Recrutement pharmaceutique : pourquoi il faut structurer l’évaluation des agences

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.