The Best Time To Implement an ELN? Before You Even Enter The Lab

So, you've finally secured investment for your biotech start-up. Congratulations!

Your laboratory is becoming operational, equipment is arriving, and you're still excited about everything ahead. Meanwhile, investors are already asking about milestones, even though half the equipment is still sitting in boxes.

Among the many decisions you need to make, there's another question: Do we actually need Electronic Lab Notebook (ELN) software and a sample management system?

Of course, better reproducibility and data organisation can save time and money. Many ELN providers also offer special programmes for start-ups. But perhaps it's too early? Why invest time in a system when you barely have any samples and your experimental workflows aren't even established yet?
‍

Spoiler: I think the earlier, the better. Ideally, before your first experiment.

I've experienced this from both sides. Before working with laboratories on ELN implementation, I was a scientist in a biotech start-up myself. Back then, I didn't know much about ELNs, but we had one from the very beginning.

Looking back, I'm very glad we did. Here are three reasons why.

1. Start-up life is busy enough without searching for everything

Working in a biotech start-up means doing a bit of everything. One day you're planning experiments, another day you're writing code, pitching for a company, ordering consumables, fixing equipment or preparing results for investors.

And, unlike in a well-established laboratory, there's often nobody whose sole responsibility is keeping everything organized.

During my first year at the start-up, I was splitting my time between computer simulations and laboratory experiments. Sometimes I would spend two weeks mostly working on simulations. When I returned to the lab, I could barely remember where everything was.

• Which freezer contained that sample?
• Which box?
• Which position in that box?
• And what was the last experiment I had started but hadn't finished?

Having a searchable system made a huge difference. Instead of interrupting a colleague who was just as busy as I was, I could find the sample location or check the experiment myself.

It sounds like a small thing. But when your team is small and everyone's time is limited, these small things add up surprisingly quickly.

2. It's much easier to organize a lab before it becomes disorganized

Implementing an ELN isn't just about installing software. Every laboratory has its own protocols, experimental workflows and ways of organizing samples.

Even if you're starting from scratch, you probably bring protocols from different academic laboratories. And, as we discovered, different scientists often have different ways of performing essentially the same experiment.

We had to bring our protocols together, discuss which approaches worked best and establish an experimental structure that made sense for our team.

We also had the opportunity to decide how our freezers, boxes and sample records should be organized before we actually filled them.
‍

We were already working in the ELN before running our first experiment.

Was it some extra work at the beginning? Certainly. But it saved us a lot of trouble over the following two to three years.

Everything had its place, both physically and digitally. New reagents could be registered as they arrived. New experiments followed an agreed structure. And when new colleagues joined, they didn't have to learn an entire system of unwritten rules.

There's another advantage to starting early: you don't need to migrate hundreds of existing samples or experiments. You simply add things as you go.

Now that I work on the other side, helping laboratories adopt ELNs, I see how much more complicated implementation can become when years of existing data and habits need to be accommodated.

3. Even a small laboratory generates data surprisingly quickly

It's tempting to think that a team of three scientists doesn't really need a dedicated system. But three scientists working full-time can generate quite a lot of experiments and samples.

In our start-up, we had two years to deliver MVPs for four different projects. For the first few months, there were only three of us working in the laboratory.

Even after the first rounds of experiments, we already had dozens of samples. Eventually, that number grew into the hundreds.

Imagine trying to introduce a sample management system at that point. You would first need to identify everything, reconstruct missing information, agree on naming conventions and enter all those records.

And you'd have to do all of this while continuing the experiments needed to meet your milestones.

Today, I sometimes work with laboratories that already have hundreds or even thousands of samples when they decide to implement a system. It always reminds me of my previous job and makes me appreciate how much effort we avoided by starting early.

The question isn't necessarily how many samples you have today. It's how many you'll have in six months, and whether you'll still be able to find and understand them.

So, is it ever too early for an ELN?

I don't think so.

Of course, a three-person start-up doesn't need the same complex infrastructure as a large pharmaceutical company. And spending months designing a perfect system before doing any science would rather defeat the purpose.

But having a simple, agreed way to document experiments, manage protocols and track samples from day one is a different matter.

It helps you stay organised when everyone is busy, makes onboarding easier and avoids the painful task of reconstructing everything later.
‍

The best time to organize your laboratory is when there's still very little to organize.

And if you haven't even unpacked your first piece of equipment, that might actually be the perfect moment to start.