In-house Consumer Goods vs. Big Pharma Forum

[Anonymous User]

Assuming similar compensation packages, between big pharma (e.g. Pfizer/Abbott/Merck/GSK) or consumer goods (e.g. Unilever/P & G/Colgate), which path has the better long-term career outlook in terms of advancement, job stability etc? A friend of mine is currently looking to go in-house and is having a tough time deciding.

[lurkinassociate]

Assume pharma pays more (at least a Regeneron would pay more than a P&G). Your “friend” has to have a preference in which industry they practice in. Guessing it’s easier to jump to other in-house gigs out of industry from consumer goods than pharma.

[Anonymous User]

Assume pharma pays more (at least a Regeneron would pay more than a P&G). Your “friend” has to have a preference in which industry they practice in. Guessing it’s easier to jump to other in-house gigs out of industry from consumer goods than pharma.

This is mostly what my "friend" has been considering, to be honest. Is it so very difficult to leave pharma if necessary?

[Anonymous User]

If this person is a litigator, there is a huge difference in the type of cases he/she will be managing (tons of patent/products liability for pharma; tons of class action defense for CPG). Not sure if there is a substantive difference for transactional lawyers.

[Anonymous User]

As someone who works at one of the companies listed in the OP, happy to answer any specific Qs on the industry!

[Anonymous User]

If this person is a litigator, there is a huge difference in the type of cases he/she will be managing (tons of patent/products liability for pharma; tons of class action defense for CPG). Not sure if there is a substantive difference for transactional lawyers.

It would be for transactional law (think Securities or M&A). I can't quite see how doing either in big pharma would lock my "friend" out of job opportunities in other industries, but I've been told it can happen. However, from what I gather, the core practice is the same in the two industries, with specialized knowledge of rules that wouldn't be present in consumer being required for pharma.

Which brings me to another question: would deals be even just a bit easier in consumer?

[Anonymous User]

As someone who works at one of the companies listed in the OP, happy to answer any specific Qs on the industry!

Thanks! I'll take you up on that. Here goes:

1. Are you in pharma or consumer?
2. Have you been happy with your move from big law, and why?
3. Do you see yourself getting solid opportunities for advancement in your current company? One thing I've been told is that in well-established companies such as the ones mentioned, it's hard to get promoted unless someone relocates or dies.

[Anonymous User]

As someone who works at one of the companies listed in the OP, happy to answer any specific Qs on the industry!

Thanks! I'll take you up on that. Here goes:

1. Are you in pharma or consumer?
2. Have you been happy with your move from big law, and why?
3. Do you see yourself getting solid opportunities for advancement in your current company? One thing I've been told is that in well-established companies such as the ones mentioned, it's hard to get promoted unless someone relocates or dies.

1. Pharma -- CPG to pharma or vice versa seems to be pretty common. Both are regulated industries so I don't think doing one now forecloses the other in the future.

2. Yes. The reason: WLB.

3. There's definitely some truth to that. BigLaw, for all its cons, has the solid pro of "the next 9-10 years of your life are predefined and laid out when you start on day 1." In-house progression definitely depends on others around you moving on and/or moving up. Alternatively, as someone mentioned in another thread, moving up the career ladder might depend on relocating to a different company. If you're geographically mobile, I've seen faster career progression in those in-house colleagues vs those who stay put in one city (that only has one employer, for instance).

Happy to answer any other questions!

[Anonymous User]

As someone who works at one of the companies listed in the OP, happy to answer any specific Qs on the industry!

Thanks! I'll take you up on that. Here goes:

1. Are you in pharma or consumer?
2. Have you been happy with your move from big law, and why?
3. Do you see yourself getting solid opportunities for advancement in your current company? One thing I've been told is that in well-established companies such as the ones mentioned, it's hard to get promoted unless someone relocates or dies.

1. Pharma -- CPG to pharma or vice versa seems to be pretty common. Both are regulated industries so I don't think doing one now forecloses the other in the future.

2. Yes. The reason: WLB.

3. There's definitely some truth to that. BigLaw, for all its cons, has the solid pro of "the next 9-10 years of your life are predefined and laid out when you start on day 1." In-house progression definitely depends on others around you moving on and/or moving up. Alternatively, as someone mentioned in another thread, moving up the career ladder might depend on relocating to a different company. If you're geographically mobile, I've seen faster career progression in those in-house colleagues vs those who stay put in one city (that only has one employer, for instance).

Happy to answer any other questions!

Thanks so much!