Your First Pharma Job

About 250,000 scientists are employed by biotech firms in the United States today, and a career in commercial biotech is a goal for many PhDs, post-docs, and undergraduate science students.

Recently Fiona Murray, an associate professor from MIT’s Sloan School of Management, carried out a study of knowledge work in this sector that provides enlightening reading for those interested in a biotech career.

Her report is available for download from the National Academies’ Center for Education.  Many of the report’s findings are summarized in an accompanying presentation.

Scientific jobs in biotech can be separated into three streams:

• Technicians normally require a university degree and 0-2 years of experience. They typically receive more guidance, and have little influence over the direction of the work they do. At this level, university education is increasingly being substituted for practical technical diplomas. On average, a level one technician earns just over $40K annually in base salary. Career trajectories are often limited, as it is often not possible to move up to a scientist position without a PhD.
• Scientist positions require a PhD, and frequently a post-doc as well. Even at the entry level, scientists earn considerably more than technicians — about $80K on average. Scientists have more independence and control over the direction of their research.
• Managers have often moved from a pure science role into their position, which involves the strategic direction of scientific groups, project management, and operational and financial decision-making. Often, a switch to the management track is required in order for biotech knowledge workers to shift into a higher-paid salary trajectory.  Although level 1 managers earn about the same as level 1 scientists, they command a premium at higher levels.  At level 5 (12+ years of experience), a manager earns on average $40K more than a scientist.

Why don’t scientists earn more? At a base salary of $80K+, scientists are well-paid, but when you take into account the opportunity costs of spending many extra years in graduate school and low-paid post-doctoral positions, maybe they’re not paid as much as you’d think. As with many economic questions, the reasons why come down to supply and demand:

• Large numbers of scientists are trained every year;
• The other job options for scientists outside of biotech pay even less (academia) or offer lower job satisfaction (big pharma).

What skills are biotech companies looking for?

Murray identifies some skill gaps that biotech job-seekers should consider carefully. If you can find ways to develop your abilities in these areas, you’ll be well-positioned to set yourself apart from the competition and provide employers with the profile they’re looking for:

• In terms of science, there is beginning to be a shortage of ‘traditional’ understanding of biology at the systems level.  Understanding the bigger picture of how molecular pathways relate to tissues, organs, and general physiology can help you relate your science to the pursuit of medicine and human health. Scientists with a good handle on genomics, bioinformatics and computational biology are also in short supply.
• Business skills. Scientists working for biotech firms always need to remember that there is a commercial goal at the end of their research, and if you can show that you understand these goals you’ll be way ahead of candidates who can’t break away from an academic mindset.
• Collaboration and communication skills. Commercial biotech scientists can’t hide away in the lab — being able to work with a team and communicate both with other scientists, and non-scientists is incredibly important. You can show that you have this to offer if your resume includes extracurricular teamwork activities, and by joining Toastmasters to develop your skills.

Finally, Murray’s paper takes a look at some future trends that may impact biotech jobs in the years to come, including the “deskilling” of biotech work and outsourcing.

Overall, it’s an eye-opening look at careers for scientists in biotech.  Well worth your time.

Preclinical R&D biotech, career, management, salary, scientist, skills, technician

Here’s another great resource for your pharmaceutical job search: Career Opportunities in Biotechnology and Drug Development, by Toby Freedman.

Freedman has put together a solid resource for finding jobs and developing your career in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry. At 409 hardcover pages, this isn’t the kind of book you can slip in a pocket to browse on the subway — it’s a comprehensive guide that I could see being an invaluable aide to finding your first job in the biotech industry.

Early chapters on resume writing and interview techniques, including informational interviewing, are brief but well-written and useful. If you’ve read a lot of career guides, these chapters probably aren’t going to teach you anything you haven’t heard before.  The real meat of this book is the industry-specific information that follows.

In an excellent overview chapter, Freedman explains the breadth of the industry, and summarizes the different product development pathways followed by therapeutic, nontherapeutic, and medical device companies.

Next, individual chapters, each about 20 pages long, cover a wide range of career pathways: drug discovery, preclinical research, project management, clinical development, medical affairs, regulatory affairs, quality assurance and quality control, operations, product development, business development, sales, marketing, and corporate communications. Chapters on executive management, legal affairs, finance, management consulting and even recruiting round out this comprehensive guide.

Each chapter includes ’snapshots’ of various roles and offers a thoughtful analysis of both the positive and negative aspects of a given job.  For example, in clinical development, Freedman notes that “Original and applied clinical research is exciting.  Outcomes are unknown until trials are completed, and each trial is unique. Your work is close to the market”, but “There is frequent pressure to meet constantly looming deadlines, and the objectives often seem to be ‘too much, too soon, with too little’”. When you’re just starting out, and trying to decide what path to follow, knowing the downside of a job can be very useful information.

Naturally, salaries and compensation are a matter for discussion, as is the potential for career development, and a look at how future trends might influence job security for each role is useful in today’s economic times.

Perhaps most usefully for job seekers, Freedman clearly lays out job requirements and typical pathways into the role, and offers tips that could be helpful for getting one’s foot in the door.  Descriptions of what it takes to excel in a role, and qualities common to good candidates are also helpful.

This guide isn’t cheap, and it isn’t very portable — but if you are looking for a career in the pharmaceutical and biotech sector, this book should be at your side.

Clinical research, Interviewing, Marketing, Medical Science Liaisons, Preclinical R&D, Regulatory affairs, Resources, Resumes & CVs biotechnology, book review, career, freedman, jobsearch

A look at some recent economic numbers has the BioJobBlogger suggesting that the future may look dim for new PhDs and postdocs who were hoping to find entry-level work in the biotechnology sector.

The Future of Pharmaceutical R&D : Bio Job Blog.

“. . . a majority of the almost 160,000 employees layed off by pharma companies in the past few years have been R&D scientists. . . . Unfortunately, this paradigm shift doesn’t bode well for doctoral students and post-doctoral fellows who are training in the life sciences. This is because many entry-level biotech positions, traditionally filled by newly-minted PhDs and postdoctoral fellows will likely be filled by experienced, pharmaceutical employees who lost their jobs in the recent rounds of layoffs.”

Is this true? Maybe. However, there are a few positive things to consider about entry-level positions:

1. A lot of people are not interested in taking a step back in their careers and applying for entry-level work if they’re already accomplished and experienced at a higher level.
2. Companies trying to fill entry-level positions sometimes will not consider more experienced people for these roles. Fairly or not, more experienced candidates can be seen as more difficult to manage and more likely to be unsatisfied with low-level work and salary.
3. R&D work can be incredibly specific to particular assays and model systems. A newly-minted PhD with the exact skills a company needs may be a better bet than an experienced scientist who has been working on a different system.

So, if you have your heart set on an R&D position in industry, don’t lose hope entirely — although keeping your eyes open for other opportunities is always smart.  One last piece of advice — be mobile!  Being genuinely open to relocation will ensure that you have the most opportunities available to you. Locking yourself down to one location will almost always limit your career trajectory.

Preclinical R&D assaydevelopment, career, jobsearch, labwork, nonclinical, preclinical, R&D, research, scientist