All Members Community

 View Only

  • 1.  External competition for core services

    Posted 02-08-2026 12:04
    Hello,
    I had someone ask me the following question. I have not had to deal with this, so I thought I'd post it here to see if others had similar experiences.
    This person was asking if I had guidance on any policies or ways to limit outside vendors who compete with cores and offer similar services from advertising on campus, show up to vendor shows, etc. While my initial thought about it is that cores should not have to worry about outside competition if they are providing novel services, it seems the outside influences there are a bit more problematic than the norm, and they are trying to consider ways to limit this type of activity. Are there any standard practices or policies that other universities use to at least preserve the priority of core services over outside services? They want to approach administration with a precedent.
    Thanks! 
    Andy


    ------------------------------
    Andy Chitty
    Executive Director, MGB Research Cores
    Mass General Brigham
    Boston MA
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: External competition for core services

    Posted 02-09-2026 08:11
    Hi Andy:

    Thanks for posting your question to the ABRF community.
    While we cannot limit our faulty from using outside vendors it is good to know how much business we were/are losing to them and then to take available measures.

    A few years back I worked with our Finance group who had access to all of the institute's purchases. I gave them a list of vendors with competitive services and reagents.
    It was startling to learn how much business was actually going to the outside companies, often at higher prices and longer turnaround times.
    Outside vendors have sales and marketing teams (we don't) and a large budget that allows them to stockpile many reagents that we clone on demand.
    When asked, some labs said, "well, we've always done it that way", or "that's how I did it before I came here" or "their website was better than yours" and so on.
    In terms of our action/response, I was able to email or visit those PIs and let them know they could work with us: faster, cheaper and (often) better than the vendor.

    I would encourage all Core Directors to go through this exercise, to learn what you're up against and to have a way to bring back some of these  internal clients/customers who have a habit of finding most if not all of their goods and services via an external Google Search (where our small Core Facility does not appear on top of the list).

    Best regards, 

     

    -Ralph

     

    Ralph J. Garippa, Ph.D.

     

    Head, Gene Editing & Screening (GES) Core Facility

    Department of Cancer Biology & Genetics (CBG)

    Memorial Sloan-Kettering Institute and Cancer Center

    417 East 68th Street, room ZRC-1102

    New York, NY 10065 

    office 646-888-3339

    cell 201-247-2196




    =====================================================================

    Please note that this e-mail and any files transmitted from
    Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center may be privileged, confidential,
    and protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of
    this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
    responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
    you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution,
    copying, or other use of this communication or any of its attachments
    is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
    error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message
    and deleting this message, any attachments, and all copies and backups
    from your computer.

    Disclaimer ID:MSKCC





  • 3.  RE: External competition for core services

    Posted 02-09-2026 10:25

    One thing that comes to mind is what a grant application says.  Does the text in a grant say something like, "The Microscopy Core will be used for these experiments," and include a letter of support from the core?  If so, the institution could require the core be used as per a contractual obligation, unless the core does not offer the needed service.

     

    You're also asking two separate questions.  One is whether advertising on campus can be stopped.  The other is whether actual use of an outside service can be controlled by the institution.

     

    Putting up fliers or posters on campus may be stoppable.  Sending emails, making phone calls , and other communications cannot be stopped.

     

    Finance, purchasing, and legal departments should be able to make policies regarding the second question. 

     

    But I don't know what institutions have actually done. 

     

    Michael Cammer, Sr Research Scientist, DART Microscopy Laboratory

    NYU Langone Health, 540 First Avenue, New York, NY  10016

    Office: RB (formerly Skirball) 4-102  -- call if door is locked (phone near elevators)

    Office: 646-501-0567 Cell (voice only, not text): 914-309-3270  Michael.Cammer@med.nyu.edu  

    http://nyulmc.org/micros  http://microscopynotes.com/ 

    Scheduling the time you want is far more reliable by phone call.  Why not provide your phone number?

     

    ______________________________________
    This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender by return email and delete the original message. Please note, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The organization accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.





  • 4.  RE: External competition for core services

    Posted 02-12-2026 17:58

    Products and Services - Internal Core Facilities vs. Companies

    At the end of the day, we are stewards of taxpayer dollars and philanthropic funding. Our obligation is not to defend internal infrastructure for its own sake, but to ensure investigators get the highest value for every dollar spent.

    If the best option is external, then we should support that choice. However, too often investigators default to commercial vendors simply because they are unaware that internal cores can provide equal or superior pricing, quality, turnaround time, and-critically-customization and scientific partnership that a for-profit vendor cannot match. Core facilities are not just service providers; we are embedded collaborators who understand the institutional ecosystem and can adapt to evolving scientific needs.

    The challenge of cores is visibility. With a transient population of students and postdocs, awareness erodes constantly. That makes passivity a losing strategy.

    I strongly support the proactive approach Ralph took. When possible, work with purchasing to identify what is being obtained externally. Then reach out-not to criticize-but to understand why. Those conversations are invaluable. They uncover unmet needs, misconceptions about core capabilities, and opportunities to improve. They also reinforce that we are partners in advancing their science, not competitors for their budgets.

    This kind of engagement also forces healthy self-assessment. If a service can be done more efficiently or more cheaply by industry, we should consider sunsetting it. We did exactly that with monoclonal antibody production and purification because commercial providers could do it at lower cost. That allowed us to redirect resources toward areas where we truly add differentiated value, such as antibody discovery.

    In my view, a core should offer a product or service only if:

    1. There is clear internal need; and

    2. It is either unavailable externally or we can demonstrably provide superior value-through quality, expertise, integration, customization, and/or turnaround time.

    Anything else risks diluting focus and misallocating institutional resources.

    We are here to support investigators and strengthen the institution's science-not to protect legacy offerings. If we consistently align our portfolios with investigator needs and institutional value, both the science and the cores will be stronger for it.



    ------------------------------
    Frances Weis-Garcia
    Director, Antibody and Bioresource Core Facility
    Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center - Zuckerman Research Center
    New York NY
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: External competition for core services

    Posted 02-20-2026 15:17

    Frances - I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your approach! This is the culture that I am working on getting MSU moving towards - "how do the cores best support PIs/the science", even if that means PIs sending samples elsewhere for reasons you've stated above. 



    ------------------------------
    Mary Gauvin
    RED Service Centers Director - Core Facilities
    Montana State University
    Bozeman MT
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


Related Content