Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
This is where I share practical insights from inside biotech hiring teams.
Frameworks, thinking and tools to help you make better career decisions, apply with intention and stand out for the right reasons.
Over the past few months, I have noticed a repeated theme across conversations with biotech professionals.
Experienced scientists, Bioinformaticians. Computational biologists. AI drug discovery professionals. Senior R&D talent.
People applying deliberately and strategically to roles that genuinely align with their background.
And yet many are saying versions of the same thing:
“I meet the criteria… so why can’t I get through screening to interview?”
I think this is becoming one of the biggest frustrations inside biotech hiring right now because after enough silence, confusion slowly turns into self doubt.
But from what I am seeing inside biotech hiring, this is often less about capability… and more about positioning.
Biotech hiring has become significantly more risk-averse over the past couple of years. Teams are leaner, funding pressure is real, and many companies need people who can create impact quickly with minimal ramp-up time.
As a result, hiring teams increasingly favour candidates who feel easy to understand, directly aligned, and simple to explain internally. This is one reason why highly capable candidates can struggle unexpectedly, particularly candidates with interdisciplinary backgrounds.
Many biotech professionals now sit across multiple worlds. Biology + machine learning. Research + product. Academia + commercial.
These combinations are incredibly valuable and, in many ways, represent exactly where modern biotech is heading. But candidates often present these experiences in ways that accidentally create confusion rather than clarity.
I regularly see CVs and LinkedIn profiles trying to communicate every skill, every project, and every possible career direction all at once. The result is often a profile that feels broad… but unclear.
And when hiring teams are reviewing large numbers of applications quickly, ambiguity becomes dangerous. Not because the candidate lacks value, but because the hiring team cannot immediately identify: “Where exactly does this person fit here?”
Many candidates imagine hiring teams carefully analysing every application in depth. In reality, early-stage screening is often influenced heavily by speed and pattern recognition.
Recruiters and hiring managers are subconsciously scanning for relevance, alignment, narrative consistency, and confidence in fit. Candidates who communicate a clear professional identity and focused expertise often progress faster than candidates with broader but less clearly framed experience.
This does not necessarily mean they are more capable. It simply means they reduce uncertainty faster.
One of the biggest disconnects I currently see is this:
Candidates are asking: “But I meet the criteria.”
While hiring teams are quietly asking: “Can I confidently explain why this person is the safest fit for this role?”
Those are two very different questions.
Meeting the criteria still matters, of course. But in today’s market, positioning has become increasingly important because hiring teams are often trying to make fast decisions under pressure.
I do not believe biotech lacks talented people.
Quite the opposite.
I think there are many exceptional scientists and technical professionals currently struggling inside hiring systems that were not designed particularly well for interdisciplinary careers.
And I think many candidates are carrying far more self doubt than they should because when applications repeatedly disappear into silence, it becomes very easy to assume: “Maybe I am the problem.”
But increasingly, what I am seeing is not a lack of talent.
It is a growing disconnect between capability and clarity.I know it is hard on the inside of hiring right now.
I know it is hard on the inside of hiring right now.
I really do.
I spent years working inside biotech hiring teams, so I understand the pressure many recruiters, talent partners and hiring managers are under right now.
There is more noise than ever before.
More applications.
More urgency.
More pressure to move quickly.
Smaller teams trying to manage bigger workloads.
Companies asking hiring teams to do more with less.
And now, on top of all of that, there is this growing expectation that AI will somehow solve hiring.
That if we automate enough steps, speed things up enough, filter enough CVs, write enough prompts and optimise enough workflows… the process will suddenly become easier.
And I understand why companies are leaning into it.
Because hiring can feel overwhelming internally at the moment.
But I also think something is getting lost in all of this.
Because while companies are trying to become more efficient, I am speaking to candidates every single day who are being left ghosted, confused, and completely unclear on what is happening to them.
It is breaking my heart a little.
Not because people expect special treatment.
But because many are starting to feel genuinely mistreated by the process.
I keep hearing stories from talented scientists and biotech professionals who have applied for hundreds of jobs and received feedback from almost none of them. People who meet the criteria, who know they can do the job, but never even make it to a first conversation and have absolutely no idea why.
Others are left trying to decode the process afterwards.
“Was it my experience?”
“Was it my CV?”
“Am I applying for the wrong roles?”
“Am I positioning myself badly?”
“Do I even fit in this industry anymore?”
And after enough rejection without clarity, confusion slowly starts turning into self doubt.
That is the part I do not think we talk about enough.
I speak to people who no longer know where they fit professionally. Scientists trying to work out whether they should stay in the lab or move beyond it. People with interdisciplinary experience who cannot figure out where their profile belongs. Candidates trying to transition into industry who are desperate to understand what hiring managers are actually looking for.
Many feel like they are navigating this market blindfolded.
And I think one of the biggest reasons for that is because hiring has become increasingly opaque.
Candidates do not understand how decisions are being made anymore.
They do not know:
And when there is no communication around any of this, people start filling the gaps themselves.
Usually with worst-case assumptions.
The difficult thing is… I genuinely do not think most hiring teams intend for candidates to feel this way.
Most recruiters I know care deeply.
I know how hard internal hiring can be because I have lived it.
I know what it feels like to manage impossible volumes, difficult stakeholders, shifting priorities and constant pressure to hire quickly while still trying to protect quality.
I know many teams are overwhelmed.
But I also think we have to acknowledge that efficiency is not the same thing as candidate experience.
Yes, automation can help.
Yes, AI can save time.
Yes, systems matter.
But hiring is still deeply human.
And I think candidates are craving more humanity in the process right now.
Not perfection.
Just clarity.
They want:
Because silence does something to people.
A rejection can sting, of course.
But silence creates confusion.
And prolonged confusion slowly chips away at confidence.
Especially in a market where many highly capable people are already questioning themselves.
This is not me blaming recruiters.
Far from it. I actually think this is a wider industry conversation.
Because behind every application is a person trying to build a life.
Someone trying to stay in science.
Support themselves or their family.
Find stability.
Find purpose.
Regain confidence.
Build a future.
And I genuinely believe our industry can do better at remembering that.
Not perfectly.
But meaningfully.
Even small improvements in communication, expectation-setting and transparency could completely change how somebody experiences this market.
I think that matters.
One CV, Two Audiences.
Recruiters need clarity and reassurance.
Hiring managers need depth and trust.
Your CV must satisfy both.
When you understand how each audience reads your application, you stop guessing and start designing your CV intentionally.
That is when applications become easier to assess, easier to advocate for and more likely to progress.
Most people imagine their CV will be read in a single, linear way.
In reality, it is interpreted through two completely different lenses, each with its own priorities and pressures.
After 7+ years inside biotech hiring teams, this is one of the biggest reasons talented biotech professionals are overlooked. Not because they lack capability, but because their CV only works for one audience.
This article explains how recruiters and hiring managers read your CV, what each is trying to understand, and how to reduce friction for both.
Recruiters are the first filter.
They are not reading slowly. They are reviewing 100’s of CVs per role, switching between priorities and making quick decisions under time pressure.
Their job is not to assess deep technical skill.
Their job is to decide whether you are worth progressing.
Your CV has one primary task at this stage: convince them to keep reading.
Within seconds, recruiters are trying to answer:
If these answers are difficult to find, friction appears.
And CVs that create friction might not progress.
Recruiters scan before they read.
In around six seconds, they should be able to see:
If they need to hunt for this information, you are asking them to work too hard.
CVs that perform well for recruiters tend to:
Every one of these choices reduces friction.
The easier your CV is to interpret, the easier it is for a recruiter to feel confident progressing you.
At this stage, reassurance matters more than depth.
Once your CV reaches a hiring manager, the lens changes.
Hiring managers are assessing capability, judgement and impact, not just relevance.
This is where depth matters.
Hiring managers are reading your CV to evaluate:
They are not just assessing whether you can do the work.
They are assessing whether they can rely on your thinking, judgement and communication.
Hiring managers value detail, but only when it is relevant and structured.
Strong CVs for this audience:
Rather than long lists of tools, hiring managers respond better to clear examples that show how you work, how you approach problems and how you communicate.
Hiring managers want to understand:
Evidence of impact outweighs long task lists every time.
Hiring managers are also asking:
Your CV cannot demonstrate everything, but language choice, structure and clarity all help shape their impression.
Recruiters need quick clarity.
Hiring managers need depth and substance.
Your experience is the same, but the way you structure and present it determines whether both audiences get what they need.
The strongest CVs are designed intentionally with both perspectives in mind.
There are always three perspectives in an application:
The best CVs acknowledge all three and guide each reader with confidence.
If you work in biotech, you will be asked to explain what you do.
By a recruiter.
By a hiring manager.
By someone you meet through your network.
And very often, the moment matters more than you realise.
An elevator pitch is not about sounding impressive.
It is about being clear, confident and memorable.
After 7+ years inside biotech hiring teams, one pattern shows up again and again.
Talented people talk for too long, say too little, and miss the opportunity to shape how they are understood.
This article explains what an elevator pitch is, why it matters, and how to build one that actually works.
An elevator pitch is a short, intentional explanation of:
It is not a full career summary.
It is not a list of technologies.
And it is definitely not your CV read out loud.
Think of it as the opening paragraph to your professional story.
Its job is simple:
to make the other person want to keep the conversation going.
Inside hiring teams, elevator pitches show up everywhere.
They influence:
Very often, the words you choose become the words others use to describe you.
If your pitch is vague, that vagueness travels.
If it is clear, focused and confident, so is the narrative built around you.
The biggest mistake biotech professionals make is waffling.
They:
This usually happens because people are trying to be accurate rather than intentional.
Accuracy matters.
But clarity matters more.
A strong elevator pitch helps the listener understand, quickly:
It gives them the language they need to:
From an insider perspective, this is critical.
Recruiters and hiring managers often need to summarise you in one or two sentences to someone else.
Your pitch should make that easy.
Your elevator pitch should align with:
When these tell the same story, your positioning becomes consistent.
And consistency builds confidence.
This is why, inside The Insider Method, the elevator pitch is not treated as a standalone exercise.
It is built alongside your CV and LinkedIn profile, not separately.
Rather than memorising a script, focus on structure.
A useful framework is:
Keep it short enough that you can say it comfortably.
Clear enough that it can be repeated accurately by someone else.
You should be able to adapt it slightly depending on:
One pitch.
Multiple versions.
If you can understand what a role is really assessing, you can tailor your elevator pitch to match.
If the role prioritises:
You can choose examples and language that quietly reinforce those strengths.
This is not manipulation.
It is preparation.
And it is one of the clearest differences between candidates who feel reactive and those who feel in control.
Your elevator pitch is not about selling yourself.
It is about helping others understand you quickly and accurately.
When that happens:
And most importantly, you stop leaving first impressions to chance.
Most professionals underestimate how much they have achieved.
Not because they lack impact, but because they have never taken the time to capture it.
After 7+ years inside biotech hiring teams, this is one of the biggest gaps I see. Talented people struggle to articulate their value, not because they do not have it, but because they have never documented it.
That is where the Brag Box comes in.
A Brag Box is one of the simplest and most effective tools you can build for your career. It supports confidence, clarity and strong decision-making, whether you are actively job searching or not.
A Brag Box is a personal record of your achievements, strengths and moments of impact.
It does not need to be polished.
It does not need to be formal.
It simply needs to live somewhere you can access quickly.
Your Brag Box might live in:
The format does not matter. Access does.
From an insider perspective, hiring conversations often hinge on examples. Candidates who have these ready, move through processes with far more confidence and clarity.
A Brag Box is useful at every stage of your career.
From my experience inside hiring teams, people who maintain one find it easier to:
Job searching and interviewing can be mentally draining. Even high performers have moments where confidence dips. A Brag Box becomes a grounding tool on those days.
One of the most valuable additions to a Brag Box comes from other people.
I often suggest asking trusted colleagues or managers, past or present:
From an insider point of view, this exercise does three important things:
Be genuine when you ask. Receive the praise fully. Do not minimise it.
When you are job searching, your Brag Box becomes a strategic asset.
Your CV, LinkedIn profile and elevator pitch should be supported by evidence. A Brag Box gives you real examples that prove your skills, rather than simply listing them.
From a recruiter’s perspective, evidence is what builds confidence in a candidate quickly.
Review your Brag Box before interviews. It anchors you in facts and examples when nerves appear or confidence wobbles.
From experience, job searches often feel personal, even when they are not. Your Brag Box is a reminder of your capability when momentum feels slow.
As a seasoned recruiter, this is one of my biggest pet peeves.
Do not keep your strongest achievements hidden.
Waiting to “reveal” them in interview is risky. If your impact is not visible on your CV or LinkedIn profile, you may never get invited to talk about it.
From inside hiring teams, decisions are made early. Visibility matters.
Your strongest achievements should be visible:
Be proactive. Make it easy for hiring teams to see your value.
A Brag Box does not need to be impressive.
It needs to be honest and accessible.
If you can open it at a moment’s notice and be reminded of your capability, it is doing its job.
Most biotech professionals start their job search by updating their CV or scrolling through LinkedIn. But the strongest and most efficient searches start much earlier, with clarity.
A Reverse Job Description (RJD) is one of the most powerful tools you can use to make better decisions, save time and increase your chances of finding a role that genuinely aligns with your needs.
A RJD helps you deliberately select roles in or out. That deliberate choice creates clarity, which naturally leads to passion, enthusiasm, confidence and drive. These are powerful soft skills that stand out immediately in interviews and cannot be taught in the same way technical skills can. Hiring teams feel the difference. This can be what separates candidates who progress from those who come close but lose out to a competitor.
After 7+ years inside biotech hiring teams, reviewing 1,000s of CVs and supporting hiring managers across Europe, I can confidently say this: candidates who are clear on what they want make better choices and interview with more confidence.
A RJD gives you that clarity.
A Reverse Job Description is your own personal version of a job description.
Not what a company asks for, what you need in order to thrive.
Before you apply for your next role, pause. Take 10 minutes to create your own Reverse Job Description and notice how your intention and focus change.
A good RJD should work for you on a good day and still hold up on tougher days, when clarity, boundaries and structure matter most.
Those 10 minutes can save a significant amount of time and heartache later.
A RJD influences every step of your application journey, which roles you apply to, the questions you ask in interview and the offers you are willing to accept.
Without a RJD, job searching becomes reactive.
You apply for roles that sound interesting but are misaligned.
You progress through interviews only to realise too late that the role is not right.
You feel pressure to accept offers that do not fully meet your needs.
With a RJD, your decision making becomes intentional. You identify fit earlier, ask better questions and approach each step with clarity rather than hope.
Inside hiring teams, clarity makes candidates easier to advocate for. When your direction is clear, others can see where you fit and why.
This is the framework I use to help biotech professionals define what they truly want next.
Once created, your RJD becomes a practical decision-making tool.
Instead of asking “could I do this job?”, you start asking “does this role match what I want?”
When your direction is clear, conversations become more focused and more useful.
Your positioning becomes consistent and forward-looking.
Your RJD helps you ask meaningful questions about working style, expectations, progression and culture — not just role responsibilities.
Clarity prevents reactive applications and poor compromises.
A RJD is not just a document.
It is a filter, a compass and a confidence-building tool.
When you deliberately select roles in or out, you show up with more conviction, energy and intent — qualities that are immediately felt in interviews and difficult to teach.
Biotech Careers Insider