How to Build Flexible and Collaborative Laboratories

Shared laboratory spaces are on the rise, especially in innovation-driven sectors like biotech, pharma, and academic research. These multi-user environments offer clear advantages: improved collaboration, reduced operational costs, and more efficient use of high-value equipment and resources. But designing them isn’t as simple as maximizing bench counts or squeezing in communal equipment. Shared labs must be deliberately planned to support diverse user needs, evolving technologies, and dynamic workflows—all while maintaining safety and operational clarity.

Kelly Sullivan, PhD, global director of operations & labs at CIC, has deep experience designing and managing shared lab environments. Her approach centers on flexibility, communication, and people-first planning—prioritizing how scientists actually work. In her June 2025 webinar, Designing Shared Lab Spaces: Balancing Functionality, Collaboration, and Future-Proofing (available for free on demand viewing), Sullivan shared practical strategies and lessons learned from years of managing multi-tenant lab environments.

Drawing on nearly 20 years in scientific operations, Sullivan emphasizes that a successful shared lab balances design and culture equally.

“Designing a shared lab isn’t about packing in as much as possible. It is about enabling science,” she says. “That means creating space that supports how people actually work: room to focus, collaborate, move freely, and store what they need. Shared tools should be easy to access, and the environment should be able to flex with evolving research needs.”

Understanding shared lab fundamentals

Shared labs are fundamentally different from traditional, dedicated research spaces. They support multiple tenants or teams—each with their own schedules, equipment, and priorities. This diversity brings complexity, especially when it comes to layout, storage, safety, and ownership of shared tools.

One of the most common early-stage mistakes, according to Sullivan, is not accurately predicting how the lab will be used. “One of the most frequent mistakes I see is underestimating how space will actually be used. This can be related to storage, equipment sharing, and human movement,” she says. “Early renderings often look clean and balanced, but they don’t account for real use patterns, random carts in hallways, or where people actually cluster during the day.”

To avoid these pitfalls, Sullivan encourages teams to engage real users—not just leadership—early in the planning process. Mapping workflows and understanding equipment and movement patterns ensures the final space will support daily operations, not just look good on paper.

Designing for efficiency and collaboration

Creating zones for specific tasks, balancing shared and private work areas, and streamlining equipment access are all essential strategies for improving lab efficiency. Sullivan recommends centralized locations for high-use shared tools and implementing visible booking systems to avoid confusion or conflict.

“Define what is shared versus private and who maintains what; use clear labeling,” she says. “Accessible, transparent systems prevent conflict and keep operations running smoothly as the lab scales.”

Storage also plays a pivotal role. Poorly planned storage leads to cluttered spaces, misplaced materials, and user frustration. Sullivan advises teams to build in dedicated zones for chemical, consumable, and sample storage—with flexibility for future growth. Using vertical space and integrating cold, dry, and secure options helps accommodate different research types and regulatory needs. “Skipping this step leads to clutter, inefficiency, and unhappy users in the spaces,” she notes.

Building for flexibility and future-proofing

In fast-paced research environments, flexibility isn’t a luxury—it’s essential. Sullivan shares a lesson learned from a past project: “In one project, we inherited a space with fully fixed casework: benches, cabinets, and utilities all locked in. It looked polished, but as we started onboarding new clients with diverse workflows, the limitations quickly surfaced. The lack of flexibility made it hard to accommodate different equipment needs or adjust for specialized processes,” she explains.

“Retrofitting was costly and disruptive. That experience reinforced the value of modular design,” she added, noting that she now prioritizes mobile benches, adjustable storage, and flexible utility layouts in all new builds.

Planning utilities in overhead grids or in easily accessible zones allows labs to evolve with minimal renovation. It’s all about “giving yourself options,” Sullivan says.

“Future-proofing doesn’t mean designing for every hypothetical scenario that could arise. It means giving yourself options. Think ahead to tricks like choosing mobile casework, demountable partitions, and planning utilities in zones or overhead grids that allow for later drops without a full overhaul. And always make sure your network, mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems can scale.”

Managing diverse users and promoting cohesion

While flexible infrastructure is important, people are the heart of a shared lab. Supporting a diverse user base means planning beyond just physical space. Sullivan emphasizes the need for intentional culture-building and onboarding. “Even a well-designed lab will fail if users don’t understand shared expectations,” she says. “Design should include orientation space (physical or digital) and signage that reinforces space guidelines. Communication isn’t an afterthought—it should be built into the infrastructure.”

Structured intake processes also help avoid future conflicts. Sullivan’s team gathers detailed space and equipment needs from new users early on and maps them against existing commitments. When conflicts do arise, a documented priority framework—based on factors like usage, criticality, or project stage—helps guide decisions objectively.

Intentional overcapacity and modular zones are also effective strategies, Sullivan says. “You can’t predict every need upfront, so having buffer space and reconfigurable zones gives you room to adapt without triggering territorial tension.”

Design for real use, not idealized vision

In the end, designing a shared lab is about more than infrastructure—it’s about supporting science in a real, functional way. The most successful shared spaces anticipate change, accommodate different working styles, and give researchers the freedom to do their best work.

Ultimately, enabling a thriving shared lab environment is about empowering researchers while building in operational foresight. That means planning for growth, anticipating storage and equipment needs, and embracing modularity not just as a design trend, but as a day-to-day necessity. When design and operations align with the rhythms of research, shared labs become more than just space—they become an engine for discovery.

“Overdesigned labs feel rigid. Great labs feel alive,” Sullivan says. “They adapt to the people inside them and make the science easier, not harder.”