Recruiting in the pharmaceutical industry is like formulating a drug: you need the right active ingredient but also the right excipient.

Nicolas Grancher • 7 août 2025

When drug science inspires recruitment strategy

In the pharmaceutical industry, no one would launch a new treatment without a balanced formulation.
An active ingredient (the therapeutic agent) is essential to act on the symptom or disease. But without the right excipient, that molecule would be ineffective or even harmful: poor absorption, low tolerance, or rejection by the body…

And yet, this is exactly what many HR teams do when recruiting: they focus solely on finding the right “active ingredient” the right degree, the ideal experience, the perfect technical skills.

But they forget the “excipient”: human values, team culture fit, and the soft skills that are essential for long-term success.

The result?
Recruitments that fail despite flawless CVs.
Employees who are technically excellent… but misaligned.
Talents who leave the company before the end of their probation period.


It’s time to reformulate recruitment in pharma  with a holistic and sustainable approach.

1. The active ingredient: Technical skills the essential component


In every job description, the first requirement is clear: mastery of technical skills.


In the pharmaceutical industry, this can include:

  • Knowledge of EU and FDA regulations
  • Proficiency in tools like Veeva Vault, SAS, or LIMS
  • Management of multicenter clinical trials
  • Protocol design in pharmacovigilance
  • GMP process validation


This is the foundation.
The molecule (technical skillset) cannot be missing — otherwise, the treatment simply doesn't work.

But a drug composed only of an active ingredient is often unstable, difficult to dose, or poorly tolerated by the body. The same applies to raw technical skills in a candidate: they are not sufficient to ensure effectiveness and long-term success.


2. The excipient: Soft skills and cultural fit


An excipient is everything in a drug that doesn’t directly heal, but makes the active ingredient effective, stable, and easier to administer.


In recruitment, the excipient is made up of:

  • Emotional intelligence
  • Interpersonal communication
  • Autonomy and collaborative mindset
  • Stress management and adaptability
  • Compatibility with the team’s managerial culture


Let’s take two examples:

  • A brilliant data scientist who refuses any peer review of their work? Guaranteed tension.
  • A highly skilled project manager who rejects internal project management tools? The whole team slows down.


In a pharmaceutical product, the right excipient allows the active ingredient to deliver its full potential.
In recruitment, it’s exactly the same.


3. Why recruiters often overlook the right excipient


a. Because it’s harder to measure


Technical skills can be assessed with a test, a degree, or prior experience.
Human behavior requires qualitative evaluation, which is often more nuanced and complex.


b. Because operational pressure pushes for shortcuts


In a high-demand sector like pharma, recruiters are often pressured to “fill the role quickly.”
The risk? Focusing on a candidate who “ticks all the technical boxes” — without checking if they fit the human context.


c. Because team culture is rarely formalized


Many organizations struggle to define their actual working environment:

  • Do people work independently or in pair programming?
  • Is feedback direct or diplomatic?
  • Does the manager lead with control or with trust?


Without this clarity, it becomes very difficult to assess whether a candidate will truly fit in.

4. How to reformulate your recruitment process


Here’s a 5-step action plan to balance your HR “formulation”:


1. Map out the “excipients” of your team culture


Create an ideal behavioral profile:

  • Which soft skills are essential?
  • What level of autonomy is required?
  • What is the dominant management style?

Involve your current team to identify the behavioral traits that lead to success internally.


2. Integrate these criteria into the job description


Turn your job ad into a cultural attraction tool not just a technical checklist.
Examples:

  • “You’ll thrive here if you love learning as a team”
  • “We’re looking for someone who values feedback and transparency”
  • “Our pace is fast, but we support each other every day”

This naturally filters out incompatible candidates  while attracting those who share your values.


3. Use structured behavioral interviews


Apply the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) to get candidates talking about real-life situations.
Sample questions:

  • “Tell me about a time you handled a conflict in a project team”
  • “How did you react to a very directive manager?”
  • “What was your biggest mistake  and how did you handle it?”

This helps you assess actual behavior, not just good intentions.


4. Involve the operational team in the process


Include future colleagues in the final phase:

  • Informal coffee chat
  • Collaborative task simulation
  • Team tour

Why? Because coworkers intuitively sense whether someone will fit in. And involving them boosts engagement and shared ownership of the recruitment success.


5. Make decisions using a mixed evaluation grid


Create an assessment matrix that gives equal weight to:

  • Technical skills (active ingredient)
  • Human skills (excipient)
    Add a score for cultural fit.
    Make hiring decisions as a team, based on this shared and balanced framework.


  • Why compare recruitment to drug formulation?

    Because in both cases, success relies on a subtle balance between efficacy and tolerance. An excellent candidate can still fail if they’re not “bioavailable” in your environment. It’s a concrete metaphor that resonates with all pharma professionals.



  • Can soft skills really be measured reliably?

    Yes, provided the right methods are used:


    Structured behavioral interviews

    Personality or emotional intelligence tests

    Collaborative assessments or role-playing exercises

    The goal isn’t to find an absolute truth, but to evaluate the consistency between the candidate’s profile and the reality of the role.

  • Why involve the team in the recruitment process?

    Because the team knows the realities on the ground and can quickly spot style or attitude mismatches. They also feel more invested in the new hire’s success, which promotes integration and collective buy-in.




  • How to convince a technical manager to assess soft skills?

    By showing them the costs of a bad hire, even if technically perfect:


    Premature turnover

    Tension within the team

    Loss of productivity during onboarding

    And by providing concrete tools (scoring grids, interview guides).

  • Is this approach suitable for production or temporary positions?

    Yes. Even for temporary positions, behavioral compatibility plays a key role in team cohesion, safety, and workplace atmosphere. Ignoring it means taking an unnecessary risk.

FAQ

What candidates really feel during a pharmaceutical interview

par Nicolas Grancher • 30 janvier 2026
An interview in the pharmaceutical industry rarely leaves candidates indifferent. Even experienced professionals, accustomed to demanding environments, often walk away with a mix of relief, doubt, and unanswered questions. “Was I clear enough?” “Did I say what I was supposed to say?” “Was it too formal? Not formal enough?” “Did we have the right feeling?” These questions are universal. Yet, they are rarely voiced. In a sector as rigorous as the pharmaceutical industry, emotions tend to have little space in the official discourse, even though they are omnipresent in candidates’ real experiences. This article aims to put words to what candidates truly go through during an interview, in order to better understand it, reduce unnecessary anxiety… and regain a sense of control over the experience. Immediate tension: being assessed without losing credibility From the very first minutes, many candidates experience a familiar sensation: the tension of being evaluated. Interviews are often structured, highly framed, and sometimes very technical. The setting is established quickly: competencies, responsibilities, compliance, processes. This framework can create a paradoxical feeling: - on one hand, it is reassuring (you know what to expect), - on the other, it is pressurising (you feel observed and analysed). Many candidates experience: - fear of giving an approximate answer, - concern about not being “at the expected level,” - the feeling that every word matters. This tension is normal. It does not indicate a lack of competence or poor preparation. It reflects an environment where mistakes carry a high cost. The weight of formality: between respect and distance Another frequent feeling is formality. In the pharmaceutical sector, interviews are often: - highly structured, - minimally improvised, - conducted by several interviewers. For some candidates, this framework feels safe. For others, it creates a sense of relational distance. Many candidates internally ask themselves: - “Can I be myself?” - “Should I stay strictly factual?” - “Is it appropriate to show my motivation?” This internal questioning can lead to significant mental fatigue. Candidates constantly juggle between who they are and who they believe they should appear to be. The strange feeling of constantly having to “prove” oneself Even for experienced profiles, interviews often revive a familiar sensation: the need to justify oneself. To justify: - career choices, - transitions, - periods of doubt, - technical limitations. Some candidates feel a sense of unfairness: “My career path is coherent why do I still have to defend it?” This feeling is particularly strong in a sector that values stability, compliance, and linear progression. Atypical career paths, although increasingly common, often require more explanation. Post-interview doubt: a universal experience Once the interview is over, another phase begins: the internal debrief. In the hours or days that follow, many candidates replay the conversation mentally: - a response they could have phrased differently, - a question they misunderstood, - a moment of hesitation. This doubt is amplified by two factors common in the pharmaceutical sector: - long response times, - limited or no detailed feedback. When information is missing, interpretation takes over. And interpretation fuels self-criticism. The “feeling”: a source of hope… and anxiety The feeling plays an ambiguous role in the candidate experience. When the exchange is smooth, human, and respectful, candidates often leave feeling hopeful. When it is colder or very formal, anxiety sets in. What many candidates don’t realise is that: - a very formal interview is not necessarily a negative signal, - a good interaction does not guarantee a positive decision. From the recruiter’s perspective, “feeling” does not always mean immediate alignment. It may simply reflect a highly standardised professional framework. The fear of not having been “enough” - Clear enough. - Precise enough. - Technical enough. - Convincing enough. This fear is particularly strong among candidates who: - compare themselves to others, - are aware of market tension, - know that similar profiles are competing for the role. It can create a lingering impression of never doing enough, even when the background is solid. What candidates rarely realise… but is very real  One important point deserves to be stated clearly: there is uncertainty on the recruiter’s side as well. Recruiters and hiring managers in the pharmaceutical sector: doubt - compare, - hesitate, - arbitrate. Silence or hesitation is not always linked to a negative impression. More often, it reflects the complexity of the decision-making process. How to better navigate the interview experience While not all parameters are within a candidate’s control, some levers can help: Accept discomfort Discomfort is part of the process. Resisting it only increases tension. Focus on clarity rather than performance Being understandable is more valuable than being impressive. Remember that an interview is a two-way meeting You are also assessing the environment, the team, and the culture. Avoid overinterpreting immediately afterward Let emotions settle before drawing conclusions. Regaining agency as a candidate Putting words to what you feel helps reduce confusion. Realising that these emotions are widely shared makes it easier to put things into perspective. An interview is not a verdict on your professional worth. It is one step, in a specific context, at a specific moment in time.

Ce que les candidats ressentent vraiment lors d’un entretien pharmaceutique

par Nicolas Grancher • 30 janvier 2026
Un entretien dans l’industrie pharmaceutique laisse rarement indifférent. Même les profils expérimentés, habitués aux environnements exigeants, en ressortent souvent avec un mélange de soulagement, de doute et d’interrogations. « Est-ce que j’ai été assez clair·e ? » « Est-ce que j’ai dit ce qu’il fallait ? » « Est-ce que c’était trop formel ? Pas assez ? » « Est-ce que j’ai eu le bon feeling ? » Ces questions sont universelles. Pourtant, elles sont rarement exprimées. Parce que dans un secteur aussi rigoureux que le pharmaceutique, les émotions ont peu de place dans le discours officiel , alors qu’elles sont omniprésentes dans l’expérience réelle des candidats. Cet article propose de mettre des mots sur ce que vivent vraiment les candidats lors d’un entretien, afin de mieux comprendre, de dédramatiser… et de reprendre un peu de maîtrise sur l’expérience. Une tension immédiate : être évalué sans perdre sa crédibilité Dès les premières minutes, une sensation s’installe chez beaucoup de candidats : la tension de l’évaluation . Les entretiens sont souvent structurés, cadrés, parfois très techniques. Le décor est posé rapidement : on parle compétences, responsabilités, conformité, processus. Ce cadre peut générer un sentiment paradoxal : d’un côté, il rassure (on sait à quoi s’attendre), de l’autre, il met sous pression (on se sent observé, analysé). Beaucoup de candidats ressentent alors : la peur de dire une approximation, la crainte de ne pas être “au niveau attendu”, l’impression que chaque mot compte. Cette tension est normale. Elle ne signifie ni un manque de compétence, ni un défaut de préparation. Elle est le reflet d’un environnement où l’erreur a un coût élevé . Le poids du formalisme : entre respect et distance Un autre ressenti fréquent est celui du formalisme . Dans le secteur pharmaceutique, les entretiens sont souvent : très structurés, peu improvisés, menés par plusieurs interlocuteurs. Pour certains candidats, ce cadre est sécurisant. Pour d’autres, il crée une forme de distance relationnelle. Beaucoup se demandent alors : « Est-ce que je peux être moi-même ? » « Est-ce que je dois rester très factuel·le ? » « Est-ce que montrer mes motivations est approprié ? » Ce questionnement interne peut générer une fatigue mentale importante. Le candidat jongle en permanence entre ce qu’il est et ce qu’il pense devoir montrer . Le sentiment étrange de devoir “prouver” en permanence Même pour des profils expérimentés, l’entretien ravive souvent une sensation bien connue : devoir se justifier . Justifier : ses choix de carrière, ses transitions, ses périodes de doute, ses limites techniques. Certains candidats ressentent une forme d’injustice : « Mon parcours est cohérent, pourquoi dois-je encore le défendre ? » Ce sentiment est d’autant plus fort que ce secteur valorise la stabilité, la conformité et la progression linéaire. Les parcours atypiques, bien que de plus en plus fréquents, demandent souvent plus d’explications. Le doute après l’entretien : un classique universel Une fois l’entretien terminé, une autre phase commence : le débrief intérieur . Dans les heures ou les jours qui suivent, beaucoup de candidats repassent mentalement l’échange : une réponse qu’ils auraient pu formuler autrement, une question mal comprise, un moment de flottement. Ce doute est amplifié par deux éléments fréquents dans notre secteur: des délais de réponse longs, peu de feedback détaillé. L’absence d’information laisse place à l’interprétation. Et l’interprétation nourrit l’auto-critique. Le feeling : une source d’espoir… et d’inquiétude Le feeling occupe une place ambiguë dans le ressenti candidat. Quand l’échange est fluide, humain, respectueux, beaucoup repartent avec de l’espoir. Quand il est plus froid ou très formel, l’inquiétude s’installe. Mais ce que beaucoup ignorent, c’est que : un entretien très formel n’est pas forcément un mauvais signal, un bon échange ne garantit pas une décision positive. Le feeling, côté recruteur, ne signifie pas toujours adhésion immédiate. Il peut simplement refléter un cadre professionnel très normé . La peur de ne pas avoir été “assez” Assez clair·e. Assez précis·e. Assez technique. Assez convaincant·e. Cette peur est particulièrement forte chez les candidats qui : se comparent beaucoup, connaissent la tension du marché, savent que d’autres profils similaires sont en lice. Elle peut générer une impression diffuse de ne jamais en faire assez , même lorsque le parcours est solide. Ce que les candidats ressentent rarement… mais qui est pourtant réel Un point important à rappeler : côté recruteur aussi, il y a de l’incertitude. Les recruteurs et managers du secteur pharmaceutique : doutent comparent, hésitent arbitrent. Le silence ou l’hésitation ne sont pas toujours liés à une mauvaise impression. Ils sont souvent liés à la complexité de la décision. Comment mieux vivre l’expérience d’entretien Sans pouvoir contrôler tous les paramètres, les candidats peuvent agir sur certains leviers : 1. Accepter la part d’inconfort L’inconfort fait partie de l’exercice. Le refuser augmente la tension. 2. Se concentrer sur la clarté plutôt que la performance Être compréhensible vaut mieux qu’être impressionnant. 3. Se rappeler que l’entretien est une rencontre Vous évaluez aussi l’environnement, l’équipe, la culture. 4. Ne pas surinterpréter à chaud Laissez retomber l’émotion avant de tirer des conclusions. Reprendre du pouvoir côté candidat Mettre des mots sur ce que l’on ressent permet de sortir de la confusion. Comprendre que ces émotions sont partagées par beaucoup aide à relativiser. L’entretien n’est pas un verdict sur votre valeur. C’est une étape, dans un contexte donné, à un moment donné.