The article explains that when you send in your information,  automated “Applicant Tracking Systems” (ATS) swallow and dissect your resume.  It will only be seen by a live human being if it matches with specific keywords and skill categories determined by the software. If you’re lucky, you’ll get an automated email reply telling you that you’re in the system.

According to the article,

Until recently, it was easy for job hunters to game the system: The computer ranks you higher in the turnip pile if you tweak your résumé to include the same phrases found in the employer’s job description. But lately, spoilsport employers are ruining the fun, with sophisticated software that uses artificial intelligence. This newer technology can analyze the résumé of a top performer — say, Dennis in accounting who saved the company millions by eliminating doughnut Fridays — and find applicants whose résumés fit his “ideal candidate” profile.

Personallly, I think that this is hyperbole.  ATS software is a niche market, and the companies that sell them for thousands of dollars or more in licensing fees aren’t ashamed to exaggerate their functionality. The truth is, many of the applicant tracking systems out there are absolute garbage pieces of software, no more sophisticated than your grandmother’s recipe database.  But whether the software is good or bad, the fact remains that it’s no friend to the job hunter.  This is especially true for entry level candidates and people trying to make a career transition.

So what can you do? Is there a secret method to outsmart the software?  Well, as the article suggests, it can’t hurt to be sure you’re including relevant keywords in your resume.  But really, what you should be doing is avoiding the machine entirely.  If you’re entry-level, or a career switcher, then replying to online postings is almost always going to be a waste of your time.  Even if your resume makes it past the ATS system, it’s only going to land in the hands of an HR associate or internal recruiter who’ll reject it immediately if it doesn’t seem like an obvious match.

Instead, you should be making personal connections by building a network and engaging in a series of informational interviews.  Remember, only a tiny minority of jobs are filled through online postings — if you’re going to be successful, you need to focus your energy on what works, not what’s easy.

“The quality that is hardest to find in the science policy world is the ability to write clearly and quickly,” says John Marburger, Washington, D.C.-based science adviser to President George W. Bush. “Communicating technical material in technical journals does not give you the skills to communicate to nontechnical audiences,” he says.

The article suggests some resources, such as the National Postdoctoral Association, that students and postdocs can turn to for help in understanding and developing these skillsets.  Some of the suggestions in the article will be familiar to readers of this blog — joining Toastmasters or relevant campus clubs, for example.  The suggestion to take charge of a lab responsibility, like radiation safety, as a way of demonstrating leadership is also a good one.

—

You may have noticed that there’s been a bit of a gap in posting lately.  I’ve actually just started a new job myself, so things might be a little uneven until I get settled.  Thanks for your patience!

The program has posted a PDF scan of a great article on regulatory affairs careers from The Scientist, which is usually only available by subscription. The article, “For the Hottest Jobs - Go Regulatory”, follows a typical day in the life of a regulatory affairs associate, Joan Kwong, who started her career in the laboratory and made a career switch a few years later. The article offers some great insight on career potential and typical salary ranges.

The article also includes a sidebar piece entitled “So you want to be a regulatory affairs professional - here’s how to get started”. The article notes that one of the hardest things to get used to at first is the abundance of industry-specific jargon and acronyms. A great resource for learning the language of clinical research and regulatory affairs is the online glossary hosted by the Applied Clinical Trials journal.  ACT also recently posted an interesting article, “eSubs and eCTD and RPS, Oh My! ” which discusses some of the changes regulatory teams are dealing with as the submission process goes electronic.

Using sites like Monster, Workopolis, Biospace or Medzilla is free for job-seekers, but employers and recruiters pay a lot for access. When a hiring manager or a recruiter posts an advertisement, or searches for resumes on these sites to fill an open position, they are doing so in a particular frame of mind. In this perspective, the resumes of under-qualified people are simply chaff to be sorted through; an annoyance that delays their effort. When they’ve invested a lot of money in their search, they aren’t looking for someone with the potential to do the job, they’re looking for someone who has already done it, and your resume, no matter how well-written, attractively formatted and indicative of your enthusiasm, simply won’t make the cut if you don’t closely meet the posted qualifications. Don’t believe it? From ask.metafilter, Here’s what one hiring manager wrote about her experience:

I recently filled a position on Monster, and it was a miserable experience. Between the constant “resume blaster” spam I was getting at my contact address and the 75% of respondents who had listed salary requirements double or more what we were paying, most of whom did not read the qualifications, and the crappy formatting of Monster’s attached resmes, I was deleting applications for the smallest transgressions. Gear your resume and communications toward people who have chronic headaches and don’t give them any excuses to be crankier.

But simply having your resume posted on these sites can’t hurt, can it? Well, actually, it can. Just last month, Monster.com reported that its security had been breached, and personal information belonging to millions of account holders had been stolen (and it’s not the first time!). In 2003, the San Diego-based Privacy Rights Clearinghouse published a report on resume database security and jobseeker privacy, detailing the theft of thousands of resumes from Medzilla and other biotech job boards. When you consider the kinds of information that are included in a job board profile, you begin to realize just how significant the attendant risks of identity theft could be.

Responding to job posts or posting your resume online can also make you vulnerable to scams. Many job-seekers have been taken advantage of after applying for clinical research jobs with legitimate-sounding companies or recruitment agencies. They are contacted and told that their application is very strong, but that they lack experience, and are given a referral to an training course. Of course the job never existed, and they find that the expensive course doesn’t really help them at all.

Ask the Headhunter’s Nick Corcodilos will also tell you that job boards are a waste of  your time. In fact, he argues that they’re a waste of time for employers as well!

In 2002 we began to learn the answer. CareerXroads, publisher of the popular directory that reviews online job sites, released the study I’d been waiting for³. Finally, someone was looking at the bottom line — hiring success rates. Employers were asked what percentage of their new hires came from the four leading online career sites. The percentage of hires made through Monster: a whopping 1.4%. Hotjobs: .39%. CareerBuilder: .29%. Headhunter.net: .27%. (Yes, those decimal points are in the right places.) Suddenly, the cat was out of the bag.

I think one of the worst things about these sites is that it gives job seekers the false impression that they’re accomplishing something.  It can take a lot of time to post a carefully formatted resume and profile to one of these sites, or to submit an application to a posted job.  Submit two or three applications in an evening after finishing classes or getting home from your ’survival’ job and you’re exhausted. Using these sites is hard work, so it feels active, even though it’s actually a very passive - and therefore very ineffective - strategy.

So, is there any way to get some value out of job boards?  Well, maybe a little. Job boards can be useful as a research tool to find the names of companies doing work that interests you.  There are a lot of small biotech companies and CROs out there, and it’s possible you might find out about one you didn’t know before. But once you know they’re out there, you need to short-circuit the typical job application process, which is very likely to land your entry-level CV in electronic purgatory or a virtual trashcan. Instead of filling out an application, put your research and networking skills to work and find the names of people who work there. Picking up a phone and making a personal connection is scary — but it’s active, and it’s far more likely to move your job search ahead.  We’ll talk more about how to turn a phone call into an informational interview in a future article.

Fortunately, not all sectors of the economy have been equally hard-hit, and healthcare, pharmaceutical and biotech companies continue to offer some good prospects. The Globe points out that opportunities in this sector aren’t limited to students with a science background:

• Political science majors are finding work in healthcare policy positions at think tanks, consulting firms, and within the government.
• Economics and business students are in demand at the larger hospitals and drug companies in management and financial roles.
• Sociology and psychology degrees open doors to counseling jobs at retirement and medical facilities.
• English majors with good writing skills can find work in corporate communications at pharmaceutical firms, insurance companies, and larger healthcare providers.
• Healthcare Information Technology is a steadily growing field taking job applicants from engineering, information sciences, and web analytics backgrounds.
• Pharmaceutical sales continues to be a reliable option with great long-term opportunities for liberal arts majors with strong interpersonal skills.

The pharmaceutical and biotech sectors have been enthusiastic adopters of this social networking site. If you’ve ever wondered how to find the names of people to call for informational interviews, or for personalizing your cover letters, this is your answer.

These days, LinkedIn should definitely be a part of your networking strategy but you can’t just put up a profile and forget it.   Louise Fletcher’s advice will help your profile get attention.

If you’re trying to land a clinical research job, you should apply these tips on how to write a clinical research resume to your profile as well. Be sure to sign up for some LinkedIn groups that relate to your career goals (e.g. the Good Clinical Practice group).

In a future post, we’ll talk about how to use LinkedIn to actively build relationships, and discuss the value of other niche social networking sites.

I’m writing this in 2009, but I’ve been seeing MSL programs eliminated and entire teams laid off ever since late 2006. There are many MSLs who have experience and don’t have jobs right now. There are many more who are worried about their jobs. The reality is that at most companies, the MSL function is seen as a cost-center, and a heavy one at that. It can be easy to justify cutting heads from the MSL team to save the company money, or when the company’s drugs go generic, or when an investigational drug approval process gets interrupted.

Any PhD who enters the MSL career should consider the “what if’s”, especially in today’s times. What if I lose my job as a MSL? What are my alternatives? If an academic track has been this difficult for postdocs, what additional difficulties will this route present now that I’ve been out of the academic scene for a few years?

From my perspective, I suspect most of the PhDs who are interested in MSL jobs and other careers in pharma have already made the decision that a life in the laboratory isn’t right for them, so while the difficulty in returning to research is a real consideration, it probably isn’t one that weighs very heavily. And an MSL’s role, positioned as it is at the interface between clinical development, medical affairs and marketing, offers a number of possible exit strategies for continued career development in the event of layoffs. Nonetheless, Jane’s note is sobering and everyone, PhD or not, pursuing any career in pharma should go in with eyes wide open to the risks inherent in this sometimes chaotic industry.

You can read the entirety of Jane’s note, and find out more about her thoughts on MSL careers at the Medical Science Liaison Institute website.

1. Direct employment by a pharmaceutical company.
   Most people contemplating a career as a CRA probably envision themselves working directly for a pharmaceutical or biotech company as a full-time, salaried employee. Years ago, this was the most common employment situation for CRAs. Companies would design their own clinical trials and use their own employees and resources to conduct them. CRAs tend to like this kind of employment because of the perceived stability that comes from working for a big company and the generous salaries and benefits that were used in an attempt to ‘buy’ employee loyalty. On the downside, these CRAs were often specialists in a particular therapeutic area and didn’t get exposure to other kinds of clinical protocol, and are sometimes required to travel over a huge geographic region.
2. Direct employment by a Contract Research Organization (CRO).
   CROs got their start in the 1970s, and for many years they remained a pretty marginal part of the industry (you can watch a video about Quintile’s early beginnings here). During the early 2000s, things began to change. Big Pharma companies, under pressure from stockholders due to declining revenues, patent expirations and increased R&D costs, were encouraged to focus on their core competencies (drug discovery and marketing).  At the same time, explosive growth in the biotech industry created companies that didn’t have the internal resources to carry out trials. Contract research organizations allowed companies to shift their clinical development activities out-of-house, streamline their operations and reduce their infrastructure costs. The CRO industry grew rapidly and now books annual revenues of ~$20 billion. Its biggest players (such as Quintiles, Covance, Icon, Kendle and Parexel) are international companies with offices worldwide, fully capable of managing massive global clinical trials. But smaller CROs have been successful too, marketing their services on the proposition of specialized expertise, flexibility, personalized service and reduced overhead. Clinical research associates at CROs often appreciate the opportunity to work on a variety of trials in different therapeutic areas and find it a great way to develop a broad range of experience. On the flip side, CROs can be a high-pressure environment, and some CRAs find working with different trial protocols confusing and frustrating. Many CROs deploy their workforces regionally, so that travel is limited to a reasonable geographic area.  Salaries and benefits are usually quite good, although not quite as good as working directly for a pharmaceutical company. After ~2 years of experience, CRAs typically find it easy to find new employment opportunities if they aren’t happy. In the current economic situation, the global CROs may offer more stability than smaller, more local organizations.
3. Self-employed, independent contracting.
   Many CRAs aspire to the freedom of self-employment. Experienced field monitors are in high demand, and it has been relatively easy for those with proven skills and good references to set up their own businesses, picking up contracts from pharma companies or CROs.  Independent contractors often charge $75 - $100 or more for their services, and can easily earn six figures or more each year. In addition, they can choose contracts that suit their lifestyle and travel preferences.  However, independent consulting  has its minuses as well. Independents must pay for their own benefits and vacation time. Many CRAs do not enjoy the work required to market their services, which is necessary to avoid long periods of “down time” between contracts. Some find that the burdens of running their own business on top of thier long days monitoring isn’t worth the increase in income. As companies become more sophisticated in the way they manage outsourcing, independents may find it harder to find opportunities on their own. Increasingly, companies find it easier and more efficient to sign a single contract with an outsourcing agency or CRO rather than managing stacks of separate contracts with independent consultants.
4. Employment through an outsourcing agency.
   The most recent development in clinical outsourcing has been the growth of specialized outsourcing agencies, which claim to offer the best of all possible solutions to both pharmaceutical sponsors and clinical professionals. Unlike a CRO, these clinical staffing agencies do not provide any consulting services; they simply provide human resources (often CRAs, but also trial assistants, coordinators, project managers and others) who can help a company carry out a clinical trial. Whereas CROs often provide a turnkey service, this model makes use of a companies existing knowledge base and infrastructure and gives them complete control over protocols and trial activities. The sponsor can flexibly expand or contract the size of the clinical force through a single master agreement. By acting as a go-between, the agency can provide CRAs with the flexibility of self-employment while taking over the challenge of finding new contracts. Agencies can usually pay CRAs more than they would make as a direct employee of a CRO or sponsor but not quite as much as they would make as a fully independent consultant. One of the largest agencies, and a pioneer in clinical outsourcing, is Kforce.

So, what does all this mean for a CRA or wannabe CRA?  In the current economic climate it’s difficult to say with any certainty. But it’s clear that clinical development has undergone a number of shifts in strategy that have affected employment patterns over the past few decades, and it would behoove anyone in the sector to keep their eyes open if they hope to chart a clear path for their career. My best guess is that big CROs will be fighting with outsourcing agencies for dominance within the next few years but that CROs will continue to offer the best opportunities for entry-level career development.

Approximately 80% of Medical Science Liaisons hold advanced degrees (PhD, PharmD or MD). Companies prefer to hire people with these degrees because they are seen as more credible when discussing scientific research, and because their advanced training gives them a kind of parity with the doctors they work with. If you don’t have an advanced degree, your chances of landing an MSL job are very limited, and if you do, it almost certainly won’t be your first pharma job. In your position, I would recommend approaching these MSL jobs laterally, by succeeding as a medical sales representative and switching over to the more consultative MSL role after proving yourself.

If you hold a  PharmD or MD, you don’t have the same hurdles to jump as PhDs, who may be perceived as too narrowly focused and insufficiently patient-centred. Instead, you simply need to continue developing your presentation skills and knowledge of the clinical trials process. Communication skills are the #1 challenge that limits the success of internationally-trained MDs in applying for MSL roles. If you think this might be the case for you, consider investing in an accent-reduction training program.

The remainder of this article will be most useful to those who are at the beginning or midway through a postgraduate program (PhD or possibly postdoc) in the life sciences.

1. Focus on human health. The most important thing for PhDs to remember when thinking about a career as a medical science liaison is that pharmaceutical companies are in the business of marketing drugs used as therapeutic treatments for human disease.  Pharmaceutical research is patient-centred, and clinical results are what matters most. If you’re like most PhDs, you probably aren’t used to thinking about your work in this perspective. If you want to succeed in a pharmaceutical career, you need to change your thinking. You need to reconsider and reevaluate your studies from this new perspective. Instead of thinking about your research in terms of a particular assay or model system, you should begin thinking about your work in the context of medical care and the potential impact on patients.

2. Choose a Therapeutic Area. As a Medical Science Liaison, you will be expected to have expertise in a particular field, in particular a comprehensive knowledge of a specific portfolio of drugs and their competitors. From a market perspective, the most important therapeutic areas are Cardiovascular, CNS, Oncology, Anti-infectives, Musculoskeletal/Pain, Metabolism, Gastrointestinal, and Respiratory. Of course there is a market for therapeutics, and MSLs, in other therapeutic areas as well (Dermatology, Genitourinary, Haematology, Ophthalmology, Vaccines, Transplant etc.) but the bigger markets may offer more opportunities. If you can’t easily relate your research to a human disease, then you should think about what you would need to do to shift your work in that direction. If you’re nearing the end of your PhD and/or can’t figure out how to shift the focus of your current research, it might be worthwhile to consider a short post-doc in a more clinically-focused lab before pursuing your MSL career.

3. Become an Expert. As much as possible, you should fulfil your course requirements and choose electives by taking classes that have a clinical, human-health focus in your therapeutic area. If possible, take courses offered by your university’s medical or pharmacy programs, and do your best to attend any industry-sponsored events — especially medical education seminars and workshops. Learn all you can about the top drugs in your therapeutic area and keep abreast of new clinical research. You might consider starting a blog to track this research, both as a learning tool and as a concrete demonstration of your passion for the subject that you can point to in an interview.

4. Present at the Right Conferences. Take advantage of opportunities to attend and present your research at conferences. Choose your conferences wisely! You should focus your attention on conferences where your audience will include a significant contingent of clinical researchers and medical doctors. The title, abstract and content of your presentation should be designed to reflect the linkages between your work and human health. Make a point of attending talks about industry-sponsored research, and any presentations relating to drugs in your therapeutic area. Consider joining Toastmasters or another public-speaking club to develop your skills and show your comfort in making presentations.

5. Network. Just being able to name the top clinical researchers in a therapeutic area can set you apart from the competition in an MSL interview. If you actually have a professional relationship with them, you’ll be head and shoulders above the rest. After attending presentations, seek out the speakers afterwards, introduce yourself and then follow up by email later, and strive to stay in touch through a genuine interest in their work. Similarly, use email to make contact with clinicial researchers at other institutions whose work you have appreciated.  If there are top clinical researchers in your therapeutic area at your university or at institutions in your area, you should follow their work closely. Attend their presentations, seminars and classes, ask follow-up questions, share your own data if it’s appropriate, and try to build a professional relationship of mutual respect. In time, you may even be able to ask them to introduce you to their contacts in industry.

6. Learn about Clinical Trials. A big part of an MSL’s job is working with doctors to help them develop their own investigator-initiated clinical trials. As soon as a company applies for permission to market a drug, any clinical research on that drug that is not conducted in line with the approved product label is called Phase IIIB research. These may be comparative efficacy studies against other drugs on the market, observational studies of different treatment regimens, or studies that investigate the use of an approved drug for an “off-label” use, e.g. using a medication approved for treating seizures as an experimental treatment for migraine sufferers. Phase IV research, on the other hand, investigates the use of products in the approved fashion, and usually collect observational data on treatment outcomes over  a long period of time.  An exceptionally good guidebook to understanding phase IIIB and phase IV research is Strategic Research, by Hugo Stephenson of Quintiles. It’s very well-written, a pleasure to read and very informative. Unfortunately it’s also out of print, but you should look for a used copy!

If you follow these guidelines, you’ll have done a lot to set yourself up for success in landing the Medical Science Liaison job of your dreams.  To finish up, here are two other reference books that may be helpful to you along the way.

As an MSL, you sometimes walk a fine line between supporting research, providing education, and promotion. Understanding the ethical and legal aspects of drug promotion is very important for MSLs because promoting off-label usage of drugs is illegal.

Managing Relationships with Industry is a guidebook for physicians, but it could also be useful for MSLs and sales representatives from industry to learn how to work ethically and effectively with medical professionals in a shared goal of providing better patient care. Understanding how the physicians who are your ‘clients’ view your role can help you become a better consultant to them.

The Medical Science Liaison A-Z Guide looks like an excellent, comprehensive guide to managing a career as an MSL.  I have only read a sample chapter but what I’ve seen looks well-written and trustworthy. A reviewer on the Student Doctor Network forums describes it as a “great read”. It includes a chapter on “Getting Hired” which will no doubt be of great interest to readers of this blog.