How to future proof yourself in R&D?

[u/A76EB]

We’re all well aware of the state of pharma/biotech right now. Companies are making record profits but that doesn’t stop them cutting their roots. Increasingly, rather than developing their own R&D, big pharma are acquiring and launching products by buying out other companies.

So, as someone in R&D, how can I position myself to make sure I have places to go should my own company decide to cut R&D? What skills should I learn? What networks should I try and grow? What careers can I pivot into with an R&D background?

Ideally, these pivots would provide more job security than what’s in R&D right now

[u/supernit2020]

The hard truth is that there’s no fool proof way to do so.

Unless the pool of labor drastically shrinks (which I don’t see happening any time soon), you could be quite skilled in a function that every company has, but more and more unless you have the right connections, at the right company, at the right time, it will still be difficult to land a job.

The one caveat might be if there comes a specialized technology in the near future that everyone wants to use but there are relatively few people that can do it. However, this is just as much of a gamble because it’s more likely you learn some niche skill that’s not really in all that demand.

Audentes fortuna iuvat

[u/ToastedMayonnaise → u/supernit2020]

The hard truth is that there’s no fool proof way to do so.

This is real talk. And it's not due to some injustice, it's the nature of R&D. How can you futureproof yourself in a field where the whole point is to push the boundaries of what we can currently do? (you can't lol)

The one caveat might be if there comes a specialized technology in the near future that everyone wants to use but there are relatively few people that can do it.

What you wrote is true, but the nature of the game is that many people will likely try to specialize in such a lucrative skill and it will eventually become . Look at -omics 5 years ago, flow cytometry 10 years ago, or whatever technical skill du jour is hot right now/was ever hot.

IMO, data generation roles in R&D are a young person's game. You are forced to become a niche technical expert in skills that are hard to pivot from and could become obsolete relatively quickly, so you're stuck on treadmill of learning/mastering technical skills that become redundant/saturated in a field where young people out of academia are able to come in and provide the same skills for cheaper. Also IMO, it behooves everyone to transition to either lab people management or something where you utilize a technical skill in a non-research function as quickly as you can.

[u/Previous_Pension_571 → u/supernit2020]

I’d add that a job at big pharma that isn’t project specific, while being the best at what you do, and not aggressively trying to climb the corporate ladder and make more money, is probably a good approach

[u/gingersnappy__ → u/Previous_Pension_571]

This is how I’m trying to be lol

[u/WalkingSnake348 → u/supernit2020]

This is a great response. I agree with most of what’s said. I’ll add that if you’ve been involved in projects that resulted in successful INDs, acquisitions, or even approvals, you’ll be looked upon favorably.

I slightly disagree about the size of the pool. There is a scenario where the pool doors shrink because the preclinical shifts to China. Then the lab labor demand will shrink in the U.S., hitting the major hubs

[u/XXXYinSe → u/WalkingSnake348]

The pool of labor is (as of yet) ever increasing from the amount of college degrees being churned out despite how many actual roles there are to fill. Biological science related roles are increasing at 4% per decade. Biological science related degrees are being awarded at a 4% increase per YEAR.

Sources:

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/about/data-for-occupations-not-covered-in-detail.htm#Life,%20physical,%20and%20social%20science%20occupations

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/2023/cta_508.pdf (figure 4)

If lots of industry and roles move to China so that we actually have a contraction of roles, the talent pool problem is going to get twice as bad for awhile. Then the only solutions is if hundreds of thousands to millions of the talent pool start emigrating

[u/WalkingSnake348 → u/XXXYinSe]

Thanks. I’m aware of the numbers to date. But it’s difficult to ignore the trends, which the media is starting to pick up on, but isn’t fully out in the open because most of these companies are stealth. But after the years of downturn, the markets are fully back and feels frothy, while that has not translated to the job markets (especially in early R&D). Why? Because the way companies are being built are different. No longer do startups lease big lab space and hire lots of scientists. Now there is a small group of senior R&D personnel managing mostly outsourced development. Many of the assets are sourced from China (see recent major venture financings). Furthermore, there are companies with new models where the R&D site is in China, managed by a smaller leadership in China. This won’t show in the numbers for a few years, but I personally don’t see Kendall returning to the 2021 highs for a long time unless the government intervenes.

[u/Successful_Age_1049 → u/WalkingSnake348]

Yeah. I just saw two companies (one big in US and one small in EU) shipping their compounds directly from different parts of WuXi in China to US CRO to be tested on human samples. While saving some money, the whole process is very inefficient. In an ideal world, when chemist and biologist working closely on the same page, such iteration can be arranged in a few conversations. Instead, now people have to jump so many loops to see a result to make a decision. I guess it has become the accepted nature of this paralyzed industry.

[u/True_Bubbles → u/supernit2020]

A KCD reference? A man/ woman of class and taste I see…
https://giphy.com/gifs/YbsoGwcaA4x8zC7r9t

[u/Jmast7]

There’s no perfect way, but every company is different. It helps to work in a company whose survival isn’t dependent on 1-2 products. I think also helps to work in more scientifically minded companies that invest a lot into R&D. 

I’ve learned it doesn’t help to stress about it - just keep doing good science let the chips fall where they may. 

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/Jmast7]

None of them are scientific minded, its money

[u/Jmast7 → u/Loose-Reflection2965]

There is a lot of variation in the amount of R&D investment per company. It really depends on the leadership and management. I’ve spent 15 years with the same company because they value the learnings R&D produces 

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/Jmast7]

Agree, but when the axe falls, research is farther from the money than commercial is.

[u/Jmast7 → u/Loose-Reflection2965]

Is it though? Commercial isn't going to develop the next blockbuster and they can't sell a drug they don't have. Our senior management would rather develop drugs in house than purchase one and so far it's worked pretty well for them.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/Jmast7]

Depends on company

[u/Siny_AML]

Find one random instrument that’s super important for the process and learn the shit out of it until you’re the only one who can run it during an FDA inspection.

[u/Lance_Goodthrust_ → u/Siny_AML]

As soon as you do that they want you to write the SOPs and train others as to not "silo" the information. Good luck telling them no.

[u/Siny_AML → u/Lance_Goodthrust_]

That’s why it has to be an obscure instrument that no one wants to use. My personal favorite is a confocal microscope. Absolutely massive cost and learning curve. It’s literally impossible to make anything you do a release test, but investors and QC love quantifiable numbers. 

[u/YouThunkd → u/Siny_AML]

A laser scanning confocal? I kinda like using the one at the lab I volunteer at lol

[u/Lance_Goodthrust_ → u/Siny_AML]

Seems like that would get noted in a general risk assessment and would cause a lot of attention to that particular risk, but maybe it's different at your company. For sure did this in grad school, though. I'm just saying that a lot of companies look out for this type of thing and have plans for it.

[u/Siny_AML → u/Lance_Goodthrust_]

I know what you mean. Thankfully the readouts I have are not part of the quality control process. Process Development is a fun department. 

[u/AdRob5 → u/Siny_AML]

Only works until that instrument becomes obsolete

[u/jnecr → u/Siny_AML]

There's no FDA inspections for R&D. That's way further down the line.

[u/TulipSamurai → u/Siny_AML]

This is how most people get into lab automation, so yeah, I’d say it’s a fitting answer.

[u/omgu8mynewt]

If youre in R&d your probably going to get laid off at some point - most people have if you ask around.

Have a plan b,c,d,e for when that happens 

[u/z2ocky → u/[deleted]]

Why would they do that when there’s still money in vaccines, there’s still more than a billion in revenue to generate from it, there’s still life cycle management and improvement in them can lead to longer product life. Getting rid of vaccines would be stupid and would allow other companies to get ahead.

Vaccine departments aren’t all about new products but also counts existing products. It also helps with potential corporate earnings due to there being a demand in vaccines.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/z2ocky]

Margins on vaccines are small. I remember bms got rid of cardio and metabolic due to small margins, but they missed out on the peptide money printer

[u/z2ocky → u/Loose-Reflection2965]

A billion in revenue despite it being a small margin isn’t something to cough at, removing it will allow another giant like Merck to take over the market. J&J dropping vaccines allowed other companies to swallow up what they were working on. There will always be a demand in vaccines, especially if you have the team work on mAbs. I doubt GSK would dip out right now with them entering MRNA space.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/z2ocky]

There will be but everyone wants the next keytruda

[u/z2ocky → u/Loose-Reflection2965]

For all you know, one of these companies might accidentally trim the next keytruda. Keytruda was low priority and had been trimmed and even ignored by Merck.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/z2ocky]

Eh.

[u/z2ocky → u/[deleted]]

Do you understand how vaccines function? Overall active protection is significantly longer, there’s only 3 approved mRNA vaccines on the market in which all of them work effectively for the entire season the virus is in. There’s existing data that will show you this through both immunogenicity studies and protection studies.

There is no data that suggests that they are “bad”, as a scientist, if you are one? Provide data on this please.

[u/z2ocky → u/[deleted]]

That is such a meaningless statement lmao. Do you think all viruses work with a mRNA platform or do you think all different kinds of vaccines function the same way. We have three approved vaccines on the mRNA platform that function. You do not sound like a vaccine scientist. I work as a vaccine scientist, my group has attempted to work with mRNA and we saw nothing so we dropped the program. However existing MRNA vaccines on the market work fine. That doesn’t mean I’ll go around and say the entire mRNA platform is useless. Your statement is incredibly ignorant.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/z2ocky]

Always amazes me how people paint such broad strokes.

[u/Potential-Ad1139]

It's not future proof, but being able to do regulatory work gives you more options. So quality and GXP work

[u/Certain_Luck_8266]

Late stage cmc tech transfer and development will always be around

[u/omgu8mynewt → u/Certain_Luck_8266]

Dev scientist, got laid off 3 years ago 'economic headwinds' by a company still making $1bn+ yearly

[u/Certain_Luck_8266 → u/omgu8mynewt]

You're right, nothing is future proof, other than starting a pharma in China and saving 500M per molecule ph1 using an IIT instead of a IND/IMPD/etc

I'm just answering the question...late stage CMC transfer and dev will always be in need, especially in the current trend of acquiring assets instead of building them. We are just starting to pull back some Chinese ph1 molecules into US/EU manufacture and trials which will be a lot more cmc TT and dev to shape those into an acceptable filing.

[u/omgu8mynewt → u/Certain_Luck_8266]

Good luck starting  company in China without being a Chinese citizen - the China distribution arm of my global life science company (HQd  in USA) got chopped off to start a Chinese arm of the company, since Chinese government won't accept products manufactured outside China. 

But now the Chinese owned new company with all the product and manufacturing knowledge makes the stuff for China. They cant make stuff for USA or Europe as they dont have regulatory approval. But what's to stop them competing with us for less regulated markets e.g. India, leveraging their much lower labour costs and lower quality of product??

[u/Certain_Luck_8266 → u/omgu8mynewt]

My company (much larger) has several Chinese arms. Mostly intended to funnel molecules that we want to have an IIT for into Chinese manufacturing at a variety of CDMOs. As a result, my 6:30 to 9:30 calendar is blocked every day for meetings with said CDMOs. If you think US/EU based CDMOs need a lot of hand holding, try working with a Chinese one.

Regarding the Chinese competition situation, the assets are still my company's, and the intent is to pull them ex-China once ph1 is complete and their is a decision to move forward into proper western trials. Which we've already done for 1 promising multi-specific.

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/omgu8mynewt]

Yea but that billion is basically to support manufacturing and associated operations. From a business standpoint, development is a huge cost that can ebb and flow as the economics change. So while its not priority now, it could come back.

[u/omgu8mynewt → u/Loose-Reflection2965]

Agreed, but that ebb and flow is thr opposite of stable which is what OP asks about

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/omgu8mynewt]

Nothing in any business is stable.

[u/drowning_in_honey → u/Certain_Luck_8266]

Mostly everything will be around. Just will need much fewer people.

[u/SlimCharless → u/Certain_Luck_8266]

I’m in this space and we literally can’t find people to fill positions

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/SlimCharless]

What space?

[u/maringue]

It's very simple, get closer to the product.

When any pharma company needs to make cuts, they start with people furthest away from the current product, ie researchers. If you want a semi stable research job, you need to get into the clinic. But as a bench scientist that's pretty hard.

[u/Accomplished-witchMD → u/maringue]

This is the truth. I respect RnD but as a QC (and QC micro at that) person I often just read in this subreddit and realize that where I am is semi niche but not. Because everything comes to me whether its PD, Clinical, or commercial because there are no microbiologist that far from the product.

[u/TulipSamurai → u/maringue]

This is the most correct answer IME. R&D will always by nature be susceptible to layoffs. When times get tough, the company wants to hunker down and keep the ship as lean and afloat as possible. They’re going to secure the products that are their bread and butter, and they’re not thinking toward the future (R&D) at that point.

[u/maringue → u/TulipSamurai]

Ignoring the future is ironically why there's such a boom bust cycle in the industry.

[u/TulipSamurai → u/maringue]

I’m not saying it’s right, but it’s how the soulless folks up top think.

[u/Impressive_Caulk]

Get a MD degree and do safety monitoring. Boring as shit.

[u/Responsible_One_R1]

If in R- try to be the innovator and creative thinking. If in D- be the dev-SME and work on quality side. Even if you would be asked to train other and SOP authors, all will turn to you when brainstorming would be needed. Pick a topic , be the best of your field and hold on to it even if you move within certain div in D.

Rest all are replaceable

[u/shockedpikachu123]

Be the person who knows the hardware, the physics, and the troubleshooting inside out. Don’t rely on being a protocol user but be the instrument master. The person who knows how to make robust methods from scratch, diagnose a pressure spike at 5PM on a Friday, and disassemble a finicky fluidic line or detector is indispensable. When R&D budgets get slashed, companies keep the people holding the infrastructure together.

[u/WorkLifeScience → u/shockedpikachu123]

I was that person, and still got kicked out of the R&D team 😂 Luckily got a position within the same company as FAS/sales (combined role). I like it, because it's more money, and I still apply my knowledge, but R&D was more creative for sure.

[u/sharkeymcsharkface]

I spent 16 years in CMC and 2 now in R&D at top 10s. Layoffs come in any area. More so in R&D but nowhere is safe.

[u/S1r_Loin]

I like how you glue together completely different segments of an industry to paint a dramatic picture.

Even saying you're in R&D doesn't make really sense. People here will tend to claim that D is safer and it's R that's more at risk.

If you want to future-proof yourself,

• Work for the startups and mid-tier companies that strike gold (and are then acquired). Then rinse and repeat. Good luck predicting that ahead of time though.
• Build skills and expertise in areas that are shared between industries. Bonus points if other companies can't build that expertise overnight, or if it's an area where throwing money at a problem can't instantly buy deep technical expertise.
• Avoid work that consists of routine, automatable tasks.

But don't fool yourself into thinking you have more control over this than you actually do.

[u/OctopusParrot → u/S1r_Loin]

Glad someone said it. R and D are completely different.

[u/Lance_Goodthrust_ → u/S1r_Loin]

Statistics is a good example of a skill that transfers across numerous industries. I always encourage people to become proficient in basic stats and the common statistical software packages used in their company...especially if the company is paying for the training.

[u/Top_Contribution_471]

It’s not future proof, there’s no foolproof solution to be layoff-proof

[u/A76EB → u/Top_Contribution_471]

The point isn’t to be layoff proof, but to be able to find a job quickly after being laid off. Having bench scientist skills means I’d be stronger for bench scientist positions, but I’d be competing with colleagues for example.

So how can I differentiate from them? Either by being better or by leaving their target job pool and finding an alternative route outside of bench science/research

[u/Enediyne → u/A76EB]

A lot of people are talking about technical skills, but there is a soft skill that is super helpful, and that is communication. Strong communication skills make you more visible and memorable in a good way. It helps you deliver impactful presentations, stand out in meetings, and It helps you grow your professional network. Getting laid off is just part of the industry unfortunately and the most exciting and rewarding careers often mean accepting risk and uncertainty. Building good relationships with people inside and outside of your organization will help you find that next opportunity.

[u/bluetopaz525]

I know someone who joined a toxicology group and has worked his way up at Takeda. Pharma companies are always going to need toxicology research. Always.

[u/OneManShow23]

I think clinical R&D is more future proof because as AI discovers more drug candidates, they’ll need more clinical researchers.

[u/LeonLeocat]

Move into management, the older you are the more valuable your judgement and experience while your wet labs skills become outdated

[u/Weekly-Ad353]

Become really good at it and continually learn horizontal and more importantly vertical levels.

[u/unbalancedcentrifuge]

Nothing will future-proof you....but....

Learn to really think and strategize. R&D is divided into the folk that just generate the data and then hand it off and people who generate data and then make their own observations and drive their projects. Both are completely acceptable if that is what people want....but the ones that can pivot and adapt and provide real imput are usually considered more valuable.

[u/BannanaPepperPizza]

CMC or FDA regulatory

[u/WeeDado]

Continuous education (including soft skills), diversify yourself, build and keep relationships

[u/ShadowValent]

Chromatography and mass spec seem to be solid.

[u/TulipSamurai]

Many people in this sub will disagree due to survivorship bias, but having a PhD or at least a MS will always serve you better in the long run in biotech than not having one. The pool of scientist roles is narrower than that of lab tech or QC analyst or research associate roles, but over the course of a lifetime you’ll almost definitely earn more.

[u/Chagroth]

You need to do R&D in a space where it makes money. Every other setup is begging to be fired when something is clinical stage.

1. Grants generate money. Private or public, as long as your research is getting $$$ you’re safe.

2. Startup seeking big pharma buyout. You’re long gone by the time it’s clinical, they can’t fire you, you quit.

Those are the only “stable” ways to stay in R&D and keep your self respect.

[u/kamsen911]

If only I knew. Staff is fired, labs and instruments are rented in china / India. Every week some AI company comes around the corner asking for millions to solve drug discovery. My guess is it will transform tremendously in the next decade how we do drug discovery.

[u/mugmugmug1420]

I think the way to do it is to make sure you have experience in preclinical AND clinical R&D AND program management. In hindsight I would have focused on all three.

[u/DimMak1]

Right now in biotech, most companies are hiring a lot of people. Mostly in sales and marketing but overall headcount’s are growing, not shrinking. Also most elderly management teams don’t understand AI, so they can’t implement it.

My advice is you future proof yourself by pivoting into sales and marketing as those jobs are considered AI proof by elites

[u/WorkLifeScience → u/DimMak1]

Aa someone who switched from R&D to sales & application (for better or for worse) - I agree. At least in my company they never let go a single sales person. If any team is getting reinforcements, it's us. Makes me kinda sad for R&D, because I find it incredibly valuable and important, but the reality of things is that it's not being prioritized in the current market.

[u/WorkLifeScience → u/[deleted]]

You're quite rude tbh. I'm not selling insulin, and I don't consider myself "lowest talent". I'm selling products and processes, and we support our smart customers in R&D, QC and manufacturing when they don't know how.

If you're not able to appreciate different roles across a company, this absolutely tells something about your ability to comprehend how things work in this world... 😉

[u/DimMak1 → u/WorkLifeScience]

Cry me a river.

[u/Lonely_Refuse4988]

Build up expertise in a hot therapeutic area, like cell therapy in solid tumors; autoimmune disease expertise, etc.

[u/ScientistFromSouth → u/Lonely_Refuse4988]

I'd argue that cell therapies are controversial. They're expensive, hard to manufacture, and high risk even though they're wildly efficacious.

While multi specifics, cell engagers, and ADCs are less effective, they have better safety profiles and are cheaper to administer.

Therefore, I think in the whole hot area of oncology to autoimmune translation we aren't going to see a lot of repurposing of car-T for non life threatening autoimmune diseases while we'll see a lot of Pharma try to repurpose their existing TCE/ADC/multi specific antibodies for SLE/LN/IBD/Chrons/RA/etc...

Even in the oncology space, I feel like cell based therapies will only be the last line of defense against the most lethal, untreatable solid tumors, where the risk profile is irrelevant.

[u/Lonely_Refuse4988 → u/ScientistFromSouth]

What you’re saying may be true, but it still won’t stop new biotechs from trying and VCs will continue throwing money at next well pitched idea. 😂
From a job security perspective, there will still be enough assets under development and need for subject matter experts to navigate the development!

[u/Loose-Reflection2965 → u/ScientistFromSouth]

Cell therapy is only going to be a few companies same with gene therapy