Do you ever wish your lab could be a little less chaotic and a little more predictable? Automation can give you that: steady processes, fewer human errors, and more time for the real thinking. But automation isn’t magic — it’s a choice. The wrong experiment to automate wastes money and time, and the right one makes your lab feel like it grew an extra, very reliable pair of hands. Equally important, the best hardware in the world is useless if your team doesn’t know how to run, maintain, and troubleshoot it. In this practical guide I’ll walk you through which experiments actually benefit from automation and exactly how to train your staff so those automated workflows deliver consistent, reproducible results.
A simple mental checklist for automation-readiness
Before buying any equipment, ask five questions: does this task repeat a lot; is the method stable; is the outcome measurable; does human error materially affect results; and does automating it free important expert time? If the answer is yes to most, the task is a strong candidate for automation. That mental checklist helps you avoid one of the most common mistakes labs make: automating novelty instead of routine. Automation rewards repetition and predictability, and punishes ambiguity.
High-throughput screening: the automation poster child
If your project is about testing thousands of compounds, conditions, or genetic perturbations, automation is not optional — it’s foundational. High-throughput screening relies on plate handlers, dispensers, and readers that perform identical actions across thousands of wells without fatigue or bias. Robots enable randomized plate layouts, consistent dispensing, and overnight throughput that humans simply cannot match. The result is cleaner data and a scale of experiments that would be impractical manually.
Plate-based biochemical assays and ELISA workflows
Many biochemical assays follow a mechanical sequence: add reagent, incubate, wash, add substrate, read. These steps are highly automatable. Automating wash cycles and reagent dispensing reduces background noise and increases assay sensitivity. When timing matters—like removing a plate at the exact same minute across dozens of plates—automation standardizes that timing and reduces variability that could otherwise obscure real biological signals.
Molecular biology workflows: PCR, qPCR and NGS library preparation
Molecular biology contains numerous pipetting-heavy steps where human hands add noise. PCR setup, qPCR plate preparation, and NGS library prep involve repetitive small-volume transfers, careful mastermix preparation, and bead cleanups. Automated liquid handlers deliver consistent volumes and mixing patterns, reducing contamination risk and improving yield reproducibility. For sequencing labs, moving these steps to robotic platforms often reduces failed libraries and increases data quality per run.
Serial dilutions and dose–response experiments
Serial dilutions are deceptively error-prone when done manually because small pipetting errors amplify through the series. Automated serial dilutions produce precise gradients that are critical for dose–response curves, MIC testing, and potency determinations. When concentration is the variable of interest, robots make the difference between noisy results and publishable curves.
High-content imaging and cell-based phenotypic assays
Cell-based assays are sensitive to how cells are seeded, incubated, and handled. Automating cell seeding, media exchanges, staining, and plate transfers to imagers preserves timing and reduces mechanical disturbance. For high-content imaging—where quantitative image analysis follows automated acquisition—repeatable handling is essential. Automation ensures that differences in images reflect biology, not pipetting fatigue.
Compound management, plate replication and cherry-picking
Compound libraries and plate replication are logistics problems that scale poorly by hand. Robots do precise cherry-picking, replicate plates overnight, and maintain traceable logs of where each compound was placed. For drug-discovery pipelines and large screening campaigns, automation brings speed and fidelity to sample distribution and preserves chain-of-custody data.
Analytical chemistry sample prep and extraction workflows
Sample preparation for LC-MS, GC-MS, and HPLC—such as protein precipitation, SPE cleanup, or derivatization—benefits from automation because timing, vortexing, and wash steps need consistency. Robots deliver uniform extraction efficiency and reproducible sample handling, reducing variability that otherwise challenges downstream quantitation and comparison between runs.
Microbiology: colony picking and plate streaking
Automated colony pickers and plate streakers reduce the tedium and subjectivity of manual colony selection. Where selection criteria are objective—size, fluorescence, or marker expression—pickers move colonies reproducibly into wells with recorded images and metadata. That speeds library construction and reduces human bias during clone selection.
Biobanking, aliquoting and sample normalization
High-volume biobanking workflows require accurate aliquoting, careful temperature control, and impeccable metadata. Automation of decapping/recapping, aliquoting, and barcode-driven storage improves sample integrity and traceability. For longitudinal studies or clinical sample repositories, automation lowers the risk of mislabeling and improves downstream data reliability.
Quality control and routine controls
Quality control runs are predictable and rules-based, which makes them ideal for automation. Robots running QC plates consistently generate dependable control charts that flag true assay drift rather than noise introduced by different operators. Automating QC reduces false alarms and accelerates root cause analysis when real issues appear.
When not to automate: experiments that need human judgment
Not every task belongs on a robot. Exploratory experiments that change week-to-week, delicate manipulations like microdissection, and assays that require subjective morphological judgment are poor automation candidates. Automating a moving target wastes time and locks you into costly revalidation. Keep humans in the loop for discovery and judgment-heavy steps, and aim to automate only after protocols stabilize.
How to prioritize experiments for automation
Start with mapping your workflows and measuring time spent on each step. Identify the top time sinks, highest error rates, and most frequent routines. Those metrics guide prioritization. Next, conduct a quick feasibility assessment against the mental checklist: repetition, stability, measurability, and impact of error. Use those data to build a ranked automation roadmap that balances quick wins and strategic investments.
Pilot design — how to test whether automation really helps
A pilot is a small, controlled experiment where you run the automated workflow side-by-side with the manual method using real samples. Measure hands-on time, throughput, failed-run rates, reagent consumption, and data equivalence. Include edge cases and odd labware to reveal hidden integration problems. Pilots expose supply-chain, software, and validation surprises long before you commit to large purchases.
Infrastructure and site readiness — don’t forget the facilities
Automation needs a physical home: power, bench space, network access, environmental controls, and sometimes exhaust or vibration isolation. Check vendor specs early and engage facilities and IT before purchase. The number one cause of installation delays is inadequate site prep, so plan ahead and avoid timeline slips.
Data management and LIMS integration — capture the story
Automation produces metadata: timestamps, protocol versions, machine logs, and reagent lot numbers. Integrate instruments with your LIMS or ELN so metadata travels with the data and is not lost to manual transcription. Good metadata enables reproducibility, supports QC, and simplifies audits. Without it, automation generates a confusing pile of files rather than a usable data stream.
Safety and biosafety in automated workflows
Robots reduce direct exposure to hazardous materials but introduce new risks—moving parts, heated elements, and complex decontamination needs. Design automated workcells with safety interlocks, clear emergency stop procedures, and appropriate containment for biological hazards. Ensure that operators are trained in spill response and that SOPs include steps for safe pausing and sample quarantine.
Consumables and supply-chain planning
Automated systems often consume a lot of tips, plates, and proprietary cartridges. Validate third-party consumables early where possible and build inventory safety stocks to cover lead-time risks. Negotiate consumable pricing and delivery terms with vendors, and track usage metrics so procurement can anticipate needs as throughput grows.
Maintenance and downtime strategies
Automation increases the need for preventive maintenance and fast repairs. Build a maintenance plan that includes in-house first-line fixes and vendor SLAs for complex repairs. Keep a spare-parts kit for components with short mean time between failure, and measure mean time to repair to understand operational risk. Planning for downtime reduces the chance a single failure halts a critical campaign.
Designing a training program — philosophy and foundations
Training is the human key to automation success. The goal is to teach operators not just how to press start, but how the system behaves, why certain parameters matter, and how to recover from common errors. Structure training around understanding principles of liquid handling, contamination control, deck setup, protocol logic, and data flow. Blend classroom theory with hands-on supervised practice and objective competency checks.
Hands-on practice and simulated failures
Real learning happens when people practice recovering from errors in a safe environment. Simulate dropped tips, blocked probes, and failed deck moves so operators develop muscle memory for stabilizing runs. These drills reduce panic and minimize sample loss during real incidents. Practical experience trumps slide decks every time.
SOPs, runbooks and living documentation
SOPs must be clear, version controlled, and tied to protocol metadata. Pair detailed SOPs with short laminated runbooks at the instrument for day-to-day use. Include pre-run checklists for barcode verification, reagent lot entry, and consumable levels. Documented procedures make operations consistent across shifts and personnel changes.
Competency assessment and certification
Require operators to pass competency checks before they run production samples. A typical assessment includes an observed run from start to finish, simulated error recovery, and quality checks on the resulting data. Re-certify personnel after major software changes, protocol edits, or annually to keep skills sharp and create an audit trail for compliance.
Troubleshooting, escalation and vendor support
Train staff to interpret logs, identify common fault signatures, and perform safe first-line fixes. Define a clear escalation ladder with vendor support contacts and internal engineers. Empower operators to pause and quarantine suspect runs to prevent larger failures. Quick, documented escalation pathways prevent small issues from becoming catastrophic.
Preventive maintenance training for operators
Teach operators simple preventive tasks that vendors allow, such as deck cleaning, probe maintenance, and tip-probe checks. Routine preventive care reduces downtime and builds operator ownership. More complex repairs should remain vendor-managed unless the lab has certified service technicians.
Cross-training and redundancy to avoid single points of knowledge
Cross-train multiple people on each instrument to avoid reliance on a single expert. Rotate roles so knowledge spreads and people gain diverse skills. Cross-training builds resilience during vacations and turnover and helps operators notice incremental process improvements.
Measuring training effectiveness and continuous improvement
Track KPIs like operator interventions per run, failed-run rate, mean time to repair, and hands-on time saved. Use these metrics to identify training gaps and prioritize re-training. Encourage operators to document suggested fixes and small improvements, then test them in a sandbox. A culture of continuous improvement turns operators into contributors.
Culture and change management — making automation a team win
Automation changes jobs and workflows. Involve staff early in pilot selection, protocol writing, and SOP development. Recognize and reward staff who master new skills. When people feel ownership, automation becomes a tool they use to do better work rather than a threat to their roles.
Scaling automation and training as throughput grows
As you add instruments and lanes, scale your training by adopting a trainer-of-trainers model. Maintain a central knowledge base with SOPs, runbooks, and troubleshooting notes. Schedule regular refresher courses and vendor updates so staff keeps pace with software and firmware changes. Training should be treated as a continuous program, not a one-off event.
Common pitfalls to avoid
The classic pitfalls are automating unstable protocols, underinvesting in training, ignoring data capture and LIMS integration, and overlooking consumable logistics. Avoid these by piloting first, budgeting for training and maintenance, integrating data systems early, and negotiating consumable supply terms.
Conclusion — automation is a partnership between machines and people
Automation gives labs power, scale, and consistency, but only when matched to the right experiments and supported by well-trained staff. Start by choosing repetitive, stable, measurable tasks that cause real pain when done manually. Pilot thoroughly, prepare facilities and data systems, and invest in a layered training program that teaches principles, hands-on skills, troubleshooting, and preventive maintenance. Build SOPs, certify operators, and create a culture that rewards continuous improvement. Do this, and your lab will run smarter, faster, and more reliably — and your team will spend more time doing science they love.
FAQs
Which experiment gives the fastest return on automation investment?
Automating repetitive, multi-well pipetting tasks—like PCR plate preparation, serial dilutions, and plate replication—usually returns value fastest because the time saved compounds across runs and error rates fall immediately.
How long does it take to train an operator to full competency?
Basic safe operation can be taught in a few days, but full competency—including troubleshooting, maintenance, protocol editing, and data QC—typically takes several weeks to a few months depending on prior experience and protocol complexity.
Can exploratory assays be automated effectively?
Not while they’re changing frequently. Automate stable, repetitive sub-steps in exploratory assays (like plate transfers or washing), and only automate the full protocol after it stabilizes to avoid constant revalidation overhead.
What’s the most common mistake labs make when starting automation?
Automating a poorly documented or unstable manual process. Fix and standardize the manual workflow first, run a pilot, and only then scale to automation.
How do I prevent a data swamp from automation?
Plan your data architecture early: define required metadata, integrate instruments with a LIMS or ELN, automate QC checks, and train operators to verify data ingestion. This makes automated output a structured, reusable asset instead of a pile of orphan files.
Thomas Fred is a journalist and writer who focuses on space minerals and laboratory automation. He has 17 years of experience covering space technology and related industries, reporting on new discoveries and emerging trends. He holds a BSc and an MSc in Physics, which helps him explain complex scientific ideas in clear, simple language.
Leave a Reply