Make Access Great Again? Why life sciences hiring is stuck in limbo

The phrase ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA) serves as a prominent political slogan, shaping policy discussions and influencing sectors such as life sciences. While it largely focuses on US domestic industry and drug pricing, its broader impact on global confidence and regulatory direction remains significant and is now amplified by recent developments like the sweeping Big Beautiful Bill. Shifting focus from this political context to the current landscape of market access reveals a sector grappling with a persistent paradox: despite active development pipelines, growing payer scrutiny, and increasing demand for real-world evidence (RWE), recruitment within market access, HEOR and RWE remains frustratingly sluggish. On paper, the sector is vibrant, yet in practice, vacancies remain open, recruitment processes drag on, and candidates disengage. This article explores why hiring has stalled and what changes might help to move it forward.

Strong demand for talent, but slower hiring processes

At Carrot Recruitment, we continue to see genuine demand for professionals in pricing, reimbursement, evidence generation and RWE analytics; however, this demand does not always translate to efficient recruitment processes and successful hires. The specialist talent required for these vacancies does exist (albeit in fewer numbers), but more often than not the hiring processes lack momentum and hiring managers appear too stretched to give recruitment the attention it needs.

The paradox is striking. Our clients need extra resource urgently, but they lack time to interview, give feedback, or make timely decisions. As you’d expect, strong candidates can then disengage quickly when momentum is lost, particularly when they have multiple other opportunities to consider.

A skills shortfall, or a misalignment of expectations?

There is mounting evidence of both a shortage of talent and a mismatch between hiring expectations and available skills. Many roles require strong disease-area knowledge, modeling expertise, policy insight, stakeholder management, and sometimes advanced analytics—all in one person. The unicorn! These individuals do exist, but they are not abundant.

Randstad reports that 83% of life sciences employers struggle to find the right talent, and 75% expect this challenge to grow. CSG Talent estimates a 35% workforce shortfall in the US alone, with more than 87,000 vacancies across life sciences. RWE and data-focused roles are cited among the hardest to fill.

Even when talent exists, employers are often inflexible, pursuing exact-fit candidates rather than hiring for potential and investing in upskilling.

Political uncertainty slowing global confidence

The political climate, particularly the 'America First' stance championed by the MAGA movement in the US, adds to the inertia. Cuts proposed under the Trump Administration’s policy agenda include a 37% reduction to National Cancer Institute funding, alongside job losses across NIH and FDA. Looking ahead, the restructuring of US health agencies under Project 2025 poses further risk to 20,000 federal science roles.

These developments have raised alarm bells among scientists, with the Bethesda Declaration warning against politically motivated interference in research funding. More broadly, some analysts believe the US is at risk of losing its global leadership position in biomedical innovation.

This uncertainty affects how global organizations operate. If US research, regulatory and funding infrastructure is unstable, investment slows, and, with it, hiring plans in the UK and Europe become more cautious.

The Big Beautiful Bill: a catalyst for change in life sciences?

Donald Trump’s recently signed Big Beautiful Bill (BBB), a sweeping tax and spending package, adds another layer of uncertainty for the life sciences sector. While its full impact is still unfolding, early indications suggest significant repercussions for research institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and MedTech manufacturers—both in the US and internationally.

The bill proposes deep cuts to federal science funding: 40% for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), 44% for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and 55% for the National Science Foundation (NSF). These reductions could slow clinical trials, rare disease research, and public health programs that impact not only US research but also global partnerships and the organizations that rely on them.

For pharmaceutical and biotech firms, the reintroduction of a Most Favoured Nation (MFN) pricing model and proposed tariffs on imported medical devices and active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) create further complexity. These measures could affect profitability, supply chains, and long-term investment decisions.

Although legal challenges and political negotiations may delay or soften implementation, the uncertainty alone is enough to influence hiring confidence and strategic workforce planning across the UK, Europe, and beyond.

The process bottleneck

Another barrier is procedural. Managers tasked with leading hiring are often also juggling business development, delivery, and internal initiatives. Recruitment slips down the list. Interviews are postponed, decisions delayed, and promising candidates fall through the cracks.

None of this is deliberate. Most hiring managers are simply time poor. But in a candidate-driven market, such inconsistency signals disorganization, and competitors that move quickly usually win the hire. In this climate of shifting policies and stretched resources, organizations must rethink how they approach recruitment by starting with how they leverage specialist support to keep critical roles moving. Without them, the process bottlenecks that already plague recruitment efforts will only deepen.

The value of specialized recruitment

Where internal talent acquisition (TA) functions are absent or overstretched, the answer is to engage a specialist recruitment partner. But that partnership must be meaningful.

Using multiple agencies often leads to duplicated candidates, shallow outreach, and reduced commitment from all sides. Conversely, partnering exclusively with a trusted specialist allows for deep market insight, candidate engagement, and proper headhunting.

It also frees up time – something many teams cannot spare.

Five practical shifts to regain hiring momentum

While the root causes are multifaceted, ranging from evolving political landscapes to internal company processes, solutions are within reach. To break free from this hiring stagnation and unlock the full potential of these critical functions, organizations must adopt a proactive and strategic approach, including:

1. Prioritize recruitment as a core strategic function, not just a support task. This means allocating appropriate resources, leadership attention, and integrating hiring needs directly into business planning.
2. Broaden candidate specifications to allow for growth and training. Strict, often unrealistic, criteria limit the talent pool. Companies should consider candidates with strong foundational skills and a willingness to learn, investing in their development.
3. Allocate time properly to interview, feedback, and for candidate management. Protracted processes and poor communication are major deterrents. Streamlined, efficient, and respectful engagement with candidates is paramount.
4. Engage one trusted recruitment partner, especially if internal resources are thin. When internal TA functions are absent or overstretched, a specialized external partner can provide invaluable expertise, market insights, and dedicated capacity.
5. Plan for volatility, particularly where political change may impact funding or regulation. The life sciences sector is inherently sensitive to policy shifts, as evidenced by past discussions around drug pricing and market access under various administrations. Proactive scenario planning for talent needs in response to potential political or economic shifts (like those seen with 'MAGA' policies) can mitigate future hiring disruptions.

Final thought

There is no single cause of the current hiring gridlock. It stems from political uncertainty, internal process strain, unrealistic expectations, and a reactive hiring culture. The good news is that each of these can be addressed with discipline, clear thinking, and the right support.

The talent exists. The challenge is not finding it; it is creating the conditions for it to land.

About the author

Martin Anderson
Founding Director, Carrot Recruitment

Martin formed Carrot Recruitment in 2006 having spent nine years in life science consulting and industry positions, initially with the Adelphi Group in Patient Outcomes and Business Intelligence, and then in commercial roles at Merck Serono. He co-leads the business strategically whilst remaining very active at a senior level within the market access, HEOR & RWE space, partnering with clients exclusively to source exceptional talent. Martin also consults with businesses around their talent brand and recruitment processes, offering reviews and strategic direction to help them differentiate their proposition to the talent market.

[email protected]; +44 (0)7786 024 142.

Sponsorship for this Guest Column was provided by Carrot Recruitment.