Chromatography detectors have undergone significant development over the past 40 years, from simple single fixed wavelength UV detectors to now the widespread use of specialty detectors designed for specific tasks or problems. Chromatography detectors of just 5-10 years ago look almost primitive in their capabilities compared to today's new generation of specialty chromatography detector technology. Significant advances in performance have been coupled with major advances in usability and reliability.
When a liquid chromatography manufacturer evaluates whether to develop in-house (make) or partner with an external company (buy)
a new, specialty detector - performance, whilst important is not the only factor to be considered. The same make or buy evaluation
also applies to financial considerations, they are indeed important, but not decisive alone. In most circumstances, the decision about whether a new specialty chromatography detector should be developed in-house or sourced under an arrangement from an external partner, is led by a relatively complex decision matrix which considers aspects of three different key factors (know-how,
resources, time). Each of these factors, in a new development, need to be carefully considered and assigned a decision weighting
according to their individual contribution to the desired resultant product, according to the company general policy, particular
situation, market situation and outlook.
It is important to note, that it is nearly impossible to generate a typical development decision table, as such a table is intrinsically specific to the particular situation of the organisation in the process of deciding how to develop their desired new specialty chromatography detector. However, each development project does have some common decision process that can be considered
and looking at these can be helpful as a starting point.
As previously mentioned, the three fundamental factors influencing decision making are:
A) Know-How
B) Resources
C) Time
The Necessary Know-How for the Task
The 'Know-How' category is probably the most challenging of the three, as it requires prior deep knowledge of the desired product to lead to a solid evaluation. First, it is necessary to assess what type of Know-How is required; is new research needed or is the project more of an engineering development? This is typically the first point to be made clear. Engineering must be evaluated under different branches of the discipline - mechanical, electronic and firmware/software engineering. Table 1 summarises how to define internal availability of the know-how necessary to complete the development.
Know-How Table
Select parameters relevant to the internally available Know-How aspect for the project. Answer with Yes or No to each question and determine the importance of each parameter by assigning individual weights to them. A Yes with a high weight (10) means the parameter is very important and possible in-house. A No with a high weight (10) means the parameter is very important and difficult to achieve in-house.
Table 1. How to define internal availability of the necessary know-how to complete the project.
|
Yes/No |
Weight
(1-10) |
Comments |
| Is research necessary for the project? |
No |
1 |
|
| Is prior experience available? |
No |
7 |
Important factor |
| Is Mechanical Engineering necessary? |
Yes |
2 |
|
| Is Electronic Engineering necessary? |
Yes |
2 |
|
| Is Software Programming necessary? |
Yes |
5 |
|
