Hiring in biotech when it's still early: the decisions that shape everything later

The most consequential hiring decisions a biotech makes are the first ones. Not because the individuals are irreplaceable — they often are, but that's true at any stage — but because early hires set the cultural and scientific norms that every subsequent hire inherits.

We've placed scientists and leaders into more than 40 early-stage UK biotechs since 2012. The pattern when it goes well is consistent.

Hire for scientific rigour over enthusiasm

Early-stage biotech attracts scientists who are excited by the mission — which is appropriate and important. But mission-enthusiasm is not the same as the quiet rigour that catches experimental errors at 11pm before a board presentation, or that says "I don't think this data supports that conclusion" when the conclusion would be very convenient.

The scientists who make the most difference in early biotech are typically the ones who are most intellectually honest, not the most enthusiastic. Those two things can coexist — but when they're in tension, rigour wins every time in our placement data.

Pay at the market rate from day one

Early-stage biotech companies sometimes try to pay below market on the assumption that mission and equity compensate. The data does not support this. Scientists who accept below-market compensation for the equity are often the ones who leave when the first cliff approaches — they've done their own calculation and it no longer favours staying.

Pay market rate. Use the equity as genuine upside, not as a substitute for competitive salary.

The founding scientist hire is a different brief

The first two or three scientists you hire are not employees in the conventional sense — they are co-builders of the scientific platform. The brief for those hires should reflect that. The question is not "can this person do the job" but "can this person build the thing we need, in a way that compounds over time, with founders they'll be spending 60 hours a week with."

That's a different brief and it needs to be run differently. We've found that spending two to three times longer on the briefing conversation for founding scientist hires — including honest conversations about the founders' working style and expectations — produces dramatically better outcomes than treating it as a conventional search.

Don't hire ahead of the science

The most common early-biotech hiring mistake we see: hiring a Head of Manufacturing or Head of Clinical at Series A when the science is still pre-IND. The logic is usually "we want to get ahead of it" — which is sound in principle but often results in an expensive, senior person who spends 18 months with insufficient work and leaves before they're needed.

Hire just-in-time for the stage you're at. Over-hiring ahead of scientific de-risking is one of the fastest ways to burn runway and lose good people.

If you're at an early stage and thinking through your first scientific hires, we'd be happy to share what we've seen across the 40+ early-stage biotechs we've worked with. Get in touch.