Why Innovation Gets Stuck: The Hidden Role of Procurement in Life Sciences
Read & Comment the Article on LinkedIn: The Missing Link in European Life Science Growth? Talent, Timing, and Translational Leadership
April 4, 2025
Innovation in life sciences rarely fails due to a lack of scientific brilliance. More often, it stalls at a critical juncture: adoption.
Across Europe, we see groundbreaking therapies, diagnostics, and digital tools that could transform care, but never make it past pilot stage. Not because they don’t work, but because the systems meant to adopt them aren’t ready.
This isn’t just a missed business opportunity. It’s a loss for patients who never get access, for clinicians who never get to practice better medicine, and for health systems that never realize the benefits of their own investments in innovation.
One reason? A function that’s rarely in the spotlight but holds immense influence: procurement.
The Friction Point No One Talks About
In a sector defined by medical breakthroughs and rapid scientific progress, procurement often operates in legacy mode. Tendering processes, designed to safeguard public funds and ensure maximum value for patients, can paradoxically become a barrier to the very innovation they’re meant to promote.
Budget silos, fragmented decision-making, and a structurally risk-averse mindset introduce friction at the point of adoption. Even therapies and technologies with strong clinical potential struggle to navigate procurement systems that prioritize short-term cost over long-term value.
This isn’t just an operational gap. It’s strategic.
Procurement decisions determine what innovations reach patients, how quickly they scale, and whether their full potential is ever realized. When procurement is disconnected from clinical priorities and broader health system goals, innovation gets stuck, not due to a lack of efficacy, but due to a misalignment of process and purpose.
Case Examples: When Innovation Got Stuck
- Digital Pathology in Community Hospitals Despite demonstrated efficiencies and improved diagnostic accuracy, the implementation of digital pathology has been hindered by unclear reimbursement models and insufficient pathologist engagement. Current reimbursement structures often fail to cover the costs associated with technology acquisition and the additional workload for pathologists, leading to financial disincentives for adoption. 🔗 Source: Friends of Cancer Research – Digital PATH Project
- AI Decision Support Tools Even with validation, AI-based clinical decision support tools remain underutilized in healthcare settings. A significant barrier is the absence of standardized frameworks for procurement, integration, monitoring, and evaluation, making it challenging for healthcare organizations to assess and implement these tools effectively. 🔗 Source: PMC – Frontiers in Digital Health (2024)
- Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery (MIMVS) Minimally Invasive
The implementation of MIMVS has been slow due to uncertainty regarding long-term cost-effectiveness, variations in clinician training, and overall system readiness. Although MIMVS offers benefits such as improved cosmetic outcomes and faster postoperative recovery, concerns about the initial investment, the need for specialized surgical skills, and the preparedness of healthcare systems have significantly hindered adoption. 🔗 Source: Journal of Thoracic Disease – Minimally invasive cardiac surgery—a Fad or the Future?
More Than a Purchasing Problem: Structural Barriers to Innovation
The examples above highlight some of the deeper friction points within procurement processes:
- Fragmented decision-making: In many systems, no single stakeholder owns the full value chain from clinical trial to bedside use.
- Financial incentives misaligned with innovation: Capital budgets and operating budgets are often siloed, leading to decisions that minimize upfront cost but increase downstream expenses.
- Procurement frameworks that struggle with non-tangible value: Technologies that improve workflow, reduce variation, or increase patient satisfaction are often undervalued.
- Lack of clinical co-ownership: Procurement processes can be overly administrative, limiting clinician influence on decisions that affect patient outcomes.
- Evidence vs. status quo: Even when new technologies have strong data and endorsements, the inertia of established practices often dominates.
So, What’s the Alternative?
It starts with value-based procurement, a model that goes beyond price tags and considers clinical outcomes, total cost of care, and broader system impact. Countries like the UK and Sweden have begun experimenting with outcome-linked tendering models, particularly for medical devices.
But value-based procurement doesn’t stand alone. It requires translational leadership; individuals and teams who understand both sides of the table: the clinical frontlines and the budget holders; the innovators and the evaluators. This leadership can align stakeholders early, help frame innovation in terms of system value, and design adoption pathways that respect constraints while unlocking potential.
And for smaller procurement teams, it may also mean thinking bigger: taking a macroeconomic perspective. Innovation in life sciences isn’t just about better care, it’s a pillar of economic growth, job creation, and global competitiveness.
🧭 Closing Thought When innovation stalls at the point of adoption, everyone loses. But with smarter procurement strategies and stronger translational leadership, we can turn friction into momentum – not just to get new technologies through the door, but to get them to the people who need them most.
Across Europe, promising solutions are already at our doorstep. The question is no longer if innovation exists, but how we ensure that it delivers value – to patients, clinicians, and society.
How do we, together, make the most of innovation, safeguard a truly patient-centric approach, and respect the responsibility that comes with spending public money?
💬 How do you experience this in your organisation or market? I’d love to hear your perspective — let’s connect.
Best regards
Michael W. Bek