Why the Best Pathology Solution Doesn't Always Mean the Most Automated One

When discussing innovation in pathology laboratories, the conversation often revolves around automation, artificial intelligence, cloud connectivity, and increasingly intelligent equipment. It is natural to assume that adding more features will always result in a better product. As manufacturers, we sometimes think the same way.

However, after speaking with laboratories, distributors, and industry partners over the past few weeks, we were reminded that innovation is not always about adding more functionality. More often, it begins with understanding how each laboratory actually works.

One of the biggest lessons we learned is that there is no standard pathology workflow. Every laboratory has developed its own processes based on its size, information systems, security policies, staffing, and daily workload. While the goal is always the same: accurate specimen identification and reliable patient diagnosis, the path to achieving that goal can look surprisingly different from one laboratory to another.

Installation of cassette printer in the EIV Diagnostics

Some laboratories prefer a fully connected environment where multiple users send print jobs through a central server. Others connect each printer directly to a dedicated workstation. Some organizations prioritize advanced networking and workflow automation, while others place greater value on simplicity and data security. In fact, during recent discussions, we learned that certain customers intentionally prefer devices with fewer onboard functions because they want to minimize unnecessary data storage and reduce potential cybersecurity risks. That was a valuable reminder that the most feature-rich solution is not always the most appropriate one.

Digital Pathology

We also found that different companies define "workflow" very differently. Software providers often focus on image management based digital pathology and AI-assisted diagnosis, while hardware manufacturers concentrate on specimen preparation, grossing, tissue processing, or slide labeling. Every company contributes to a different part of the pathology ecosystem, and each approaches workflow from its own perspective.

These conversations reinforced an important principle for us: there is no universal solution that fits every laboratory.

For pathology labeling systems, flexibility is often just as important as performance. A printer should not only produce clear, durable labels, but also integrate naturally into the customer's existing workflow. The same hardware may be deployed differently depending on whether a laboratory uses a standalone workstation, a centralized server, or a customized laboratory information system. Understanding those differences is essential before deciding how a product should be designed.

A screenless printer that performs printing only, with all patient information and print jobs managed by the connected PC.

As manufacturers, we believe it is our responsibility to listen first and design second. Rather than expecting laboratories to adapt to our products, we should develop products that adapt to the realities of modern laboratory workflows. Sometimes that means greater automation. Sometimes it means a smaller footprint that fits beside a grossing station. Sometimes it means simplifying the system instead of adding another feature.

Every conversation with a laboratory teaches us something new. Those experiences continue to shape not only our pathology labeling solutions, but also our understanding of what meaningful innovation truly looks like. In the end, building better products is not simply about making them more advanced: it is about making them more suitable for the people who use them every day.