Another Sign That Pharma Companies Will Rely Less on Internal R&D Programs
The drug maker Eli Lilly and Co quietly launched a new website today for a program dubbed Lilly Phenotypic Drug Discovery Initiative or PD2. According to the company, “The PD2 initiative is a unique opportunity for investigators from external institutions to submit proprietary compounds for potential screening in Lilly's phenotypic assay panel. This highly collaborative process is enabled by a web-based application that facilitates efficient transfer of information between Lilly and the investigator. The PD2 screening panel is currently comprised of five modules which are relevant to therapeutic areas of long-term strategic interest, including oncology, neurological disorders, and metabolic diseases. This panel may change over time to reflect additional research interests.”
Company officials believe that program will allow it to evaluate and possibly license treatments from biotech companies and academic institutions "that are never fully evaluated as potential drug candidates." The launch of the PD2 website—perhaps the first of its kind—clearly sends a signal that pharmaceutical companies are reducing their reliance on internal discovery programs to identify prospective new molecular entities and are eager to enter into licensing deals to find and acquire them.
Membership in the PD2 requires that a legal representative from the investigator's academic institution or biotech company executes a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA). Once the MTA is reviewed and approved by Lilly officials, the institution can create an account. Until that time, use of the site is limited to browsing only. I have no doubt that technology transfer offices at most major universities will be signing up for membership in short order.
I think the PD2 initiative is an innovative and timely one given the massive reductions in R&D jobs that have taken place at many pharma companies over the past two years. Expect other pharma companies to follow Lilly’s lead.
Until next time....
Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!
.jpg)
As many of you may know, I attend national science meetings where I offer resume critiquing services and give career development seminars on topics ranging from resume writing to alternate career opportunities for life scientists. Frequently, I critique the resumes of 
After yesterday's post about career planning for life scientists, one of my soon to be former students in the Fundamentals of Bioscience Program aptly pointed out that my readers might have benefitted more if I had, in fact, offered information about alternate career possibilities for bioscientists. I don't want the student to get too overconfident but I had the same thought immediately after I uploaded the post. 
Yesterday, I gave a lecture entitled “Alternate Careers: Taking the Road Less Traveled” to over 100 members of the University of Pennsylvania’s Biomedical Graduate Student Association. As always, there were many good questions and comments during and after the presentation. Some of the career anecdotes offered by several of the students reminded me of a conversation that I had several weeks ago with one of my Fundamentals of Bioscience students—I teach a Product Development and Regulatory Affairs course in the program—who refreshed my memory about a typical graduate student approach to career development and job searching. “We don’t think about jobs or our careers until we begin writing our PhD theses” she said. “Until then, our advisers don’t talk about careers or jobs and only bring it up because our funding will run out” she added. Admittedly, I had forgotten this because so many years have passed since my graduate student days. That said, it forced me to consider how much the life sciences job market has changed since I was graduate student and how vitally important it is for today’s graduate students to think about and possibly explore different career options throughout the course of their graduate training.
The advent of social networking sites like MySpace, Facebook and Linked In have been a boon to recruiters and human resources (HR) professionals. Social networks represent a vast and easily-accessible source of job candidates whose professional credentials and personal information are readily available to determine whether or not they may be potential new hires. While the effectiveness of recruiters and HR professionals to source new talent is debatable, I contend that there is nobody more qualified than employees at a company to identify prospective new employees who may bring value to an organization. A number of forward-thinking companies have realized that the best way to find “right fit job candidates” is to mine the social networking contacts of their existing employees. To that end,.gif)
Over the past three years, more than
Using Facebook and Twitter to find jobs is becoming routine in many industries including healthcare. However, the life sciences industry is lagging behind most others when it comes to social media and recruitment. Nevertheless, many companies and academic institutions are beginning to realize that Facebook (FB), Twitter and other science social networks are good source of qualified candidates for those difficult-to fill job openings. 
The US economy has lost about 7.1 million jobs since December 2007 and nationwide unemployment is hovering around 8.5 percent. Despite the lost of about 80,000 pharmaceutical jobs over the past three years and unprecedented consolidation taking place in the life sciences sector—Merck-Schering Plough, Pfizer-Wyeth and Roche-Genentech—the job prospects for scientists at biotech companies, medical devices and diagnostics, and government appear to be stronger than anticipated. While drug discovery and sales jobs may be scare, there are rapidly emerging opportunities in the fields of medical communications, regulatory affairs, biomanufacturing, clinical trials management , bioengineering, medical devices/diagnostics and website development and management.(1).jpg)
For those of you who want to learn about why Vincent and I created .jpg)
Talk about a rough week. First, on Monday,.jpg)
.jpg)
I believe in free enterprise and that publicly-traded companies ought to be able to buy one another if a deal makes sense. In any other financial market, Pfizer’s impending acquisition of Wyeth would be a noteworthy event but not extraordinary. However, we are living in unprecedented and uncertain financial times and Pfizer’s possible purchase of Wyeth has serious implications for American taxpayers.
.jpg)
Making a profit (and a large one at that) is the primary objective and driving principle of capitalism. That said, the for-profit sector is currently in a shambles—mostly due to greed and stupidity of the so-called stewards of the American economy. Maybe it is time for many of us to abandon corporate greed in favor of job opportunities in the more philanthropic and altruistic not-for-profit sector. I was surprised to learn that, despite the current economic downturn, there are growing numbers of jobs at non-for-profit hospitals, clinics, civic organizations and education (pre-school, primary and secondary)..jpg)
For those of you who haven’t been able to keep up with the latest pharma layoffs, I came across an .jpg)
Like it or not, the best way to land a new job whether or not there is a recession is to network. While career counselors and recruiters trumpet the virtues of networking to job seekers, many people really don't understand what it is or how to do it correctly. I found an.jpg)
I’ve blogged on this topic many times in the past. However, I came across a.jpg)
The relationship between science, education and industry has always been a tenuous one. To learn more about the complexity of this relationship check out this 
Pfizer announced today that it will .jpg)
I know this is kind of odd, but I have recently begun to wonder which life sciences companies have layed off the most employees this past year. Well, for those of you out there who were also wondering we don't have to wonder any longer because Ed Silverman over at the Pharmalot blog has conveniently compiled a 
Pfizer may announce .jpg)
I first thought about starting a social network for life sciences professionals about a year ago after joined I Facebook and LinkedIn and then learned about SciLink, one of the first social networks for scientists. Apparently, others had the same idea and today, there are currently, by my reckoning, no fewer than 20 social networks for scientists—each promoting a unique approach to networking for scientists..jpg)
ring people advice and tips on how to hold on to their current jobs. In my opinion, most of these posts didn’t offer any new or insight tips on this topics. Instead most of the suggestions were obvious and rather pedestrian. For example, be pleasant to your boss, show up on time, don’t leave before the official work day ends, volunteer to take on new projects yada, yada, yada..jpg)
I want to let my readers know that a beta-version of .jpg)
.jpg)
Let me begin with the good news. The Indianapolis Business journal reported today .png)
e I present seminars to students and postdocs who are desperately seeking employment. I talk about resume writing, interviewing techniques and designing and managing job searches. While all of these things are helpful, in the end, finding a job really comes down to one thing—networking or perhaps more aptly put —self promotion. Yes, I said it—you really do have to SELL yourself when trying to land a job! This is very difficult for scientists because we are taught (and it is hammered into us) that self aggrandizement is a cardinal sin if you are to be taken seriously as a serious scientist. While this may have been true in the past, it is no longer the case in today’s highly competitive and shrinking job market.
Online career sites like 
Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly & Co 
Yesterday Pfizer announced that it would layoff 275 employees
ecruiter blog 
When I was working as a recruiter, I always called my candidates a day before a scheduled face-to-face job interview. I did this to reassure them, build confidence and provide them with any insights that I may have had regarding the hiring manager or the job. But, more importantly, I called to insure that they were adequately prepared to go on the interview. I typically talked with them about dress, interview etiquette, cell phone usage, body language etc. Sometimes, when I was concerned about particular candidates, I even sent (via fax or e-mail) an interview preparation checklist. 
Much has been said (and written) about the impact and power of a firm handshake in business settings. Are the urban legends and "old wives tales" really true? Peggy McKee 
Who hasn’t heard the old adages “Beauty is only skin deep” or “It’s not what’s on the outside but what’s on the inside that counts?” While these sayings may be apt when looking for a soul mate, they are absolutely not true when it comes to networking or job interviews. I know this may seem shallow and superficial, but the stark reality is that appearance does count when making a first impression or finding a job. There is nothing wrong in adopting a “superficial” persona when it comes to job interviews or networking. I know; we scientists work hard to avoid being superficial and shallow, but let’s face it, sometime you just gotta do what you gotta do to get or job or advance your career!.jpg)
I came across an interesting article in Forbes Magazine that .jpg)
During the course of my 25 years or so of participating in job interviews, I have come across a variety of questions that interviewers seem to routinely ask interviewees. While some of the questions may seem silly or ridiculous, according to interviewing etiquette and protocol (and how much you want the job) you are required to answer them. The intent of many of these questions is not to be flippant or intrusive but to determine whether a candidate can think quickly on his/her feet or field difficult questions that they may encounter as an employee. 
I just returned from my career development sojourn at this year’s FASEB meeting in San Diego, CA. Not surprisingly, all of my sessions were well attended. In fact, attendance at many of the presentations was standing room only. Again, this was not terribly surprising because the job market for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows for the last 5 years has been dismal. However, in contrast with past years, there was a noticeable and palpable difference in the attitudes of many of the students and postdocs who attended the sessions. In previous years, many career development participants seemed resigned to the possibility of a “jobless future”. However, this year there was a small but vocal group of participants who openly expressed their anger and resentment at the possibility of not finding a job after completing their training. I think that many graduate students and postdoctoral fellows have begun to realize that they are being exploited by a fundamentally flawed academic system and that they are “not going to take it anymore.”
I am sitting in Newark Airport waiting for my flight to San Diego which, not surprisingly, has been delayed for about 2 hours. As you might have guessed from the title of this post, I am on my way to the 2008 FASEB Career Development Symposium which is run every year at the annual FASEB meeting. 
Like it or not, writing a carefully-constructed resume or curriculum vitae (as resumes are known in scientific circles) is a vital part of any successful job search. Inexperienced job seekers tend to hastily craft resumes without paying much attention to format, style or content and then wonder why they can’t land job interviews. The best way to approach resume writing is to think of a resume as a work of art–something that requires a lot of thought, creativity and attention to detail. As one well-known professional recruiter and job search expert put it”Trying to find a job without a smart, well-crafted resume is like showing up for dinner at a fancy restaurant in a T-shirt and cutoffs. They won’t let you in.” 
Many people think that organizing a job search requires little more than quickly throwing together a resume, applying for online jobs or answering print ads and then kicking back to wait for responses from prospective employers. While this scenario may have been accurate 10 years ago– when jobs were abundant and the economy was humming– it is no longer the case. In fact, the current science job market may be one of the most challenging in the past 20 years or so. This is likely due to shrinking government research spending, contraction of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries and the possibility that the American economy is slipping into recession. Nevertheless, there are still available jobs out there. But, in contrast with the past few years, getting them will require a carefully planned and well orchestrated job search..jpg)
downward turn. Even the recession-proof pharmaceutical industry has taken a huge beating over the past year or so– and things seem to be getting worse! The biotechnology industry, which is highly dependent upon venture capital and private equity to remain healthy, is also trending downward and will be hit hard if the economy slides into recession. To make matters worse, the US Department of Labor recently released figures which showed projected growth (for 2006 to 2016) for the fastest-growing occupations in America (see below). Not surprisingly, scientists–industrial or academic– did not make the top 20 list..jpg)
If you are contemplating a career move, check out the new list from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that projects the fastest-growing jobs from 2006 to 2016..gif)
