We build laboratory information management systems that run every step on a single record, from the moment a sample is received through to the certificate of analysis: barcoded sample tracking, a method library, instrument connections, specification checks, staged approval and an audit-ready record structure.
In a laboratory, work begins with the sample, and the sample is usually booked in by writing it into a logbook. A label is stuck on by hand, it goes on a shelf, and when its turn comes it goes to the instrument. The instrument's output is read off paper and typed into Excel; the report is written into a Word template, signed and emailed to the customer. At small volumes this arrangement genuinely works, and it has worked for years. Once sample numbers rise, though, questions start going unanswered: what stage is this sample at right now, which analyses are finished, who carried them out, when will the result be ready. When the customer rings, finding the answer means asking several people. Worse still, when someone asks which raw data a report issued last month was based on, nobody can speak with certainty.
The second problem shows up in audits. Laboratory work is not only about producing a result but about being able to prove how that result was produced. Which method was used, which version of the method was valid, was the instrument's calibration current on that date, was the analyst authorised for that method, what was done with a result that fell outside the limits. In laboratories accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 or working towards accreditation, this evidence is demanded systematically; on the food and chemicals side, customer audits ask the same questions. Excel cannot answer any of them reliably, because it does not show who changed a cell and when. Scattered records turn into a file-gathering exercise that takes weeks before every audit.
A LIMS, that is a laboratory information management system, runs the sample on a single record from the moment it is received through to the report. The sample is barcoded on arrival, the analyses to be performed are tied to a plan drawn from the method library, and every step is recorded together with who carried it out. Where a result can be taken from the instrument it is transferred directly; where it cannot, it is entered by hand under controls. The entered result is compared automatically against the product or customer specification; an out-of-limit value does not depend on the analyst spotting it, the system flags it. Once the approval stage has been passed, the certificate of analysis, the CoA, is produced from the same data; because the report is not typed out by hand, copying errors disappear. When the sample is linked to a production batch, traceability works in both directions: from batch to analysis and from analysis to batch.
To be honest, a LIMS on its own is not a guarantee of quality. Installing a system does not earn you accreditation; accreditation comes through an audit by TÜRKAK, the Turkish accreditation body, and what is audited is your practice. What the software does is keep the evidence orderly, complete and searchable. In the same way, not every instrument connects automatically: some only produce a paper printout, some write in a closed format, and for some the data interface is licensed separately by the manufacturer. During discovery we go through the instruments one by one and write down in advance which can be connected and which will continue with controlled manual entry. This page is a sector-independent overview; for a more detailed account specific to food laboratories, see our Gaziantep food and laboratory tracking page.
Laboratories that take in samples from outside and issue reports to their customers. Here the turnaround time is a direct commercial commitment; not being able to see where a sample is waiting produces both delays and lost customers. Tying pricing, work orders and invoicing to the sample record is a further need in these organisations.
Laboratories within food, chemical, textile, plastics and metal manufacturers. Here an analysis result is not a report but a decision: will the batch be released or will it stay blocked. Linking the result to the production batch and keeping a record of the blocking decision is the most critical point.
Organisations planning to be accredited under ISO/IEC 17025 or maintaining an existing accreditation. Holding records of method versions, measurement uncertainty, calibration validity and staff competence systematically rather than in scattered files cuts audit preparation from weeks to days.
Businesses that carry out some analyses themselves and send others to a subcontractor, or that have laboratories at several sites. Tracking the samples sent out, recording the returned result on the same report and keeping methods consistent across sites is a job in itself in these organisations.
The sample is barcoded on arrival with a unique code; where it came from, the date, the storage condition and who delivered it are recorded. Which shelf, which instrument or whose hands the sample is in can be seen at any moment. By linking it to a production batch, a customer order or a dispatch record, the traceability chain is established from the start.
For each analysis, the method to be applied, its version, the calculation formula, the measurement uncertainty field and the validity date are defined. The set of analyses to be performed comes ready as a plan based on the sample type, so the analysis list is not built by hand for every sample. When a method is revised, which result was produced with which version remains traceable retrospectively.
From instruments that can output data, results are taken automatically over a serial port, a file output or the manufacturer's interface and written to the relevant sample. For instruments that cannot be connected, controlled manual entry is used, with field type, unit and plausible-range checks. Which instruments can be connected is determined one by one during discovery; we do not say at the outset that all of them will be.
Results are compared automatically against the product or customer specification. An out-of-limit value is flagged immediately; steps such as re-analysis, requesting a second sample or blocking a batch are defined as workflows. How the non-conformity was closed, who took the decision and on what grounds are recorded; this record is one of the documents most often requested in an audit.
The analyst enters the result and an authorised person approves it; an unapproved result does not reach the report. Every change is kept together with who made it, when, and which old value was replaced by which new value, and it cannot be deleted. This audit trail is what gives an incontestable answer to the question of whether a result was corrected after the fact.
Certificates of analysis are produced directly from approved results; the template is built to the institution's own format and prepared in several languages where needed. The report can be downloaded from a customer portal or sent by email. A verification code or QR code placed on the report allows the authenticity of the document to be checked afterwards.
Instrument calibration dates, verification records, reference material and consumable stocks, and which methods each member of staff is authorised for are held in the same structure. If someone tries to run an analysis on an instrument whose calibration has expired, the system warns them. Reminders are produced in advance for competences that are about to lapse and calibrations that are coming due.
Which sample type to start with, which analyses fall within the scope and how the current record-keeping works are mapped on site. The instrument inventory and the method list are gathered. This step usually takes two to four weeks, and rather than trying to take on the whole laboratory at once, a narrow starting point is chosen.
Methods, calculation formulas, units and limit values are entered into the system. This work is done together with the laboratory team, because the differences between the written method and the method actually applied often become visible for the first time here. Making those differences explicit is a valuable outcome in itself.
Instruments that can be connected are tested one by one; output format, unit mapping and error conditions are verified. Controlled manual entry screens are prepared for the instruments that cannot be connected. Which instrument works by which method is put in writing, so there is no argument about expectations later.
The system goes live with the chosen sample type and runs in parallel with the old method for a period. Results are compared and calculation and rounding differences are ironed out. This parallel period usually lasts four to eight weeks; if it is skipped, the switch is made before the team's confidence in the results has settled.
The scope is extended to other sample types and analyses. Reports are prepared so that the records requested in an audit can be produced from one place. The system is handed over to your team; tasks such as adding a method, updating a limit and authorising new staff are written down, and monitoring continues under support.
No, and we do not promise it. Accreditation is earned through an audit by TÜRKAK, the Turkish accreditation body; what is audited is not your software but your laboratory's technical competence and its practices. What a LIMS contributes is keeping the records ISO/IEC 17025 asks for, that is the method version, the calibration validity, staff competence and the change history, in one searchable place rather than in scattered files. That noticeably shortens audit preparation, but it does not guarantee passing the audit.
No, not all of them will connect. Some instruments only produce a paper printout, some write in a closed format, and on some the data interface is charged for separately by the manufacturer. During discovery we go through the instruments one by one and give you in writing which can be connected and which will continue with controlled manual entry. Nothing is lost on the instruments that cannot be connected either; tying the result to the right sample, the right method and the approval stage is achieved with manual entry too.
Not every laboratory does. In a laboratory that handles a few samples a day, has a single analyst and issues no reports to outside parties, a well-kept Excel file may be enough, and we have no hesitation in saying so. The need usually appears at these thresholds: when finding where a sample is has become difficult, when you are entering the same result in two places, when gathering the files before an audit takes weeks, or when a reporting error has reached a customer. If none of these signs is present, we would advise you to wait.
It will not. The ERP manages orders, stock and the financial record; it does not carry the laboratory's world of methods, measurements and approvals. In any case, the quality modules inside an ERP serve in most laboratories only to store results. The LIMS runs the analysis itself and passes the result on to the ERP or the production system: whether the batch is released or blocked goes there. We do not replace your existing ERP; we connect to it over an API or by data transfer.
This page is a general, sector-independent account of a LIMS, and it applies to food laboratories too. On the food side, however, batch-based sampling plans, microbiology incubation times, the relationship with HACCP records and analysis sets specific to product groups such as flour, oil and spices call for a separate level of detail. We cover that detail on our Gaziantep food and laboratory tracking page, and starting there would serve you better.
Barcoded sample receipt and location tracking; a versioned method and specification library; automatic result transfer from the instruments that can be connected and controlled entry screens for the rest; a non-conformity workflow for out-of-limit results; an analyst-to-approver hierarchy and an undeletable change history; certificates of analysis produced with your own template; calibration, consumable and staff competence records. The source code, the database and the documentation belong to you.
In a 30-minute discovery call we listen to what you need and tell you honestly whether custom development or an off-the-shelf product is the better answer.
We bring the chain of quote, project, time record, milestone claim and invoice together on a single record. In agencies, consultancies, engineering practices and software firms, who spent how long on which job, resource utilisation and project profitability become visible while the work is still running, not once it has finished.
Details →We do not replace your hospital information management system; we build an operations layer that runs alongside it. Appointments and resource utilisation, treatment plan tracking, reminders, consumable and implant stock, the patient journey in health tourism and the management dashboard all come together in this layer. The source code and the data stay with you.
Details →We take the company's paperwork out of folders and personal computers and move it into a single archive. Every document's version, who may see it, which approval it passed through and how long it will be kept are defined in the system; the document you are looking for is found in seconds rather than minutes, and its history can be evidenced in an audit. A DMS manages the document itself; ECM covers the process and the content that flow with it.
Details →We build a system that produces a contract from a template, puts it through approval and signature, and — once it is signed — tracks effectivity, renewal, the notice period for termination and the parties' commitments. Contract lifecycle management (CLM) is exactly that: not storing a file, but managing the contract's lifetime. A contract whose term has run out does not quietly extend itself because nobody noticed.
Details →We build an arrangement in which faults and requests arrive through a single record rather than through a messaging app, a corridor conversation or a phone call. Every request is prioritised, has a clear owner and a measured resolution time. We run the same structure not only in IT but also for human resources, administrative affairs and maintenance requests. That is what enterprise service management (ESM) means.
Details →Who is using which computer, phone, server and network device, which licence expires when, which subscription quietly renews itself: we gather all of it into a single record system. Assignment, warranty, the renewal calendar and decommissioning run in the same system; the inventory moves out of personal memory and into the organisation's records.
Details →
