Break/Fix vs. Full-Coverage Service Agreements: Choosing the Right Option for Your Lab Automation Equipment
In today’s research and production environments, laboratory automation systems — from liquid handlers to microplate labelers — are essential to maintaining efficiency, accuracy, and throughput. But as capital budgets tighten and equipment lifespans extend, maintaining those systems strategically becomes just as important as acquiring them.
When it comes to service and repair, most labs fall into one of two models: break/fix repairs or full-coverage service agreements. Each approach has advantages depending on your lab’s scale, workload, and budget priorities. Understanding the differences can help you choose the option that keeps your automation running — and your team focused on the work that matters most.
What Is Break/Fix Service?
The break/fix model is straightforward: when something breaks, you call your service provider to fix it. You only pay for what you need, when you need it.
Pros
Lower upfront cost: No recurring fees — you pay only when service is required.
Flexibility: Ideal for labs with limited budgets or newer equipment that rarely needs attention.
Pay-per-event transparency: Each repair or preventive maintenance visit has a defined scope and cost.
Cons
Unpredictable expenses: A single repair could significantly impact your budget if a major component fails.
Potential downtime: Waiting for a technician or parts may interrupt workflows.
Limited proactive care: Preventive maintenance and calibrations may be overlooked until something fails.
Break/fix service can be a practical choice for smaller labs, backup instruments, or non-critical systems — especially when equipment usage is light or redundant capacity exists.
What Is a Full-Coverage Service Agreement?
A full-coverage service agreement provides ongoing protection for your instruments. Typically billed annually, this plan includes preventive maintenance, priority repairs, and sometimes loaner equipment or remote diagnostics.
Pros
Predictable budgeting: Fixed annual costs make it easier to plan expenses.
Maximized uptime: Routine preventive maintenance reduces unplanned downtime.
Priority support: Fast response times and access to experienced engineers when you need them.
Comprehensive care: Coverage often spans multiple instruments and manufacturers when handled by a third-party provider, improving efficiency.
Cons
Higher upfront cost: You pay for coverage whether you use it or not.
May exceed needs for some labs: Light-use equipment may not justify a full agreement.
For labs that rely heavily on automation or operate under strict throughput and compliance requirements, a full-coverage plan is often worth the investment.
Finding the Right Balance
In many cases, the best approach lies between the two. Some labs choose hybrid coverage — placing mission-critical instruments under full agreements and using break/fix service for lower-use systems.
The key is to work with your service provider to tailor a plan that fits your lab’s needs, risk tolerance, and budget. A transparent partner can help you:
Evaluate your equipment usage and age
Identify cost-saving opportunities through multi-instrument coverage
Build a service plan that supports your operational goals
Empowering Labs to Make Informed Choices
As capital expenditure budgets become more unpredictable, understanding your service options is more critical than ever. Whether your lab opts for on-demand repairs, full-coverage support, or a mix of both, your decision should be informed, strategic, and data-driven.
At DCM BioServices, we help laboratories assess their service needs and create flexible maintenance strategies that protect uptime, efficiency, and investment — without unnecessary costs.
Reach out today for a free service and preventive maintenance consultation.