Two decades ago, when I transitioned from academia to industry, I was struck by the stark difference in culture and pace.
The “hurry up and wait” dynamic introduced an entirely new set of expectations and challenges. At first, I flew solo since my hiring manager left the company before I even started. Yet, I adapted quickly. The learning curve was steep, and yes, I did make some mistakes. Fast forward 20 years, and I can confidently say this journey was worth every bit of my professional and personal investment. The impact of my work today on patients’ lives worldwide is impossible to measure, but it touches my soul in the most gratifying way.
Many more fellow academics have embarked on that journey since. A recent National Science Foundation census of freshly minted Ph.D. graduates showed that 61.6% of biomedical scientists who had a job lined up were bound for industry in 2023. That’s a sizable dip from 66.5% in 20221, 2, probably reflecting the recent challenging period for the biopharma industry.
In this Insights discussion, I’m joined by three highly accomplished colleagues who successfully made this transition and share their unique stories, perspectives, and insights.
The Experts:
Marc Carr, BS, MD, PhD, Sr. Advisor, Efficus Health, former Vice President of Clinical Development, Rare Disease Pfizer and Senior Vice President of Clinical Development, Spark/Roche. Dr. Carr is a biomedical engineer and a clinician with a unique military background.
Greg LaRosa, PhD, Sr. Advisor, Efficus Health, former Senior Vice President and Chief Scientific Officer, Pfizer Rare Disease Research Unit. Dr. LaRosa is a proven leader in drug discovery research and translation.
Bartholomew Tortella, MTS, MD, MBA, FACS, FCCM, Sr. Advisor, Efficus Health, former Rare Disease Medical Affairs Portfolio Leader and Vice President Medical Affairs Spark/Roche as well as a seasoned trauma surgeon.
Let’s start with your personal journeys. What sparked your leap to industry?
Bartholomew: For me, it was about making a greater impact on patients. I was working on a product for hemorrhage, but I felt limited within academia. I wanted to be part of a process that could bring it to patients more effectively.
Marc: My path was a bit different. I spent time in the military and academia before finding my way to companies like Nova Nordisk, CSL, Pfizer, and Spark. Working on gene therapy development really opened my eyes to how important industry partnerships are in bringing those treatments to life.
Greg: As an undergraduate biology major, I took a human genetics course that turned my interest to human health and genetic disease, and I ultimately pursued a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Biology at Harvard. Like Bartholomew, I wanted a more direct focus on biology that could lead to human medicines. So, after my doctoral graduation, I went directly into a small biotechnology company working on HIV/AIDS vaccines and anti-inflammation.
What were your first impressions when you stepped into the industry?
“I was pleasantly surprised by how welcoming everyone was. They truly valued my clinical expertise.“
-Bartholomew Tortella
Bartholomew: I was pleasantly surprised by how welcoming everyone was. They truly valued my clinical expertise. I was also quite impressed with the global, multicultural environment the industry offered. Working with diverse teams and knowing my work could impact patients worldwide was incredible.
Marc: The level of expertise blew me away, especially among those with Ph.Ds. I also gained a deep appreciation for the industry’s role in bringing products to market. And the global communication? Top-notch!
Greg: [I had] similar impressions, such as being very impressed with the level of scientific expertise, the level of drive or motivation to get to a clinical candidate, and the team spirit in the biotech companies I spent time at.
What challenges did you face, and how did you overcome them?
All three faced their fair share of challenges during their transitions.
Bartholomew: One of my biggest challenges was navigating the complexities of a global organization. Understanding the nuances of different cultures and working styles was a learning curve.
Marc: For me, it was adjusting to a corporate environment. It was far more dynamic and change-oriented than the academic world I was used to.
Greg: My biggest hurdle was learning to work in a matrix organization with people from many different departments and disciplines. I also had to quickly learn to prioritize and delegate effectively.
“It was definitely a culture shock. The pace was much faster, and there was a lot more emphasis on deadlines and deliverables.“
-Greg LaRosa
Greg felt the biggest challenges were learning to work in a matrix organization with people from different departments and disciplines and quickly learning to prioritize and delegate effectively. All three emphasized open communication, active listening, and a willingness to learn were key to overcoming these hurdles.
How did your typical workday change when you transitioned to the industry? Was it a big adjustment?
Bartholomew: The biggest difference? A faster pace and more meetings! I used to get in early and tackle emails, crucial for communicating across different time zones. Then, it was on to back-to-back meetings and collaborating with diverse teams.
Marc: Expect a shift in the work schedule and a lot more meetings. The biggest difference for me was the constant change and the need to adapt quickly. Like Bartholomew, I kept my academic appointment while working in the industry, and I could see patients some, but it became increasingly difficult with time as my responsibilities in the industry roles grew.
Greg: One key change was going from working hours of my choosing or as dictated by experiments to a more rigid set of working hours. The hours weren’t necessarily longer, but typically more intense with trying to get as much done within the 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. timeframe. Also, many more meetings required preparation to report on progress, to monitor other project progress, hiring needs, etc. Lastly, there was the need to quickly do the appropriate experiments to potentially kill a project if it is unlikely to produce a clinical candidate as soon as possible. This is unlike in academia, where you have a project or a couple of projects that could be a lifetime of work.
You’ve all experienced working in different-sized companies. What were some key differences you noticed?
Bartholomew: In smaller companies, you’re more hands-on and see the impact of your decisions quickly. Larger companies offer a broader impact but involve more complex processes and collaboration, but you also have access to more resources and expertise.
Marc: It’s like comparing a speedboat (small company) to a battleship (large company). Both have their strengths, but maneuverability and impact are key differences.
Greg: In small biotech, everyone wears multiple hats, taking care of several activities in addition to project work. In large pharma, there are many separate departments that take care of many activities, freeing one up to focus on their core responsibilities. With this, though, comes the need for meetings, e-mails, and discussions about what is getting done by these diverse departments.
“Working on gene therapy development really opened my eyes to how important industry partnerships are in bringing those treatments to life.“
-MArc Carr
Looking back, what would you do differently or the same?
Bartholomew: I’d emphasize listening and learning even more. The industry has so many disciplines from which to learn
Resilience is key. You have to adapt to change, which is a valuable skill in all areas of life.
Marc: I had to adjust to a very different work style, especially with all the meetings! Being prepared for sudden changes and understanding the “why” behind them is crucial.
Greg: If I had to do over, I would still have started out in small, biotech but would make a move to large pharma much earlier. I would have also spent more time networking with people outside of my immediate team.
Is there an ideal time to make the move from academia to industry? Does it change the experience?
Marc: Early-career transitions offer more opportunities for growth and development within a company. Later transitions often focus on leveraging existing expertise and networks.
Bartholomew: You are most valuable to the industry, and you have the most to learn to enrich yourself if you spent some time practicing your discipline. Transitioning around 35-40 years of age, after mastering your craft with patients or research, allows you to maximize your impact and learn from others in the industry.
Greg: It depends on what you want out of the experience. Going right after an undergraduate will give you a good experience and may help with getting into grad or medical school. I went right from graduate school without doing a formal post-doc. I felt that my graduate experience was very much like a postdoc, so going right into a company made sense for me.
Finally, any practical tips for academics or industry managers?
For Academics
- Before making the leap, take some time for introspection. Understand your motivations for wanting to join the industry.
- Be a sponge! Embrace the opportunity to learn new things and collaborate with people from different disciplines and diverse cultures.
- Be adaptable. The industry constantly evolves, so be prepared to navigate changes and embrace new challenges.
For Industry Managers
- When hiring from academia, look beyond technical skills and medical knowledge bases. Seek out candidates who are genuinely passionate about improving patients’ lives and have the skillsets of organization, resilience, and leadership.
- Consider how a candidate’s medical expertise aligns with your company’s goals and their organizational and leadership skillset can contribute to your mission.
- Foster a supportive environment where new hires from academia can grow, develop, and thrive in their new roles.
Different perspectives shared, incredible insights!
These three journeys highlight the challenges and rewards of transitioning from academia to industry. What’s your story? Share your experiences and questions in the comments below!
References:
Great group of panelists and a great discussion!