Comparison with Indian Situation Due to the above gaps in technology, local instruments are found to be considerably behind in performance, facilities, ease-of-use, ergonomy, appearance and ruggedness. This gap cannot be bridged without greater attention of local research, development, product innovation, and high quality production. A few of the Indian industrial units are at most putting 2 to 3 personnel to the task of “development”. Even then, these personnel are ot left to be “dedicated” to development but are often drawn into other duties. The facilities put aside are marginal and R & D often has to wait for QC and other departments to free-up the facilities for tem. In the face of in pouring of imported technology, the Indian industry has an inhibited outlook and hardly any long-term perspective for its in-house research or even development.
Based on the information and data revealed during the study, it has been possible to conclude about the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats applicable to Indian instrumentation activity at the user, manufacturer and institutional level. Further consideration of these attributes enables us to arrive at suggestions as to the models of cooperation which are possible between various national R&D institutions and users as well as manufacturers in the instrumentation area.
Summary of SWOT
| Users | Manufacturers | Institutions |
| S T R E N G T H S Growing pace to modernization New large projects need instr. Large projects aware of benefits Willing to invest in instr. Prefer local where feasible. |
Basic instruments available readily Low cost from purchase to maintenance New collaborations possible good Import content generally below 30% SME do technology improvisation Ample software talent available | Ample facilities & infrastructure Multi-disciplinary expertise Fundamentally qualified personnel Admin. & Finance support Can reach out geographically. |
| W E A K N E S S E S Small/medium users not upto date System-house help not taken Resist retrofitting in old plants Conservation, pollution. Health, transport, poor instr. Users. Instr. Technicians shortage. |
Advanced products limited Technology absorbed not mastered Weak in sensors & input modules Inadequate use of software Low interaction with R & D instns.
Post-Sale service not spread wide. |
Practical development limited No market understanding Isolation from industry Poor design, engg., documentation Time targets unimportant
Poor staff versatility |
| O P P O R T U N I T I E S
To import latest instr. Systems to enhance awareness for training instr. technicians for use of systems houses |
For foreign strategic tie ups o take help of R & D instns. To sub-contract system houses | Purchase foreign technology develop industry relations encourage “venture” projects User benefit programmes Provide consultancy to users |
| T H R E A T S
Import of end products by consumer Misjudgment of tech. imports Financial limitations Inadequate use of expert support |
Import of intr. By users Wholly owned MNC compete Lack of sustained R & D | Imports by mggrs. And users Arrival of multinationals Short time cycle of products Changing technologies Lack of industry confidence. |
