Pfizer Compensation.......in San Diego

[cdpiano27]

To address the other poster regarding how to get into being a statistician in pharmaceutical industry, you would need to complete a PhD in statistics or biostatistics. To get in, you need two semesters of real analysis (which is proof-based calculus), linear algebra (at least one semester, preferably two), the calculus I-III, two semesters of calculus based probability. These are usually the minimum math requirements to get in, and you need to try to get almost all A's in those classes (with real analysis and calculus based probability looked at most closely). Then almost all schools require the general GRE (but math section is high school and more about making few mistakes); verbal is challenging but as long as you don't do too bad you are OK. Only two schools require the math subject GRE test (the PhD statistics programmes in Stanford and the University of Chicago). The PhD is usually a five year programme and tuition is waived almost all of the time with a living expense stipend. If you stop at masters degree in statistics, you can get a job as a SAS (or statistical) programmer. This does not initially pay that well but it can approach the pay package of a statistician with experience; however, career trajectory is slower. However, SAS programming is very different from software engineering. SAS is not an algorithmic language and is simply about knowing procedures and syntax, and how to write SAS macros, and manipulate and merge datasets (which can be quite tricky), in addition to knowing CDISC regulations for NDA submission to FDA. For someone who really wants to be a software engineer and likes the algorithmic aspects of coding, I would not recommend being a SAS programmer. For somone who is still an undergrad, there are six schools that give research programmes. Getting into one of these and completing the program would help one's graduate application, especially if you applied to the school where you completed the programme. Summer Institute in Biostatistics and Data Science | NHLBI, NIH. Finally with PhD in statistics you could also go to the tech industry as a data scientist, but this requires a different type of PhD thesis in machine learning and also learning SQL thoroughly to pass the interviews. And then of course there are the academia options.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[wazoodog]

Multiple, including regulatory, clinical development, med info, other areas within medical affairs, medical writing, clinical operations, business development, commercial, clinical pharmacology, etc. In my experience, it's not that uncommon at all. However, it is company specific. Do keep in mind that the higher one goes, there are generally fewer positions anyway though, regardless of ones academic credentials, PharmD or otherwise. There are also significant power dynamics and market forces that would take a lot to discuss here that affect more senior opportunities in some companies. That said, within my network, several of us have advanced beyond director, so I know it's possible.

Agree. It's not uncommon for PharmDs to get to Sr. Director or Executive Director. I personally know at least a handful of classmates and current / former colleagues who are at the SVP and President C-Suite levels after about 15-18 years of experience. I can only guess their base is at least 330-380k - but it's really the amount of equity they receive that makes the overall compensation enormously lucrative.

 

[TranslationalRPh]

Agree. It's not uncommon for PharmDs to get to Sr. Director or Executive Director. I personally know at least a handful of classmates and current / former colleagues who are at the SVP and President C-Suite levels after about 15-18 years of experience. I can only guess their base is at least 330-380k - but it's really the amount of equity they receive that makes the overall compensation enormously lucrative.

Bingo. I recently made Senior Director and get several opportunities to interview for VP (I refuse because I am not ready). Like you said, it is generally a function of years of experience, quality of your experience, and willingness to move into new opportunities that expand your value more than anything else.

Equity and bonus are the name of the game as you point out. Both increase dramatically as title increases. One can easily get into a decision where you time major life decisions such as when you buy a car or a house, or leave a company based on when you will receive your bonus and equity awards. I have several colleagues decide that their partners no longer need to work outside of the house based on long-term incentives.

Sometimes things can go up and down so quickly with stock based compensation. I have been in a situation where I insisted on more equity to make a move only to have it go up several fold in a year. I have also had it drop 40% in a year wiping out prior gains.

Additionally, functional area matters somewhat in terms of base salary. I know the cap for Senior Director for my old function at most companies with standard compensation models would be about $40-60K lower than my current functional area in my geographic region due to higher perceived value. Moreover, if I had a MD with direct patient care experience with the same title, compensation models would easily support up to another $50k bump in base. Also, I would have started at a much higher title to begin with.

BTW, for your friends in the C-suite, if they happen to be in publicly traded companies, you can likely see what their compensation is if you are really curious.

 

[wazoodog]

BTW, for your friends in the C-suite, if they happen to be in publicly traded companies, you can likely see what their compensation is if you are really curious.

I think only the big "true" C-Suites like COO and CFO are listed which 2 people I know are. The others are Chief ___ Officer but aren't the big 4. But yeah, the comp packages are at least 1M. I think more pharmacists would make the jump to industry if it was more widely known 1) how lucrative it can be; and 2) that lacking a fellowship/residency experience is by no means a closed door.

 

[TranslationalRPh]

I think only the big "true" C-Suites like COO and CFO are listed which 2 people I know are. The others are Chief ___ Officer but aren't the big 4. But yeah, the comp packages are at least 1M. I think more pharmacists would make the jump to industry if it was more widely known 1) how lucrative it can be; and 2) that lacking a fellowship/residency experience is by no means a closed door.

Honestly, I also think it's a matter of whether someone still really wants to be a pharmacist. Obviously, in the industry, you can leverage your knowledge but you are not practicing in a traditional setting. Also, I think there is sometimes less money guaranteed up front, and that matters to some, particularly if they have high expenses. Also, most industry pharmacists that I know have undergone some additional training, whether residency, fellowship, graduate school, boot camp, certificates etc. I know it's not required, especially if you are willing to go truly entry level but that can mean potentially serious wage suppression. Also, while not required, most industry pharmacists I know, particularly those with rapidly rising careers (excluding Medical Affairs), reside near a biotech hubs.

However, I totally agree with you. While the compensation is typically not as good as tech for many, there are tremendous opportunities in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

[letsquitpharm]

Honestly, I also think it's a matter of whether someone still really wants to be a pharmacist. Obviously, in the industry, you can leverage your knowledge but you are not practicing in a traditional setting. Also, I think there is sometimes less money guaranteed up front, and that matters to some, particularly if they have high expenses. Also, most industry pharmacists that I know have undergone some additional training, whether residency, fellowship, graduate school, boot camp, certificates etc. I know it's not required, especially if you are willing to go truly entry level but that can mean potentially serious wage suppression. Also, while not required, most industry pharmacists I know, particularly those with rapidly rising careers (excluding Medical Affairs), reside near a biotech hubs.

However, I totally agree with you. While the compensation is typically not as good as tech for many, there are tremendous opportunities in the pharmaceutical industry.

Totally agree. When I was job hunting for an entry-level position early last year, I was borderline depressed... It was truly tough for recent grads. Since nowhere was hiring during the lockdown, I had to accept a lowball offer, to at least get my feet in the door.

That being said, I think there's a tremendous disconnect between industry demand and what pharmacy school teaches. Students really had to go above and beyond to look for external training, and in a lot of occasions, difficult to get started. And even if they did all homework, they still had to compete with PhDs for opportunities.

In my current place, all scientists can efficiently code in R or Python, even if their background training were in pharmaceutical science or chemical engineering. I can still remember how my pk course was taught in pharmacy school: calculate terminal elimination on a piece of semilog scale paper......