Where is the European life science sector heading?
From the European Union's perspective, the direction is clearly marked: 10 billion euro is being made available annually for the industry as part of the Life Science Strategy, as the European Commission announced last summer. By 2030, the location is intended to be a global leader in research and production.
This is a clear political commitment to international competitiveness. The interesting question behind it is whether we in Europe can also offer the necessary structures and framework conditions to use the funds efficiently and build new capacities.
Overall, the European life science industry proves to be resilient and highly innovative. Europe's share of the global venture capital volume has been rising since 2020, which underscores the international importance of the location. At the same time, international tensions create uncertainties.
Especially now, it is worthwhile to look at how life science projects can be implemented successfully.
"Can you give me a rough cost estimate?"
Far too many projects still start with this seemingly harmless question. Instead of a standardised system, initial estimates are often based on assumptions or outdated internal reference values.
The problem: Numbers named off-the-cuff solidify. They are repeatedly used as a reference throughout the project, even if they are based on insufficient data.
In an industry where confidentiality is paramount, there is often a lack of perspective beyond one's own horizon. One asks oneself: How does my price compare to the competition? But without access to their data, the answer remains a guessing game.
At Linesight, we have found an exciting solution to this dilemma: the "Capital Project Benchmarking Programme." 23 of the world's leading pharmaceutical companies, including heavyweights such as AstraZeneca, Bayer, MSD, and Johnson & Johnson, share anonymised project data for this purpose. Our database now includes information from around 250 Capex projects.
The benefit is clear: by aggregating and processing this data, we create a central knowledge base for calculations, schedules, and benchmarks that all participants can access. This ensures planning certainty and transparency without companies having to disclose trade secrets.
One of the most interesting results of our benchmarking programme concerns scheduling.
Our evaluation of 844 project schedules shows that, on average, 39 percent of the total time is spent on the construction phase, while planning only takes up 20 percent.
The data proves: the more time and care that goes into the early planning phase, the shorter the actual construction time will be.
This is particularly true for refurbishment projects, where unpredictable structural challenges often lurk in existing buildings. Those who start construction later, but are better prepared, are more likely to finish their project on schedule.
Four levers for the future
A good starting point for the initial planning of new projects is the largest possible database. However, for the European Life Science Initiative to fully unfold its effect, we must consider further aspects. We see, in particular, four strategic adjustment screws that construction managers should turn:
Without qualified teams, there is no progress. In Germany alone, over 100,000 skilled workers are expected to be missing in the construction industry by 2030. We must massively expand qualification programmes and increase the mobility of expert teams.
The use of existing sites is a decisive lever. Why? Because the infrastructure is often already in place, and lengthy approval procedures for new grid connections are not necessary. This saves time and reduces CO2 emissions.
We need more flexible production capacities. Modular construction methods and reproducible design standards drastically reduce the planning effort. A core concept that is adapted across different locations minimises surprises during the construction phase.
Artificial intelligence is far more than a tool for drug discovery. It helps us with site selection by simultaneously evaluating factors like grid capacities and labour markets. In project management, AI-supported dashboards ensure real transparency regarding costs and risks.
Planning certainty as a competitive advantage
We are at a turning point. Over the next five to ten years, the life sciences industry will become even more international, and data driven. Innovations in oncology and neurology and the trend towards personalised medicine require ever closer integration of research and highly flexible manufacturing.
For this, we need new standards in construction planning. Those who base site decisions and budgets on reliable data minimise risks and secure long-term competitive advantages.
The good news is: the knowledge we need is available. It is documented in the projects that have already been built. It is waiting to be evaluated in databases. It is embedded in the experience of teams who know what works.
How to get involved?
Linesight’s Capital Project Benchmarking Programme helps life sciences organisations compare cost and schedule performance using anonymised data from more than 250 capital projects.
If your organisation is interested in joining the programme, use our contact form to speak with the team and learn more about participating.
