Kristin Brooks12.15.14
As pharma and biopharma companies continue to consolidate pipelines and shed workers, contract research organizations (CROs) are gaining highly sought after talent. A new report from the Biotechnology Industry Organization ( BIO ) found that, between 2001 and 2012, the CRO and medical lab sectors experienced job growth of more than 28%—nearly four times the growth of overall life sciences jobs. So what might this trend mean for the life sciences community?
At Charles River Labs, two-thirds of the company's new hires in 2013 came from pharma and biopharma. Among these scientists, Emily Hickey, Charles River corporate vice president of Discovery Research Services, recently left her position as Merck's executive director of In vivo Pharmacology to come to Charles River’s Wilmington campus to manage strategic alliances.
For many scientists caught in the crosshairs of pharma and biopharma consolidation, CROs are increasingly seen as stable employers, providing a path to scientific discovery and opportunities to bring drugs to market. –KB
Contract Pharma: What was your role at Merck and what were your thoughts on R&D and outsourcing during your time there?
Emily Hickey: I worked for a top ten, Big Pharma company prior to my role at Charles River. In my previous position I had the opportunity to work across In Vivo Pharmacology labs internally and with a team that evaluated CROs, deciding which had the best qualifications and would be a good cultural match for the company. My personal view is that working in a true partnership with a CRO is ideal for everyone. The scientific community is trying to develop treatments for difficult diseases to improve quality of life for human and animal health as quickly and efficiently as possible. Partnering with a CRO allows each party to execute their areas of expertise with focused internal efforts, expanded scientific and bench strength, and complete studies with the same level of quality and expertise as if they were doing the work themselves.
CP: What prompted your decision to move from Big Pharma to working for a CRO?
EH: The integrity of the sciences and the ability to build deep relationships, allowing our partners to develop novel drugs, were key drivers for accepting this position at Charles River. The role of a CRO is evolving and clients expect CROs to be scientific leaders, offering innovative solutions and working as partners on project teams, and in some cases, with the goal of reaching the next milestone for a program more quickly. CROs are no longer simply service organizations. My current position at Charles River enables me to play an integral role in the evolution of CROs as strategic partners by building these relationships and further enhancing the science in our labs.
CP: According to a report released by BIO, a large amount of job growth in the life sciences sector is occurring in the CRO space. What are your thoughts on why this is?
EH: It's no secret that as Big Pharma consolidates and continues to narrow their therapeutic areas, workforce reductions are inevitable. These reductions, which have traditionally involved management, sales, and marketing personnel, are increasingly affecting scientists and researchers. This scientific talent seems to be migrating to smaller biotech companies and CROs, both of which are critical partners for Pharma going forward. When these scientists come to CROs, they come with expert Drug Discovery and development experience that only adds to the scientific acumen of the company.
CP: If many top scientists are moving over to the CRO side, what might that mean for pharma and for CROs?
EH: Big Pharma will continue to develop and enhance their strategic relationships with CROs. The addition of new scientific talent to CROs also brings new offerings, services and expertise. This added expertise will enable CROs to expand their relationship with Big Pharma and biotech. For example, Charles River offers clients integrated expertise from early-stage in-vitro and in-vivo target discovery all the way through later-stage preclinical development. With deep knowledge across all stages of drug discovery and development, CROs can greatly improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of client’s drug development programs.
CP: Will this migration of scientific talent have any impact on the drug discovery process? If so, how?
EH: I believe we will continue to see talent shift toward CROs but, at the end of the day, we are all working on the same goal to develop new treatments for patients who desperately need them. The talent shift will encourage continued industry collaboration as we focus on solving pressing healthcare challenges.
Emily is an experienced drug discovery executive with a track record for establishing and leading a successful global discovery business. Her experience spans from target discovery through preclinical development in a global pharmaceutical organization for human and animal health. Most recently, Emily was the executive director of In Vivo Pharmacology at Merck Research Labs leading the development and implementation of the externalization strategy for in vivo studies. She has broad experience in a variety of therapeutic areas including: cardiovascular, diabetes, oncology, respiratory, immunology, neuroscience and infectious disease programs.
At Charles River Labs, two-thirds of the company's new hires in 2013 came from pharma and biopharma. Among these scientists, Emily Hickey, Charles River corporate vice president of Discovery Research Services, recently left her position as Merck's executive director of In vivo Pharmacology to come to Charles River’s Wilmington campus to manage strategic alliances.
For many scientists caught in the crosshairs of pharma and biopharma consolidation, CROs are increasingly seen as stable employers, providing a path to scientific discovery and opportunities to bring drugs to market. –KB
Contract Pharma: What was your role at Merck and what were your thoughts on R&D and outsourcing during your time there?
Emily Hickey: I worked for a top ten, Big Pharma company prior to my role at Charles River. In my previous position I had the opportunity to work across In Vivo Pharmacology labs internally and with a team that evaluated CROs, deciding which had the best qualifications and would be a good cultural match for the company. My personal view is that working in a true partnership with a CRO is ideal for everyone. The scientific community is trying to develop treatments for difficult diseases to improve quality of life for human and animal health as quickly and efficiently as possible. Partnering with a CRO allows each party to execute their areas of expertise with focused internal efforts, expanded scientific and bench strength, and complete studies with the same level of quality and expertise as if they were doing the work themselves.
CP: What prompted your decision to move from Big Pharma to working for a CRO?
EH: The integrity of the sciences and the ability to build deep relationships, allowing our partners to develop novel drugs, were key drivers for accepting this position at Charles River. The role of a CRO is evolving and clients expect CROs to be scientific leaders, offering innovative solutions and working as partners on project teams, and in some cases, with the goal of reaching the next milestone for a program more quickly. CROs are no longer simply service organizations. My current position at Charles River enables me to play an integral role in the evolution of CROs as strategic partners by building these relationships and further enhancing the science in our labs.
CP: According to a report released by BIO, a large amount of job growth in the life sciences sector is occurring in the CRO space. What are your thoughts on why this is?
EH: It's no secret that as Big Pharma consolidates and continues to narrow their therapeutic areas, workforce reductions are inevitable. These reductions, which have traditionally involved management, sales, and marketing personnel, are increasingly affecting scientists and researchers. This scientific talent seems to be migrating to smaller biotech companies and CROs, both of which are critical partners for Pharma going forward. When these scientists come to CROs, they come with expert Drug Discovery and development experience that only adds to the scientific acumen of the company.
CP: If many top scientists are moving over to the CRO side, what might that mean for pharma and for CROs?
EH: Big Pharma will continue to develop and enhance their strategic relationships with CROs. The addition of new scientific talent to CROs also brings new offerings, services and expertise. This added expertise will enable CROs to expand their relationship with Big Pharma and biotech. For example, Charles River offers clients integrated expertise from early-stage in-vitro and in-vivo target discovery all the way through later-stage preclinical development. With deep knowledge across all stages of drug discovery and development, CROs can greatly improve the efficiency and cost effectiveness of client’s drug development programs.
CP: Will this migration of scientific talent have any impact on the drug discovery process? If so, how?
EH: I believe we will continue to see talent shift toward CROs but, at the end of the day, we are all working on the same goal to develop new treatments for patients who desperately need them. The talent shift will encourage continued industry collaboration as we focus on solving pressing healthcare challenges.
Emily is an experienced drug discovery executive with a track record for establishing and leading a successful global discovery business. Her experience spans from target discovery through preclinical development in a global pharmaceutical organization for human and animal health. Most recently, Emily was the executive director of In Vivo Pharmacology at Merck Research Labs leading the development and implementation of the externalization strategy for in vivo studies. She has broad experience in a variety of therapeutic areas including: cardiovascular, diabetes, oncology, respiratory, immunology, neuroscience and infectious disease programs.
