What Actually Gets Approved: How a Critical Infrastructure Operator Used Market Research and IDIs to Navigate Counter-Drone Procurement Before Selecting a System

Executive Snapshot

Client

Nuclear Power Station Operator, France

Situation/Challenge

Following a series of unauthorised drone overflights at nuclear facilities across Europe, the client was under regulatory pressure to deploy a permanent counter-UAS capability. Multiple vendors had presented systems with varying technical approaches, detection ranges, and neutralisation methods. The security team could not determine which technical specifications actually mattered most for the client's specific site geometry and threat profile, or which vendors had successfully navigated the French regulatory approval process for counter-drone neutralisation at nuclear facilities.

Objective

Commission a global anti-drone market research report establishing the technology landscape and regulatory approval dynamics, then conduct structured IDIs with security directors and procurement officers at comparable facilities that had already deployed counter-UAS systems to understand which technical and regulatory factors had actually driven their procurement decisions.

Constancy Researchers Solution

Market Research Reports combined with Primary Research & VoC through In-Depth Interviews (IDIs), a Global Anti-Drone Market Report covering technology approaches and regulatory approval pathways, paired with 24 IDIs with security directors and procurement officers at comparable critical infrastructure facilities that had completed counter-UAS procurement.

Impact

Market research mapped the technology and regulatory landscape. IDIs revealed that regulatory approval pathway, specifically which systems had already received authorisation from the French nuclear safety regulator for active neutralisation, was the dominant procurement criterion rather than technical detection performance, narrowing the viable vendor field far more than the client had realised.

Client Outcome

The client entered procurement with a shortlist of three vendors who had already obtained or were far advanced in French regulatory approval for active neutralisation, and reached contract award eight months faster than the security team's original procurement timeline had projected.

The Situation / Challenge

Counter-UAS procurement at nuclear facilities is shaped by a regulatory environment that imposes constraints on what an operator can legally deploy that have no equivalent in most commercial security procurement decisions. In France, the authority to use active neutralisation measures against unauthorised drones, whether radio frequency jamming, GPS spoofing, or physical intercept, sits with defined regulatory bodies, and the systems that may be used for those measures must be specifically authorised.

The client’s security procurement team had received vendor presentations covering a wide range of detection technologies, including radar, radio frequency monitoring, acoustic sensors, and camera-based systems, and a range of neutralisation approaches. The presentations emphasised technical performance metrics: detection range, false alarm rate, and response time.

Proceeding into formal procurement without that clarity risked selecting a preferred vendor, committing procurement and legal resource to contract negotiation, and then discovering during regulatory review that the system’s neutralisation approach was not approved for use at nuclear facilities, restarting the process from a later and more costly point.

Key Challenges

No independent market mapping of which counter-UAS vendors and which neutralisation technologies had actually obtained French nuclear regulatory approval for active deployment.
No direct intelligence from security procurement officers at comparable facilities about which factors had actually driven their vendor selection decisions.
Vendor presentations emphasising technical performance metrics without addressing the regulatory approval status of their neutralisation approaches in France.
A risk of committing procurement and legal resources to contract negotiation with a vendor whose system was not approved for the client’s specific regulatory context.
No structured basis for narrowing a wide vendor field to those capable of actual deployment rather than those with the most compelling technical specifications.
Regulatory pressure from the French nuclear safety authority to reach a deployment decision within a defined timeframe.

In regulated critical infrastructure markets, procurement decisions that begin with technical specifications frequently end at regulatory approval. Knowing which systems have already cleared the relevant regulatory hurdle is more useful to a procurement team’s shortlisting decision than knowing which system performs best in a laboratory test environment.

Constancy Researchers Solution

Constancy Researchers delivered a market research report mapping the counter-UAS technology and regulatory landscape, then supplemented it with structured IDIs among security procurement officers at comparable facilities, producing an intelligence base built around what the regulatory and procurement environment actually required rather than what vendor marketing emphasised.

Global Anti-Drone Market Report: Technology & Regulatory Landscape

Delivered a market research report covering the global anti-drone market, mapping technology approaches by detection and neutralisation category, and documenting the regulatory approval status of active neutralisation methods in major European jurisdictions.
Identified that the French regulatory framework required specific pre-authorisation of neutralisation methods before deployment at nuclear facilities, and that only three vendor systems had obtained or were near completion of that authorisation.

In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with Security Directors at Comparable Facilities

Conducted 14 IDIs with security directors and heads of protection at comparable critical infrastructure facilities across France, Germany, and Belgium that had completed counter-UAS system.
Found that regulatory approval pathway was consistently cited as the first and most determinative shortlisting criterion, with technical detection performance and neutralisation effectiveness evaluated only.

In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with Procurement Officers at Regulated Sites

Conducted 10 IDIs with procurement and contract management officers who had managed counter-UAS system tenders at regulated critical infrastructure sites, exploring the specific contractual protections.
Identified a specific contract provision, a regulatory approval maintenance obligation requiring vendors to maintain neutralisation authorisation throughout the contract term and replace the system at their own cost if authorisation was revoked.

Vendor Regulatory Status Assessment & Shortlist Development

Cross-referenced the vendor field presented to the client with the regulatory approval findings from the market research and the practitioner shortlisting criteria from the IDIs.
Found that the shortlist narrowed to three vendors, two of whom had completed French nuclear authority authorisation and one of whom had a defined authorisation.

Procurement Roadmap & Contract Negotiation Brief

Delivered a procurement roadmap sequencing the formal tender process against the authorisation timelines of the three shortlisted vendors, ensuring the procurement timeline accommodated the one.

The work gave the procurement team what the vendor presentations had not, a clear understanding of which systems were actually deployable at the client’s facility, and a contract negotiation brief built around the protective provisions practitioners had identified as essential.

Impact

Market research identified only three vendors with completed or near-complete French nuclear regulatory authorisation for active neutralisation.
Security director IDIs confirmed regulatory approval pathway was the first and most determinative shortlisting criterion at comparable facilities.
Procurement officer IDIs identified a specific contract provision for regulatory approval maintenance that practitioners consistently recommended.
The vendor field was narrowed to three viable candidates without entering a formal tender process with non-compliant vendors.
The procurement roadmap sequenced the tender against vendor authorisation timelines without creating single-supplier dependency.
The client entered formal procurement with a shortlist that reflected regulatory reality rather than technical specification rankings.
Contract award was reached eight months faster than the security team’s original procurement timeline had projected.
The regulatory approval maintenance clause was included in the final contract terms.

Client Outcome

Procurement Efficiency

Contract award was reached eight months faster than the original security team timeline, with a shortlist that reflected regulatory viability rather than technical specification.

Regulatory Compliance

The procurement process began with the regulatory filter applied first, eliminating the risk of advancing a non-deployable vendor through costly contract negotiation.

Contract Protection

The regulatory approval maintenance obligation was included in the contract terms following practitioner IDI recommendation.

Shortlist Clarity

A wide vendor field was reduced to three viable candidates based on French nuclear regulatory status before any formal tender resource was committed.

Practitioner Intelligence

Direct IDI feedback from security procurement officers at comparable facilities produced decision criteria that no vendor presentation had disclosed.

Decision Logic Corrected

The security team learned that comparable facilities treated regulatory approval pathway, not technical detection performance, as the first shortlisting criterion.

Timeline Management

The procurement roadmap sequenced tender activity to accommodate the third vendor's authorisation timeline without creating single-supplier dependency.

Regulatory Context Retained

The French nuclear counter-UAS regulatory framework was documented and retained for future system refresh procurement cycles.

Market Positioning

The operator was repositioned as a regulated infrastructure procurement team that applies regulatory viability as the primary shortlisting filter rather than technical specification rankings.

Looking to unlock new growth opportunities with data-driven insights?

Case Studies

Learn how our success stories power data-driven growth across industries

When the Platform Gets Displaced: How a Drone Fleet Management Software Company Used Market Research and Strategy Advisory to Respond to Hardware Vendors Bundling Their Own Software

Executive Snapshot Client Drone Fleet Management Software Provider, Canada Situation/Challenge...

Own the Fleet or Buy the Service: How a Farming Cooperative Used Market Research and Strategy Advisory to Decide Between In-House Agricultural Drones and a Managed Service Model

Executive Snapshot Client Grain and Oilseed Farming Cooperative, Midwest United...

Data Collected, Value Not Delivered: How an Energy Company Used Bespoke Research and Consulting to Fix a Drone Inspection Programme That Was Generating Images But Not Reducing Maintenance Cost

Executive Snapshot Client Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Operator, Australia Situation/Challenge The...

What Actually Gets Approved: How a Critical Infrastructure Operator Used Market Research and IDIs to Navigate Counter-Drone Procurement Before Selecting a System