and publishing great content, and there’s no limit to how much you do so! Does your life science company’s website not have a blog? Don’t know how to install one? Don’t worry about it! Start up a WordPress blog and you can port it over to your own site later. If you write really good content of a solid length, consider eschewing the blog post and submitting it to a relevant online & print publication instead (again, I’ll use Laboratory Equipment Magazine and GEN as examples.)
Social Media
Many social media channels are readily adaptable to life science marketing use. Our favorites are Twitter and LinkedIn. On both, users effectively tell you what their interests are. LinkedIn is particularly good because of groups. You can read more on using LinkedIn for life science marketing here.
The aforementioned methods are far from comprehensive. For instance, if you’re not lacking in time but are lacking in money, you could write white papers, which are a great way to generate leads. Depending on the price and nature of your product, and assuming you’re both a little more sales oriented and sell in the US, you could search the NIH RePORT database for prospects for highly targeted cold calling and cold e-mailing.
While we would never recommend trying to base your marketing around free methods alone, they can be used to stretch a budget or just get a little extra publicity. If you have more time than money, then the above methods can be a very productive way to boost your life science marketing efforts.