Since the original version of this article was published in 2023, the market has continued to be tight for biotech investment. New companies continue to form and get funding, but overall, investors are reducing risk with an increasing preference for companies with clinical data – or at a minimum validation in animal studies – before follow-on investments are attractive.

We’ve also seen a reduced focus on platforms, with companies instead choosing to validate a single asset. This has at times resulted in layoffs for pre-clinical research and drug development teams once those assets move forward into the clinic – something that rarely happens when markets are flush with capital. While we can take some comfort in the fact that new science continues to emerge and hopefully those drugs now in clinical trials will have a real impact on human health, that doesn’t take away from the real anxiety experienced by those in our field.

The grass isn’t any greener in larger companies. In fact, in looking at layoffs in 2024, Fierce Biotech noted in this early January piece that, while the overall industry layoff rate remained flat in 2024 vs 2023, big pharma layoff rounds nearly quadrupled, from 11 in 2023 to 42 in 2024. And so while there really is no risk-free option at any one company, it’s worth being resilient and willing to play the long game. In biopharma, we invest our time and energy into developing treatments for patients who desperately need them; a career invested in helping support scientific advancement to fight and hopefully cure disease remains incredibly rewarding.

As I’ve updated this How-To article for 2025, I’ve added a few additional “things to look for,” but the general vibe and experience of each company stage, in my opinion, remains reflected in the pros and cons from 2023.

How should I think about my job search in 2025, especially if I’ve been laid off?

It’s true that in 2025 there are fewer open roles and more candidates applying for them, so the market is notably tighter than in 2023, particularly as you move up to more senior levels. But even though the biotech job climate has been bumpy of late, with companies shutting down and layoffs in the news almost daily, these reductions in force do not thus far equal broadening sector unemployment. What remains true is that scientific expertise is developed through years of education and experience, and within our career lifetimes there will likely continue to be demand for the skills needed to build and operate a successful biotech.

That said, the likelihood of multiple offers and an easy salary bump are lower than they were a few years ago, and now may be a better time to hunker down where you are if you can until the storm passes, unless a well aligned role comes your way directly. Even then, I’d advise that if you decide to join a new company for the science, leadership team, and investor track record, now you are less likely to see a large salary bump or an inflated title like you may have in 2020 or 2021.

It’s important to remember that joining a biotech that ultimately fails is not a scar on your background. Failure is unfortunate, but it’s so common in biotech that employers don’t see it as a liability. What hiring managers are more interested in is what you were able to contribute during your time in your last position. Often being part of a smaller organization means the breadth of your experience is wider and you can contribute to the next company in ways that expand beyond your narrow job description. There are many factors you should keep in mind when considering which company makes most sense for you to join, but fearing what the failure of that company might do to the optics of your resume should not substantially factor into your calculations.

Should you take the leap from big pharma to an early-stage biotech?

I’ve spent the past eight years spearheading recruiting for two gene therapy companies, one company-creation firm, and now RA Capital, a multi-stage biotech investment platform. I’ve also helped build two non-biotech startups. I haven’t worked for a large pharmaceutical company, but my perspective is founded on conversations with numerous job candidates over that period, most of whom are already somewhat sold on the idea of moving from big pharma to a smaller, earlier-stage biotech. Most folks looking to make this change – perhaps you, too! – have expressed frustration with one or a combination of the following in their current role: feeling siloed; feeling like decisions and work move too slowly; and feeling like they don’t get to be close enough to the “ground floor” in taking a drug from idea to patient.

So what are the downsides of making the transition? The biggest challenge for most tends to be that in a smaller biotech, there are simply fewer resources available. You will likely do a lot more administrative work on your own – the earlier your company’s stage, the fewer people there are to share the load. If at a pharma you could count on an internal team of colleagues to run a trial, then at a small biotech company you might have to make do with working through an external contract research organization (CRO), which can be frustrating. And if you’re in a partnership with a larger pharma, you are now the “little guy” and may have less control and flexibility. Your career path can feel less defined and priorities can change in ways that can feel too rapid (e.g., executives might shelve a project in response to investor feedback and a stock decline to make the company’s cash stretch), sometimes in a way that leaves you wondering how decisions were made.

But the upside of joining a small biotech can be awesome. Groundbreaking science. Turning ideas into medicines for patients whose well-being feels tangibly linked to your actual work. Building camaraderie and friendship with a team that grows from nothing to a real, grown-up company together. Constructing a culture from the very beginning with a shared confidence that, if you succeed at your mission, you’ll forever upgrade human health. There’s really nothing like it in the world.

Regardless of where you came from (another biotech, pharma, or academia), if you’re ready to take the plunge and find a new position, the following are some things you might expect to see and questions you may want to ask at various stages of a biotech company’s life cycle.

Joining a biotech company at its earliest stage (becoming part of the founding scientific team or first 1-10 hires)

Pros:

• Changes can be made quickly and it’s easy for everyone to get on the same page about progress and challenges. Issues that can take weeks or months to solve in a larger company are likely to be sorted out in hours.
• You’ll have the opportunity to wear lots of hats and gain exposure beyond your specific area of expertise, learning cross-functionally from other experts who join the early team. For example, you may be tasked to hire and build out your own lab instead of walking into an existing setup and wishing things were structured differently.
• You’ll have the opportunity to learn more about how companies are formed and how financing works. Ever wondered about how a company is valued or what inflection points are critical to get to the next round of financing? You’ll not only learn to answer essential questions like these, but live through the ups and downs on the road to success.
• You get to be a culture builder and contribute to the earliest scientific advances, which will feel intellectually rewarding and exciting. And are you passionate about diversity and inclusion? If you’re an early member of the team, you can make sure key issues like this are taken seriously from day one.
• You’ll build friendly and personal relationships with the founding team, who may become core members of your professional network later on. Having lunch with the CEO every day yields a very different relationship than crossing paths once a month before a company all-hands.
• You will have a more substantial equity stake since your shares will be based on the seed round of financing. This of course means higher risk, but an even bigger payoff if your company is successful.

Cons:

• With higher potential rewards come higher risks, and the truth is, most biotech companies fail before their drug gets anywhere near a patient.
• You’ll likely work on an unpredictable schedule, especially leading up to critical board meetings.
• Although the equity might be worth a lot more than equity at a large company, salaries at smaller companies are often lower.
• No job is too menial for any member of the team, which can be tough for people who are used to having a lot of resources available to support them. Need something mailed somewhere? You may get very good at printing FedEx labels yourself.
• Benefits are often less attractive (and more expensive for the company because smaller companies have less bargaining power).

Questions to consider:

• Do you fundamentally believe in the science? Where did it come from and what is it based on?
• Is the company capitalized well enough to make a credible go of proving that what it has is valuable and inspire additional capital? How credible and deep-pocketed are the investors? What milestones must be met for a company to be an attractive investment in whatever round is next (seed extension, Series A, Series B), and are your contributions critical to those milestones?
• If the company has an academic founder, how involved is that founder?
• Are there both scientific and company-building experts involved? (Often, these are not found in the same person, but sometimes they are.)
• Does the company offer benefits you might currently take for granted (think 401(k) matching, short- and long-term disability coverage, parental leave, etc.)?
• Is there health insurance to cover you and your family? If so, what are the out-of-pocket costs? (Pro tip: beware high-deductible plans.)

Joining an early/mid-stage company (15-50 people)

Pros:

• Scientific progress can be exhilarating and exciting. It won’t be unusual to see people crowding around data readouts and sharing in the highs and lows of moving from proof-of-concept work to translational studies.
• Depending on how quickly the company grows, you’ll be “in the trenches” with a lot of new colleagues and live through a shared experience that shapes your career.
• You’ll be able to focus on your area of expertise a little more specifically but still be able to wear a number of hats and work cross-functionally.
• Communication is relatively easy. Weekly gatherings with the whole company mean information sharing is usually constant and filled with exciting progress updates across all departments. You still know everyone in the company.
• The equity portion of your compensation is still quite substantive. You’re early enough to possibly share in a huge collective outcome.
• A company at this stage is still small enough that the culture and sense of community is still forming. This is a great opportunity to be able to take cool ideas that you’ve seen at other companies and implement them the way you wish you could have seen them implemented – think running clubs, skill-building seminars, or happy hours. You can be the one who brings the fun beyond work.

Cons:

• Still risky and more potential for financial markets to impact your company’s ability to secure the next financing round. This can be especially frustrating when you see the science progressing but investors may not see the cost of making it to the next milestone to be worth the investment risk.
• Key experiments may be far enough along to start disappointing, taking some of the bloom off the rose and imposing constraints on what previously seemed like a technology with huge potential. As exciting as it can be to see your lead asset progress, it can be stomach-churning when things stall out, all under the pressure of a dwindling cash runway.
• It’s not uncommon for leadership to change as a full-time CEO or CSO joins, which can further shift the culture, for better or worse.

Questions to consider:

• Does the company plan to move their office/lab space as they grow, and if so, do they plan to stay in the same general location?
• How much cash does the company have and when is the next inflection point (what data and what are odds of success?) for the upcoming financing round? I
• If this is a platform with a lead asset, how far along is that asset? If assets have gotten to the clinic, when is the next data readout, and what have previous readouts shown to give confidence in the success in the platform’s overall thesis?
• How much of the leadership team has been built and what are the future plans for different groups and departments?

Joining a mid-stage company (50-150 people)

Pros:

• All components of a solid company tend to be in place, including company culture. At this point, you’re joining a mission and can choose a place that fits you versus building it yourself. Usually companies are eager to keep the magic of the early team and your feedback will be solicited and more likely to be implemented.
• The science has progressed enough to be building out a downstream team, such as clinical and maybe even commercial. You now have teams of teams, each with their own unique flavor.
• Cross-functional programs are often formally implemented to help people get to know colleagues outside of their area of focus. You’ll focus on your own area of expertise but build friendships and learn a ton.
• Risk is reduced with continued scientific progress and larger rounds of financing provide the ability to push towards key milestones.
• There may be more than one program advancing through development so you may have a more diverse work experience.
• Companies go public during this phase, so your equity could have real value.

Cons:

• Your equity stake will likely be diluted with each round of funding. But your goal is to have a meaningful stake in something big, not a larger stake in something small or failed. Remaining vital to the company’s success ensures that dilution will be mitigated with periodic equity grants (often annually).
• You may be overwhelmed or bored depending on how much progress has or has not been made that affects your area of expertise.
• Depending on the speed of your company’s growth, you may quickly outgrow lab and office space, though hiring and expansion is tricky as needs can’t be perfectly forecast. With financial markets running cool, management teams might try not to saddle the company with a higher burn rate (i.e. more rent, more employees) until it’s clear that they need to.
• Communication at this stage is often hit-or-miss as companies try to strike the right balance between over- and under-communicating and determining how big or small meetings should be. It can feel a bit clunky as these bugs get worked out.
• If you are working on a secondary program and the lead program stumbles, the company might decide to conserve cash to rescue the lead program by cutting back on earlier-stage programs, putting your job at risk. (Read more about how to think about this situation here.)
• Your equity value could be highly volatile.

Questions to consider:

• Is the company’s lead program making clinical progress? Are there additional assets in the preclinical pipeline? What priority do these take compared to the lead? Which will you work on?
• How might you progress within your career path at the company? How many levels exist for your role, and how much time should you expect to stay in one level before you’ll be ready for the next? Pro tip: Be clear that you’re excited about the job being offered as companies are rightfully wary of people who expect promotions well before they are earned.
• If and when the company goes public, are you prepared for the rollercoaster ride of watching your equity fluctuate (sometimes radically)? Do you know what your strategy will be? Should you have the chance, do you know when you would want to take some gains off the table, and how much? (For more on that, explore this equity explainer my colleagues put together.)
• How much of your equity will be given to you in restricted shares versus stock options?

Joining a growth-stage company (150-1000+ people)

Pros:

• While risk is never eliminated, companies at this stage have a much higher likelihood of bringing a therapy all the way to patients.
• With multiple clinical trials for likely multiple programs and maybe even a drug on the market, you’re able to more tangibly experience how patients are impacted by what you’re doing. You’ll get to hear directly from the patient population you will help if you’re successful, which is both emotionally rewarding and puts real names and faces to the company’s mission.
• You are a lot more likely to find your next career move within the company you work for, especially if you’re hoping to gain more cross-functional experience. You’ll have the advantage of being a known entity and part of the culture if you want to move from one group to another (think going from research to recruiting or preclinical ops to program management).
• You’ll get direct exposure to the complicated FDA approval process, the challenge of balancing multiple programs, and experience with navigating integrated systems to make all this work flow smoothly. It can be an awesome opportunity to learn.
• The company’s benefits continue to be richer; systems and processes are put in place for routine tasks and milestones are celebrated.
• Your company might become the target of acquirers, which could result in a large payout to you and other equity holders.

Cons:

• This can be a period of growing pains. The earliest team members can be nostalgic for when everyone was together in a tiny lab and the newer team members can struggle to cohere or find their footing, especially if the company is growing rapidly.
• Culture naturally shifts as organizations move towards commercialization. This doesn’t mean anything has gone wrong, but many people may not like the result and leave to go join early companies again. Losing founding members can be disruptive and unsettling to the rest of the team.
• Communication is often a challenge and your equity will be more diluted.
• Your company might get acquired and you might lose your job if the acquirer decides you are redundant or cuts the program you are working on (if it’s not the program that they acquired the company for).

Questions to consider:

• What are your opportunities for learning and development as well as cross-departmental growth?
• Are you prepared to operate with more process and bureaucracy? Do you have the skills to persuade colleagues? Can you accept that decisions may be made without you understanding why they were made?
• What will happen to you if your company is acquired?
• What assets or programs are considered most critical, and will you do work that contributes to those programs directly?

I’ve been lucky enough to be part of early, mid-, and growth-stage companies and each has both awesome positives and a set of unique challenges. The good news for everyone in biotech is that we continue to make incredible progress, which can translate into drugs for patients whose lives are forever changed. Biotech is an incredibly rewarding place to build a career!

As a multi-stage investor, RA Capital supports companies from incubation through going public (and beyond). My role is to help build the scientific teams for the companies we create from scratch, so if you’re yearning for an early-stage opportunity, check out the job listings in our ecosystem here. Thinking a later-stage company is where you’d be happiest? We’ve got those jobs too – check them out and sort the opportunities in your area of expertise here. Whatever you choose, know that it’s hard to go wrong if you pursue what most inspires you.

The world will always want better health. In your career, you will have so many opportunities to learn and pivot and meet new people and grasp new technologies. So as you consider a job offer, don’t think of yourself becoming an employee of a company that may or may not succeed, but rather as a permanent citizen of the biomedical ecosystem that will always have need for your skills in pursuit of a shared mission. It’s a small community. Hope to see you soon.