Monday, November 3, 2014

More soon, but first...

This is a screenshot from last Thursday's ACS Webinars on "the future of medicinal chemistry" with speakers from both Pfizer and Gilead.

Isn't it time that industrial expectations of incoming Ph.D. medicinal chemists be laid out in a more systematic or quantitative fashion? I would find a single sentence such as "95% of our recent Ph.D. chemist hires have published one JACS article and was scored highly for their job talk" much more informative.

More later. 


  1. What's that loud buzzing noise?

  2. Uh, isn't this kinda like coming up with skill sets for future coal miners or future steel mill workers?

  3. Well, this seems to tell you some things, but really not what gets you the job (its who you know/pedigree, but that is just to politically incorrect to say).

    You really have to understand that there is a difference between what people say they want and what they really want. It does not pay to be autistic in this society.

  4. People from Monster wrote it.

  5. Focused expertise = Layoff-friendly bait
    Comfortable with change as opposed to status quo = Be cool when you get to train your replacement

  6. At my (insert Megapharma here) job, I'd wager that we hire just as many interdisciplinary scientists - chem bio, organocatalysis, geneticists, DNA folks, etc - as we do well-pedigreed total synthesis jocks. Perhaps even more.

  7. Yeah, that list is not really the skill set that will get you the job, I'm sure. It's more like the bare minimum assumed skill set before they consider in what way you are more suitable for the position than everyone else who also has this bare minimum skill set - which I'd say would be practically everyone who applies - it's all pretty vague and meaningless.

  8. "Maintain strong synthetic knowledge -- focused expertise"

    "Broad scientific background"

    So a focused generalist.

    And the hunt for the purple squirrel continues...

  9. Serious question: does anybody find the ACS webinars useful? The technical ones are so narrowly focused that they have limited utility. These job related ones are devoid of any actual content, as other commenters have noted. Several months ago Bruce Roth basically admitted that he doesn't look at people that don't come from Ivy League schools or powerhouse synthetic PIs (usually one and the same anyways). As offensive as that was to hear, several people noted that at least he was honest and gave real advice (ie; go to an expensive private school and you'll get to work for a big company).

    I'm surprised nobody commented on the fact that one of the presenters for this talk was the VP of External Research Solutions (ie: my job is to outsource yours).