It is difficult not to get upset about the wrenching changes that globalization and increased competition have brought to the drug industry. Entrenched centers of excellence and scenes of past blockbuster triumphs—Pearl River, NY, Kalamazoo, MI, Sandwich, U.K., have started to fade from memory. Seasoned professionals, typically at the height of their creative powers, have been forced to rethink their futures and move in whole new directions. 

Is it fair? One wonders why, at a time when young people are turning away from science in droves (perhaps some saw their scientist or engineer parents repeatedly laid off, one wonders?), companies in developed nations appear to be writing off so many accomplished scientists and engineers.

This year, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas’ latest figures, 2,521 industry professionals have lost their jobs. Since 2005, the total reached 276,641, the size of a small city.

These changes take their toll on people and on productivity. Families are often severely affected, and colleagues who retain their jobs rarely emerge from layoffs without some form of “survivor guilt.” There are impacts on mental health and health in general.  The definitive study of the long-term social impacts of these changes is yet to be undertaken.

But that is the way things are. We’re living in interesting times, and it is hard to know what to do or how to prepare. New positions will, no doubt, be created at contract manufacturing and services organizations, and at technology vendor companies, which continue to tap into the experience, training and expertise of industry veterans.  Some displaced pharma and biopharma professionals may move into entirely new industries, such as nutraceuticals or industrial biotech, as recruiters suggest in this month’s cover story (p. 64).

As human beings today, we face uncertainties on the broadest level. Whether or not you believe that global climate change is taking place, scientists have measured the rate at which key Antarctic glaciers are melting. Some have predicted cataclysmic results, providing religious extremists and doomsday prophets a new platform to shout from. All we can do is monitor the situation, remain calm and prepared.

News of Pfizer’s bid for AstraZeneca sent shivers through the industry, with visions of massive job loss and gutting of more centers of hard-won scientific inquiry and knowledge.

Whether the takeover will happen or not, this pattern is bound to repeat itself.  All that any professional can do is look inward and ask whether he or she has the skills and the contacts needed to move forward. As recruiters note in our cover story, scientific and technical acumen need to be balanced with people skills, and the ability to influence, move and lead. 

There’s a need to sell yourself and your ideas effectively, to make oral presentations well, to communicate with people from all walks of life and educational levels, and to “schmooze” comfortably (or at least fake it until you make it).  There’s also a need for more comfort in dealing with people from other cultures and countries.  Scientists and engineers aren’t always schooled in these areas, but one can always try to improve, at any age or career stage.

Without getting ridiculous, perhaps there are simple things that you can do every day, such as practicing by videotaping yourself making a scientific or technical presentation or even an “elevator pitch,” or asking teenagers (if you are luckly enough to have them in your household, as they are the most ruthless of critics) whether your presentation style is effective or “lame.”  

Learn a foreign language or two, get involved in social networks, but, more importantly, the bricks and mortar, real-world networks, behind them (one example that comes to mind is the New Jersey Biopharma Networking Group on Linked In, which holds regular, face-to-face meetings).

Perhaps some of you remember the emergency response practices of the past.  We had the duct tape of the second Gulf War, and the amusing Cold War era solutions.

But bunkers and fallout shelters are so yesterday. Today, research is taking emergency response into different directions, including an injection that one would take in the event of nuclear catastrophe, that would, in theory, prevent painful death from radiation exposure.  This is a solution that you’d take while on the go.

It seems a good metaphor for the active, ongoing preparation and skill building that today’s life sciences job market requires.  Godspeed! Write in and let us know your thoughts.



Agnes Shanley
Editor
ashanley@rodmanmedia.com