career trajectory advice

[123abcdef]

hi everyone, wanting some input on a 5-10 year career plan. for background i have been working at the same hospital for the last 10 years, possibly on the brink of a midlife crisis, with evolving priority to spend more time with family.
possible situations:
1. be a lifer where i’m currently at ( continue weekdays 5-8hr shifts) as a clinic pharmacist with ongoing staffing/ research / teaching responsibilities. currently unable to attend many school/after school activities, commute is 1.5 hours each way. pay is good but pension sucks.
2. work at another clinic that offers 4-10 hr shifts as a mid level practitioner highly subspecialized, commute 30 mins each way, 15% pay cut but great pension. possibly after a few years here maybe go to pharma
3. pharma working remotely, when things get back to normal local travel. pay is matched with stock benefits/pharma perks.

what do you think? appreciate your input!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[M0df]

Wow. 10 years of 90 minute commute 5 days a week?

My vote is option b unless you have some sort of affinity for pharma, then do it now rather than later.

 

[VA77]

The way I'm calculating this is that you have spent an entire YEAR of your life in a car commuting. I know we all have to do something to pay the bills but I might be inclined to reprioritize your life and the people in it which sounds like what your doing.

I think you just gotta ask yourself when you are behind that wheel, "What is this time worth to me when all is said and done and I look back on my life can I say it was worth it?"

 

[awval999]

Either move for #1.
OR
Take the paycut and go for #2.

 

[PharmDBro2017]

Wow. 10 years of 90 minute commute 5 days a week?

My vote is option b unless you have some sort of affinity for pharma, then do it now rather than later.

90min each way.... so 3 hours/day is spent commuting. That is insane.

Move or find a better gig for work/life balance.

 

[lord999]

Your ability to go to pharma is very time-dependent. Earlier is better unless you are in the scientific or management divisions given the fellowship and youth arms race. You'd be considered a nontraditional switch at this point. But there's something you're not saying about how your job is as you've been incumbent at it for long enough that in a place like CA, it's not terribly difficult to find other work. Why would you be a lifer if the loyalty benefits suck? There has to be some reason you would consider this.

If you live in CA or Atlanta, that's actually not an insane commute. If you cannot move and your heart is set on pharma, 3. But, realize that if you are not taking advantage of the commute to rest, then you're probably doing it wrong. That said, who is the principal careerist (not necessarily earner) in your household? Both of you have to make sacrifices.

 

[wazoodog]

Call me biased, but I think pharma is the way to go if you prioritize QOL, growth, pay, flexibility...pretty much anything except an environment closer to direct patient care. You just have to accept a few things: 1) that you'll be making less money for 4-5 years (but you'll still be making a decent salary); 2) you need to plan on spending some time to get a foot in the door. Best part is you have already have a job so you can apply and interview with financial security in place.

People will tell you pharma is less job security but i don't find that to be true. Its less job stability but more job security. As in, yeah you may get laid off but your accumulated skillet and pharma experience will make it much easier to find a job. A 55 yr old retail pharmacist has challenges competing with a 30 yr old pharmacist for that CVS job. On the other hand, pharma experience is something that grows in value with years. You just can't teach 20 years of industry experience...and theres usually a significant difference between someone with 20 years vs 10 years vs 5 years of experience in pharma.

 

[123abcdef]

Your ability to go to pharma is very time-dependent. Earlier is better unless you are in the scientific or management divisions given the fellowship and youth arms race. You'd be considered a nontraditional switch at this point. But there's something you're not saying about how your job is as you've been incumbent at it for long enough that in a place like CA, it's not terribly difficult to find other work. Why would you be a lifer if the loyalty benefits suck? There has to be some reason you would consider this.

If you live in CA or Atlanta, that's actually not an insane commute. If you cannot move and your heart is set on pharma, 3. But, realize that if you are not taking advantage of the commute to rest, then you're probably doing it wrong. That said, who is the principal careerist (not necessarily earner) in your household? Both of you have to make sacrifices.

great points. id for sure be non traditional. i’ve had a few consulting contracts through the years with various pharma and wondering if maybe sub specializing can allow me to skip an entry level position/salary. also not that this compares to heading a phase 3 but i have co pi’ed a couple internal studies etc. thoughts? heart is not set on pharma but it seems like a better work life balance/qol - i def won’t be resting on that commute time just spending more time being present for my kids. i’m also hesitant because im wondering if the hospitals will take me back if ive gone to the dark side haha

 

[123abcdef]

Call me biased, but I think pharma is the way to go if you prioritize QOL, growth, pay, flexibility...pretty much anything except an environment closer to direct patient care. You just have to accept a few things: 1) that you'll be making less money for 4-5 years (but you'll still be making a decent salary); 2) you need to plan on spending some time to get a foot in the door. Best part is you have already have a job so you can apply and interview with financial security in place.

People will tell you pharma is less job security but i don't find that to be true. Its less job stability but more job security. As in, yeah you may get laid off but your accumulated skillet and pharma experience will make it much easier to find a job. A 55 yr old retail pharmacist has challenges competing with a 30 yr old pharmacist for that CVS job. On the other hand, pharma experience is something that grows in value with years. You just can't teach 20 years of industry experience...and theres usually a significant difference between someone with 20 years vs 10 years vs 5 years of experience in pharma.

thanks for the insight on accumulated experience. what do you feel is the maximum age where it’s worth starting a career in pharma, for MSL vs. non MSL tracks? (not going to be a young forever but good thing there’s botox?) can you speak on salary matching? there are a lot of pharma headhunters in my location, it’s overwhelming to figure out who to talk to!

 

[wazoodog]

thanks for the insight on accumulated experience. what do you feel is the maximum age where it’s worth starting a career in pharma, for MSL vs. non MSL tracks? (not going to be a young forever but good thing there’s botox?) can you speak on salary matching? there are a lot of pharma headhunters in my location, it’s overwhelming to figure out who to talk to!

If people are able to leverage their current work experience and transition into a mid level role, or as a consultant who's an expert in their field (that a company is looking for) - theres probably no age limit. I've seen quite a few hospital pharmacists do this, especially if they were clinical or in a role that developed a skill that transferred to medical affairs like pharmacoeconomics and clinical effectiveness / outcomes research. If starting from entry level, obviously earlier the better but its different for everyone. I've seen a guy start in his 50s after he sold his own pharmacy.

As for salary progression, I just started from entry level med info and took what was offered at the time (which was hefty pay cut). Hopefully you're a better salary negotiator than I was.

 

[wazoodog]

I've noticed that MSL has really built up into this fantasy pharma job, into almost a fixation. There are so many roles in the industry that a pharmacist can go into. I'm curious - what is it about the MSL role that appeals to you?

 

[123abcdef]

I've noticed that MSL has really built up into this fantasy pharma job, into almost a fixation. There are so many roles in the industry that a pharmacist can go into. I'm curious - what is it about the MSL role that appeals to you?

i think it’s a fantasy for a lot of practitioners involved with direct patient care/ teaching duties, the burn out is real. the appeal for MSL is because it’s an entry point for someone with zero industry experience and no fellowship. i’d do it to get in for better QOL, but it’s not really my cup of tea. i’m more interested in medical affairs and clinical trials but i think it’d be hard to get into that with my current skill set, unless you tell me otherwise!

 

[wazoodog]

i think it’s a fantasy for a lot of practitioners involved with direct patient care/ teaching duties, the burn out is real. the appeal for MSL is because it’s an entry point for someone with zero industry experience and no fellowship. i’d do it to get in for better QOL, but it’s not really my cup of tea. i’m more interested in medical affairs and clinical trials but i think it’d be hard to get into that with my current skill set, unless you tell me otherwise!

I think a MSL role is a very difficult entry point into industry, unless you happen to have very solid clinical experience in a hot therapeutic area OR some other kind of nontraditional experience.

If you have experience working with payors, patient advocacy groups, CE programs, HEOR, or other nontraditional experience you can find a way into med affairs. The experience you're describing to get into a MSL role has a better chance in med info. As for clinical trials, it's not too difficult to get in at the bottom as a clinical trial associate - the issue is that the bottom is a likely a big pay cut from pharmacist salary.

 

[samven582]

I think a MSL role is a very difficult entry point into industry, unless you happen to have very solid clinical experience in a hot therapeutic area OR some other kind of nontraditional experience.

If you have experience working with payors, patient advocacy groups, CE programs, HEOR, or other nontraditional experience you can find a way into med affairs. The experience you're describing to get into a MSL role has a better chance in med info. As for clinical trials, it's not too difficult to get in at the bottom as a clinical trial associate - the issue is that the bottom is a likely a big pay cut from pharmacist salary.

There's quite a few people I know who had zero therapeutic expertise but where able to break into a MSL role with syneos/J&J. Honestly to break into pharma its not what you know but who. Networking is key

 

[123abcdef]

I think a MSL role is a very difficult entry point into industry, unless you happen to have very solid clinical experience in a hot therapeutic area OR some other kind of nontraditional experience.

If you have experience working with payors, patient advocacy groups, CE programs, HEOR, or other nontraditional experience you can find a way into med affairs. The experience you're describing to get into a MSL role has a better chance in med info. As for clinical trials, it's not too difficult to get in at the bottom as a clinical trial associate - the issue is that the bottom is a likely a big pay cut from pharmacist salary.

interesting perspective, most of my colleagues have transitioned to MSL more than any other industry position. my current dilemma is whether i should take a mid level subspecialty position (ex. car-t, breast cancer pharmd on a team) to be a better candidate for a future med affairs job, ideally after all my kids can pick up their own legos and make their own lunches , or just try to get what i can in industry with a pay cut. for whatever reason in my urban area there are a lot of opportunities and many people are switching jobs this year and now i am considering too.

 

[wazoodog]

There's quite a few people I know who had zero therapeutic expertise but where able to break into a MSL role with syneos/J&J. Honestly to break into pharma its not what you know but who. Networking is key

I also know of people who made that transition. Maybe it's easier than I thought, or maybe it happens at opportune times. Just over a decade ago, I saw quite a few people able to go into MSL roles directly with pharma companies - I also think MSL teams were larger then they are now (don't quote me on this though). As for the more recent Syneos wave of hiring, I wonder if it's indicative of an industry wide trend or opportune timing from a single employer who happened to be looking for a big team? Maybe an MSL can better speak to this. The majority (like 80-90%) of PharmD MSLs that I personally know transitioned from a prior industry role (usually med info but a few from other functions).

I agree that having close and sincere relationships with at least 1 or 2 people in the industry vastly improves your candidacy. Not necessarily that they hook you up with a job (although that would be ideal), but having them give tips on mindset, help with your CV, prep for interviews, forward you job postings that they think you have a chance at, etc. This kind of help takes some effort on their part, and that's why I emphasize "close and sincere". Quality over quantity of networking - it does little good to meet and greet 100 people if you haven't built the trust and rapport for them to go out of their way to invest their time in helping you in a meaningful way.

 

[wazoodog]

interesting perspective, most of my colleagues have transitioned to MSL more than any other industry position. my current dilemma is whether i should take a mid level subspecialty position (ex. car-t, breast cancer pharmd on a team) to be a better candidate for a future med affairs job, ideally after all my kids can pick up their own legos and make their own lunches , or just try to get what i can in industry with a pay cut. for whatever reason in my urban area there are a lot of opportunities and many people are switching jobs this year and now i am considering too.

In your case, if you can get CAR-T, allogeneic CAR-T, and overall gene therapy experience I think that will likely add quite a lot to your resume whether you want to go into MSL or med affairs. Or if you're finding a lot of opportunities at the current time, it's just as worth considering making the jump when the timing is good. Either way, it seems like you're in a good place.