Most R&D projects are not delayed by a lack of raw materials or technological limitations. The real bottleneck is inaccurate recommendations that force the team through dozens of unproductive sample iterations.
The source of the problem rarely lies in the laboratory. It usually begins much earlier, at the stage of defining the request for quotation. When decisions are made on the basis of incomplete information, the formulation process turns into a cycle of constant adjustments and repeated returns to the starting point.
Each such “empty” iteration means not only wasted formulator time, but also real operational costs and the risk that the product will not reach the market within the planned timeframe
The problem of “wasted iterations”: why raw material selection already fails at the enquiry stage?
Most projects in the cosmetics industry are not delayed by genuine raw material shortages or unforeseen technological limitations. The real bottleneck lies in inaccurate recommendations that force R&D teams through dozens of unproductive iterations and the testing of samples that have no realistic chance of being implemented from the outset.
The challenge of identifying the right raw material begins much earlier — at the stage of submitting the enquiry. When a supplier receives only fragmentary information, the selection process becomes an attempt to match solutions based on assumptions and subjective interpretation.
Why do incomplete information create hidden costs?
Every unsuitable sample represents not only wasted material, but also a costly “wasted iteration”. Instead of developing new formulations, the technical team is forced to verify assumptions. Decisions based on incomplete guidelines trigger a cycle of corrections and repeated returns to the starting point. This consumes resources and may significantly delay the product’s market launch.
In such situations, the cause is often attributed to raw material quality or an error on the distributor’s side. In reality, however, these problems far more often result from incomplete information provided at the outset. If the brief does not clearly define not only what is being sought, but also the environment in which the raw material is expected to perform, the risk of an unsuitable match increases considerably.
Why is it worth briefing functions and system parameters?
The raw material selection process is rarely prolonged by a single critical error or omission. Much more often, delays result from recurring communication patterns that force the supplier to interpret incomplete information instead of selecting the most appropriate solution. When an enquiry is framed too narrowly, the path from concept to final formulation can stretch from weeks into months.
The most common barrier is basing the enquiry solely on the INCI name rather than on the specific function the raw material is expected to perform in the formulation. For example, a request for an “SLES replacement” may sound precise in theory. In practice, however, it significantly limits the range of possible solutions. If the formulator’s actual objective is to reduce the irritation potential of the cleansing base or improve foam performance, there are many raw materials on the market that may deliver a much better final result than a direct 1:1 SLES substitute. Focusing on the problem rather than on the raw material name creates room for innovation.
Shifting the focus from the “name of the raw material” to its “function and constraints” — such as pH, sensory requirements or COSMOS/Vegan compliance — makes it possible to eliminate most unsuitable proposals before any samples are sent
Hidden factors that compromise formulation stability
A lack of full technological context at the outset is one of the fastest routes to emulsion separation or viscosity loss in the finished product. A recommendation based on a “typical application” rarely performs well under the specific conditions of an individual project. The main sources of delay include:
insufficient information about the chemical environment – a raw material that stabilises a system effectively at pH 5.5 may prove completely unsuitable under acidic conditions or in the presence of high electrolyte concentrations,
failure to share previous test results – without knowing which solutions have already been rejected, the supplier may unnecessarily propose materials with a similar or even identical chemical profile,
constraints defined too late – a raw material may pass stability testing but later be rejected by the purchasing department, for example because it lacks the required certification or exceeds the target unit cost. This is a classic example of lost operational time.
Formulators need a partner who understands these dependencies and can filter available options against actual project parameters rather than relying solely on trade names. Only with a complete view of the project can we provide a sample that aligns with the company’s technological and budgetary requirements from the outset.
How to shorten the ingredient matching process?
The quality of information provided at the enquiry stage directly determines the course and duration of the entire implementation process. From this perspective, a technological brief is no longer a formality, but a precise operational tool that moves the first stage of formulation work outside the laboratory.
The key difference lies in defining the objective rather than prescribing the solution:
a request for a “replacement for raw material X” confines the process within rigid and often suboptimal boundaries,
a request for “an emulsifier for a lightweight O/W emulsion, stable at pH 5–6 and without a greasy after-feel” creates room for solutions that are both technologically and commercially optimal.
This approach narrows the decision-making field without consuming laboratory resources. Instead of testing random raw materials, the R&D team works only with components that align with the project’s core requirements from the outset.
4 pillars of a brief that improve the chances of selecting the right material with the first sample
The effectiveness of a brief does not depend on its length, but on its structure. To shorten the path from the initial enquiry to the final formulation, the document should clearly define:
the function of the raw material – instead of looking for a replacement for a specific polymer, specify that you need, for example, a thickener that provides high clarity and remains stable in the presence of electrolytes,
the system context – parameters such as pH, salt content and system type have a critical impact on whether a particular raw material has any realistic chance of performing successfully,
the desired sensory profile – clearly defining the expected final feel, for example “rapid absorption without a greasy film”, makes it possible to select ingredients with the appropriate rheological characteristics,
project constraints – clear requirements regarding certification, such as COSMOS, exclusions, such as PEG-free, and budget limits eliminate unsuitable proposals already at the distributor’s selection stage.
These are the factors that determine whether the sample received is the right one or merely another step in an endless cycle of adjustments.
Want to download the brief? See below.
How does distributor experience help eliminate raw material selection errors?
In the raw material selection process, the distributor acts as a unique link between the manufacturer and the team of specialists developing the formulation. Experience gained across dozens of projects and a wide range of applications provides the perspective needed to identify recurring patterns quickly. At MEDICOS, we know which ingredient combinations are unlikely to work and which can provide a stable foundation for a product.
We use this experience to shorten your team’s path to the final formulation. In practice, this means:
narrowing the selection to solutions with the highest probability of success in your specific system,
eliminating unsuitable raw materials that may look appropriate on the technical data sheet but fail to meet the formulation’s specific requirements,
supporting decision-making with practical implementation data, reducing the risk of costly errors when transferring a formulation from the laboratory to the production line.
However, this support mechanism requires a solid foundation. Even the most experienced adviser cannot identify the right ingredient with complete confidence without full information about the unique parameters of a specific project. A lack of clear guidelines at the outset forces us to rely on interpretation and assumptions — the fastest route back to the starting point and to further unproductive sample iterations.
Download the brief template and shorten the raw material selection process
To streamline your processes and receive suitable samples more quickly, start by defining your requirements professionally.
Choose the path that will move your project forward faster.
Download the technological brief template and introduce a standard that eliminates incomplete enquiries and the need for repeated clarification.
Send us the completed brief, and our experts will analyse the system and immediately narrow the selection to raw materials with the highest technological compatibility.
