Hello @allenyjl !
I have been working with complex lab automation solutions for almost ten years now and have worked for multiple liquid handler and integration companies within the US as an applications team member, project manager, and sales rep. I have worked with everything from liquid handlers all the way up to complex multi-workcell orchestrated biofactories.
Just going to put this out now, these are my informed opinions, and I am sure you could find someone to disagree with my opinions fairly quickly. My goal is not to bash or promote any one particular brand. So take that as you will…
There are alot of factors to consider when assessing a scheduler in the American lab automation market today especially when working with organoids which can have mixed workflow requirements similar to cell maintenance and screening assays. Full disclosure, I work at Grenova-PAA-Peak Robotics now as a sales rep, but when I take my sales rep hat off, I encourage my colleagues to consider the following factors when assessing software and integration strategies:
Cost structure (initial and recurring) for the current implementation and future automation footprint
– This often impacts ROI the most when businesses assess the financial viability and success of an investment into automation. Dollars talk more than anything else in for-profit organizations.
– We have seen automation software costs go up consistently every single year and begin ballooning to incredible levels recently across all the major integration companies. To protect yourself against this, you have to make sure that key components and features exclusive to any one software justify the extreme costs associated with it. If you over pay for features you don’t use, this will not fare well for the ROI assessments.
– if you work in Government, the way ROI is measured can be slightly different than how its measured in industry, but generally speaking, you need to purchase a software package that is fully leveraged and you are not paying for bloat or unused features.
Company Specializations and Exclusive Features
– Lab automation softwares possess a lot of legacy development influence and often are developed with previous software strategies heavily impacting their current design and feature offerings. A few companies break from this rule, but generally speaking most software developed by scheduling/integration companies are slow to adopt new features or cutting edge software architectures and control. Generally speaking, your confidence in an integrations companies ability to deliver you a solution should go up based on how long they have been around. This isn’t a guarantee of satisfaction, but a big factor to consider because of the power of precedence.
– An easy example of this would be the Cellario scheduling software. Its focus historically has been high throughput screen excellence in small-molecule compound screening and today its design is still centrally focused around a workflow dogma similar to that small molecule screening. Since this workflow is fairly generic it works for more than just organizations doing screening, but this naturally pushed HRB to build a new orchestration style software (Cellario OS) to help expand Cellario’s abilities to meet new client demands/expectations.
– No company specializes in all forms of automation solutions within the vast ecosystems of lab workflows. I dont care what company you’ve worked with or what you’ve been told: any company that says they do it all, generally is trying to sell you something and facts be damned. HRB, Automata, Biosero, PAA, Hamilton Company, etc, they prefer you to fit into a mold specific to the way their software and hardware offerings work and are tailored for and the further you get away from that mold the worse your customer experience likely will get.
Support and Risk Mitigation
– Just like with any other major purchase you make professionally or personally, you should always hedge your bets. Its typical for most integration/scheduler companies to offer a 1 year warranty and then option to buy support/service contract annually after. But what about its offline knowledge search? Do users have the ability to solve most simple issues on their own without needing to email support? What included specifically in the 1 year warranty? Full refund or replacement? Are its software support staff local? are they even close to within your territory/country?
— all these questions are important because you are going to have questions or issues when developing novel lab automation solutions within your organization and you do not want to be stranded with a large manual that will likely not answer all your questions.
– What about training? Does the integration company have a robust training strategy to help not just your entry level users but also your engineers and software developers get the most out of your new scheduling software and workcell.
Somethings to also consider:
- most modern schedulers today have a way to work agnostically with any orchestration or enterprise software. When i worked at Biosero, Data Services had a RestAPI that could bridge this gap, I believe Automata’s software has a restAPI built directly into Linq, PAA’s S-Run has a Rest API built in. This means that you dont need to worry about full committing an entire tech stack of solutions from just a single vendor. Today we are seeing more and more people use LLMs to design and build their own proprietary orchestration software suites tailored for their organization’s needs!
- Be cognizant of your own organizations resource constraints! I know you want to do it all yourself with a vendor’s scheduler SDK/API, but the value your organization brings comes from its scientific data, not supporting a robust automation software platform.
- Organoid workflows present unique challenges that bespoke industrial-style solutions may only be able to solve. Be carefull when assessing software’s that the driver’s offered by that same company’s scheduling software possess a robust command set that will accomplish your workflow goals and KPIs.
- Do you want to use old equipment/instrumentation? Not every company in the list below wants to do an integration project with something other than new-purchased equipment.
- Make sure you clarify what any one vendor means when they say key words like : controller, scheduler, orchestrator, planner, workflow, protocol, process, lights out operation, or factory of the future. It can mean something different to everyone at each company as there is no standardization or uniformity in our industry on precise definitions across vendors.
=========================================================================
Here are my brand specific summation notes
No implicit bias for one brand or another is intended by the ordering of the list below, read the whole thing! Keep in mind that anything negative you read isnt always true, this is based on my experiences and what i have heard clients/users say over the years. Just like any business, some get better over time, some get worse!
- High Res Biosciences (HRB)
– Industry leader for a reason, full stack integrated solution offerings with lots of success to lean on with major industry leaders. The go to solution for high-throughput screening. Relatively new to orchestration, if you get in at the wrong time with them, your project may not go well because it was quietly deprioritized. Typically only prefer to do brand new purchase projects leveraging their hardware orientated around plate-based assays. Their carts made them famous and are the preferred automation strategy for many. Normal to get told lead times for solutions in excess of 8 months or more. Cellario OS has a robust API/SDK.
- Biosero
– Scheduling software, Green Button Go, gets a lot of great reviews despite how expensive it is. Company will work with existing or new solution projects. Seems to be struggling to deliver projects recently despite legacy of delivering complex projects. Historically the leader in productized/standardized Orchestration software. Normal to get told lead times for solutions in excess of 8 months or more. Prefers plate based assays, but can deliver limited tube automated solutions. Not a full-stack integrator! Data Services has a robust API/SDK.
- Retisoft
– Small company delivers a good bargain for small integrations. Not tons of features in software, but great for small workcell needs. Uncertain on support depth in non-US countries. Software doesnt offer as deep of feature set as industry leaders. Make some hardware solutions, but would not consider a full stack integrator. Uncertain on capabilities for medium to large solutions. Medium-sized SDK/API.
- Hamilton Robotics
– Excellent at liquid handler centric solutions leveraging Venus to deliver simple integrations. Complex integrations (2 or more instruments) have mixed success. Hamilton just acquired UK robotics and there is alot to be learned still about its hardware/software offerings along with its ability to deliver complex projects. Revolution has a limited but growing features set and appears to have a medium-sized, but growing SDK/API.
- Lab Services
– Historically served European clients exclusively but well known for its clean integrations in the screening world similar to HRB. Have a good reputation, but uncertain on capabilities for orchestration software. I havent been exposed too much to this integration provider but they are growing in popularity in the US. Uncertain about depth of SDK/API.
- Tecan
– Same as Hamilton robotics, historically its done well with liquid handler centric solutions with 1 or 2 instruments integrated. Its Labworx division has been heralded for it attention to detail and high quality solutions, but admonished for being slow and having long lead times. The new Wako automation purchase seems to be in focus for expanding its complex workcell offerings. Director is fairly refined and offers a good features set but concerns mount for value for money. Software itself can polarize people in how its workflow is designed, but has a robust API/SDK set in the latest releases.
- PAA
– historically only served European market and resold in the US it’s software through Tek Matic. Today its full stack of solutions and integrations are available directly in the US thanks to Grenova acquisition. Overlord has historically been heralded for its value for money since its customization capabilities are so robust. Its historically been admonished for its difficulty to use relative to other industry peer’s software. S-Run (scheduler software) builds on Overlord success, but its a new software with a medium-sized and growing feature set in its interface and API/SDK. Lead times have historically been below industry average for integration solutions. This company is a full stack integrator that makes its own robotic arm and also makes industrial solutions as well!
- Beckman Coulter
– Possess a legacy of lab automation instrumentation solutions, but never really created anything cutting edge recently. It does offer a great solution for small solutions via its SAMI software offering. SDK and API are built on older tech stack but is at least medium sized. I would consider them a type of full stack integrator, but possesses a less robust integrator compared to Tecan or Hamilton. I have not seen any new software investments from this company in a long time. BC is owned by Danaher which also is invested in Automata. While I have not seen it first hand, I believe complex workcell opportunities are likely going to Automata rather than traditional BC solution creation routes because of the investments from Danaher.
- Lab Donkey
– Relatively small company and new player in the industry. Heard from multiple parties that the software is well polished and clean. Uncertain on depth/quality of solutions due to lack of personal exposure. They do have some backing from AstraZeneca so it may be worth talking with them more. They are UK based, but have presence in the US. Not a full stack integrator.
- LabSync
– Started a handful of years ago and has a unique approach to lab automation. Good reputation with current/previous clients rumor has it. Its more orchestration forward on its workflow. I dont have tons of exposure to this solution set, but it may be worth exploring with them if you want to challenge precedent paradigms in lab automation implementation within your organization. Not a full stack integrator.
- Labman
– Excellence in industrial/bespoke solutions being implemented in the lab. Expensive and long lead times, but you get exactly what you want with expectations being met all the way through. Robust API that may be tailored to meet your exact needs. Specializes in the non-plate based portions of the lab workflows. The EU/UK was the primary place it operated but in the past five years has grown dramatically in popularity in the US. Not a full stack integrator.
- Dotmatics
– New but growing player in the orchestrated solution space. Uncertain on what next steps are for its presence in workcell control, but its acquisition of Virscidian and growing headcount points to a focus on dataflow and analysis at an enterprise level with fingers into the lab. Siemens has made it clear they want to grow their footprint in the lab automation space and it appears to be making good on that with its growing solution base. Might be worth exploring if looking for complex biofactory or multi-lab control. Uncertain on SDK/API depth. Not a full stack integrator.
- Automata
– Another relatively new player on the block. Well known for its polished looking software and hardware solutions. This brand comes off as premium and is a UK based company with strong US presence. Associates and colleagues have heard rumor there has historically been issue with delivering complex integration projects and its software not being one-time purchase/perpetual license has polarized many buyers. Software has been renowned for its robustness and API/SDK are large and growing. Has some hardware they make for lab automation solutions but I wouldn’t consider them a full stack integrator.
========================================================================
This list of companies is not totally inclusive of everything that might be relevant for you to consider but they are the people/companies i am familiar with and historically have contributed to SLAS and other lab automation event common in our industry!
Happy Shopping!