Why VP BD and CCO Searches in Pharma Services Keep Falling Short

Most organisations hiring for VP Business Development, Chief Commercial Officer, or Head of Pricing in pharma services will tell you the same thing once the search is over: the shortlist wasn't what they expected. Either the candidates lacked sufficient sector depth, or the people with the right background couldn't demonstrate the commercial sophistication the role actually required. When this happens repeatedly, the instinct is to blame the market. Usually, the problem sits closer to home.

The senior commercial talent pharma services organisations need does exist. The disconnect is almost always in how the search is structured; who's being looked for, where, and against what criteria.

‍

Why VP BD and CCO Searches in Pharma Services Keep Falling Short

The brief for a senior commercial hire in a CDMO or CRO typically starts in a reasonable place: sector experience, a track record of closing complex deals, relationships with the right accounts, and some version of "strategic mindset." The problem is that these criteria tend to get applied rigidly, in ways that systematically exclude strong candidates.

Sector experience is the clearest example. Many organisations default to requiring direct experience on the same side of the pharma services divide. CDMO hiring exclusively from CDMOs, CROs doing the same. The rationale is understandable: services models differ, client relationships differ, and there's a real cost to bringing someone up to speed. But it conflates sector familiarity with commercial capability, and those are not the same thing.

Strong commercial leaders who have operated in CROs bring something genuinely valuable to CDMO environments: they understand how sponsors think, how decisions get made on the other side of the relationship, and how to navigate the scientific and regulatory stakeholders who are often the real decision-makers in a partnership conversation. That perspective is worth something. The brief rarely accounts for it.

The same logic applies in reverse. A commercial leader who has built BD functions in a CDMO understands manufacturing constraints, capacity dynamics, and the specific pressures of a services business operating on margin. Whether they've done that for a biologics CDMO or a formulation-focused one matters far less than whether they can manage a long sales cycle and close a deal that holds up operationally.

‍

Pricing: The Capability That's Almost Never in the Brief

If there's one area where senior commercial searches in pharma services consistently underinvest, it's pricing. Not because organisations don't care about margin, they care enormously, but because pricing capability rarely makes it into the brief as an explicit requirement, and almost never appears as a structured assessment criterion.

This is a real gap. The commercial leaders who create the most value in pharma services aren't just the ones who win business; they're the ones who win it at the right number. Managing the tension between competitive pricing and margin integrity, knowing when to walk away from a deal, and having the credibility to hold a price position with both the client and the internal leadership team, these are hard-won skills, and they're unevenly distributed across the candidate pool.

Assessing for pricing capability isn't complicated, but it requires intention. Ask candidates to walk through how they've structured pricing on a complex multi-year partnership. Ask what they've done when a client pushed back hard on rate. Ask how they've handled internal pressure to discount in order to hit a quarterly target. The answers will tell you a great deal more than a question about "commercial acumen" ever will.

‍

Where Sector Knowledge Matters and Where It Doesn't

There's a version of this conversation where someone argues that sector experience doesn't matter at all. That a strong commercial leader can adapt to any services environment. That's too far. Scientific credibility matters in pharma services. The ability to hold a conversation with a CMC lead or a clinical operations director, to understand enough about what's being sold to ask the right questions and earn the trust of a technically sophisticated buyer, now that's a genuine threshold capability.

The line is between familiarity and depth. A VP BD doesn't need to have spent years in process development; they need to understand enough to be taken seriously by the people who have. That's a lower bar than most briefs imply, and it opens the candidate pool considerably.

What should remain non-negotiable is the ability to manage complex, multi-stakeholder sales cycles over extended timelines. VP BD CDMO recruitment searches that prioritise sector credentials over this capability tend to land candidates who know the industry but can't close. Deals in this space rarely happen quickly, rarely involve a single decision-maker, and almost always require sustained relationship management across scientific, procurement, and executive stakeholders simultaneously. That skill doesn't come automatically with a CV full of the right company names.

‍

The Best Candidates Aren't Looking and Your Process Probably Won't Reach Them

Senior commercial leaders in pharma services who are genuinely performing are rarely on the job boards. The ones who are tend to be between roles through circumstances that warrant scrutiny, or they've been in a pattern of short tenures that should prompt questions. This is obvious at one level, but the implications for hiring process are significant and often ignored.

If your search is relying on applications to find a shortlist, you're seeing a self-selected pool that systematically underrepresents the best candidates. A passive search (one that proactively maps the market and approaches people who aren't actively looking) will consistently produce a different quality of shortlist. It requires more time and more effort upfront, and it requires a process that can engage a senior leader who has options and isn't in a hurry.

This is also where brief specificity becomes a double-edged issue. A highly specific brief can sharpen a search considerably, particularly when it's built around genuine capability requirements rather than CV pattern matching. But specificity that amounts to a narrow list of approved previous employers will do the opposite: it will exclude precisely the candidates who bring a different and potentially more valuable perspective. For leadership searches of this kind, working with a specialist partner who has genuine market coverage across CDMO and wider pharma services makes a material difference to who ends up on the shortlist.

The brief shapes who applies and more importantly, who gets approached. Getting it right means being honest about what the role actually requires, separating the essential from the merely familiar, and building an assessment process that can distinguish commercial leadership from commercial experience. Those aren't the same thing either, and the organisations that understand the difference tend to make better hires.

If senior commercial searches are a recurring challenge, Vector Search operates specifically in this space, running leadership searches across pharma services with a focus on passive market mapping and capability-led assessment.