State of Scientific Purchasing 2026: What this year’s data means for science marketers AZoNetwork | February 2026
Scientific purchasing teams are moving faster, relying more heavily on self‑serve research, and—crucially—adding AI tools into the comparison phase. That combination changes how marketing teams need to show up: earlier in the journey, with clearer product information, fewer friction points, and content designed to be compared (by humans and machines).
VIDEO
Below is a marketer‑focused read‑out of AZoNetwork’s State of Scientific Purchasing Survey 2026 findings, with year‑on‑year signals pulled from the survey and supporting context from broader B2B buying research.
1) Buying cycles are shortening—speed now rewards the best “self‑serve experience”
One of the clearest shifts in this year’s survey is momentum: 42% of purchases were completed in under one month (up from 33% last year), and 89% were finalized within six months (up from 84% in 2024). In other words, the window to educate and influence is tightening.
Under 1 month: 42.98%
2–3 months: 27.19%
4–6 months: 18.42%
7–12 months: 8.77%
13–24 months: 1.75%
Over 24 months: 0.88%
What this means for marketers:Front‑load the decision‑making information : pricing context (or at the very least, budget bands), lead times, certifications, compatibility, and ‘fit’ guidance.Build a “no‑email‑required” research path : scientists increasingly expect to find answers without asking.Treat product pages like landing pages : your product page is often the first—and most influential—piece of content a buyer will touch.
2) The buying team is still small—win one champion, then give them shareable collateral
Buying teams have remained compact: 64.04% of purchases involved 1–3 people, while 29.82% involved 4–6. That’s good news for marketers: you don’t need to convince an army—you need to equip a small group with the right proof.
1–3 people: 64.04%
4–6 people: 29.82%
7–9 people: 4.39%
10+ people: 1.75%
Decision roles also skew toward hands‑on users. In our respondent mix, application scientists/researchers (28%) and engineers (15%) feature heavily among key decision‑makers—people who care about technical clarity and real‑world performance.
What this means for marketers:Create “forwardable” assets : one‑page spec summaries, comparison sheets, ROI/TCO calculators, validation data, and FAQs.Write for the practitioner : clear use‑cases, constraints, and setup requirements beat generic brand language.Make it easy to justify internally : your champion needs ammo for procurement, finance, and leadership.
3) Budget signals are mixed—segment your messaging by budget reality
Budgets aren’t moving in one direction. Compared with last year, the share of respondents expecting budgets to remain the same increased (34.5% → 37%), and “increase somewhat” also rose (23% → 29%). But there’s also a slight rise in “decrease significantly” (6% → 8%).
Remain the same: 34.5% → 37%
Increase somewhat: 23% → 29%
Decrease somewhat: 23% → 17%
Increase significantly: 11% → 11%
Decrease significantly: 6% → 8%
Respondents linked decreases to funding cuts and uncertainty, and increases to business growth, new opportunities, and strategic R&D investments.
What this means for marketers:Where budgets are constrained, lead with risk reduction : uptime, compliance, error reduction, service response, and total cost of ownership.Where budgets are growing, lead with throughput and performance : capacity, automation, and competitive advantage.Build sector‑specific pages : the ‘why buy’ story in academia often differs from aerospace/defence or manufacturing.
4) Channel influence is consolidating around search + websites—and events are resurging
Search engines and websites remain the core discovery layer—while the influence of sales reps fell year‑on‑year.
Survey detail (channel influence on purchase, 2024 vs 2025):
Search engines: 77% → 87%
Manufacturer’s website: 86% → 88%
Distributor website: 65% → 68%
Industry events (incl. virtual): 52% → 61%
Print publications: 58% → 62%
Online publications / 3rd‑party review sites: 58% → 62%
Sales representatives: 72% → 63%
Social media: 33% → 24%
Events are particularly interesting: their influence rose from 52% to 61%, and what draws attention on the show floor is very practical—product demos/interactive content (42%) and prior knowledge of the brand (38%).
What this means for marketers:Your booth strategy starts months earlier : build brand familiarity before the event so “prior knowledge” is working for you.Demos beat swag : bring the product to life (or recreate it digitally with interactive demos, video walkthroughs, and application stories).Double down on search + site UX : if your web experience doesn’t answer key questions fast, buyers will move on.
5) AI is no longer a novelty—it’s becoming a comparison engine
AI use among respondents increased sharply year‑on‑year (+78% in our survey). ChatGPT leads as the primary tool (58%), followed by Gemini (21%), DeepSeek (13%), and Perplexity (8%). Importantly, usage isn’t limited to younger demographics—the largest share of AI users in our sample sits in the 46–55 age bracket (32.2%).
ChatGPT: 58%
Gemini: 21%
DeepSeek: 13%
Perplexity: 8%
What this means for marketers:Publish comparison‑ready assets : standardized spec tables, ‘vs’ pages, selection guides, and decision trees.Keep critical information accessible : if key specs, compatibilities, or pricing context are gated or buried in PDFs, you reduce your chance of being shortlisted.Optimize for humans *and* machines : clear headings, consistent terminology, and structured data help both search engines and AI tools interpret your content.
6) Content that influences purchase is clear: product info first, then application depth—and video is rising
When asked about the first content they interacted with, 71% said product information. Application notes and video then play a major role in influence, with video ranking among the most influential formats—above some traditional technical formats.
Treat product information as the ‘home base’ : then surround it with application notes, validation data, and short video explainers.Make technical content easy to find : application notes don’t work if they’re hard to discover or lack clear ‘when to use this’ context.Use video to reduce perceived risk : show setup, workflow fit, data quality, and what “good” looks like in practice.
7) Vendor expectations are climbing—responsiveness and relevance now define trust
Two vendor factors sit at the top: responsiveness/customer service and the relevance of information provided. Notably, responsiveness/customer service increased from 90% to 95% year‑on‑year—an indicator that buyers value fast, helpful interactions, especially as timelines tighten.
What this means for marketers:Market your support experience : publish response‑time SLAs, service coverage maps, onboarding content, and ‘what happens after you buy’ explainers.Prove credibility early : buyers are entering research with a more open mind—your job is to become the first credible voice they trust.Use third‑party trust signals : peer recommendations, testimonials, and independent reviews remain influential.
Download your free copy of the full report here
What marketers asked in the live Q&A (and why it matters)
Speed expectations apply after the form fill too. A live poll found most (89%) respondents aim to respond within 24 hours—yet only a small minority (9%) achieve <15 minutes. If your competitors follow up faster, they often win the next conversation.
AI referrals are still small (sub‑1% today) but rising. The team called out the strategic choice publishers face—block LLM crawling or allow crawling to increase discoverability. For vendors, the actionable step is to publish ungated, structured content that can be cited and compared.
GEO/AEO isn’t a new discipline as much as ‘good SEO + E‑E‑A‑T + structure’. The guidance: optimise for humans first, keep claims citable, and make specs and comparisons machine‑readable.
UX is now part of your go‑to‑market. Page speed, above‑the‑fold load times, and frictionless navigation directly affect whether buyers can self‑serve answers—especially when vendor contact happens later.
“Clarity” is a content structure problem. The recommendation was an Amazon‑style hierarchy: a short executive summary and visuals above-the-fold, then specs, proof, and deeper detail as you scroll. In fast cycles, clarity beats cleverness.
Bigger deals bring bigger committees. The team noted a positive correlation between purchase value and number of decision‑makers—so your ‘1–3 people’ motion works best for lower‑to‑mid value purchases, while high‑value capital equipment needs a multi‑stakeholder enablement pack (technical + financial + risk).
How AZoNetwork helps
AZoNetwork has served thousands of scientific and engineering organizations for over 25 years as a publisher and digital marketing agency. Across our network of science and engineering platforms and subject‑specific newsletters, we help brands reach the researchers, engineers, and purchasing influencers who shape technical buying decisions—then support them with content, targeting, and performance measurement.
Discover our solutions here
