<img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://inews.gtimg.com/om_bt/OLNUQgud82Xay0I70nvnt7uELKKV6dT8L7FdpQu0_VWecAA/1000?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="Image" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://inews.gtimg.com/om_bt/OLNUQgud82Xay0I70nvnt7uELKKV6dT8L7FdpQu0_VWecAA/1000"/>
1.997 million people, this is the average number of employees in China's pharmaceutical manufacturing industry in the last month of 2025, according to data from the National Bureau of Statistics.
In 2016, this figure peaked at 2.36 million. The historical context it carries is:
In 2015, China initiated drug review reforms, leading to a surge of capital inflow, returnees coming back, and thousands of biotech companies being established. Traditional pharmaceutical companies responded to policy calls by shifting from &#34;generic&#34; to &#34;innovation,&#34; pushing China's biopharmaceutical industry into a golden era.
Over the past decade, amid the efforts of many local star pharmaceutical companies transitioning from following to running alongside, and then to leading in a small way, China's pharmaceutical manufacturing industry has quietly reached the next crossroads:
By 2025, the number of new drug applications classified as Category 1 in China reached 103 varieties, a year-on-year increase of 25.6%; during the same period, 86 varieties were approved for marketing, a significant year-on-year increase of nearly 70%. China's share of global new drug pipelines surged from 4% in 2016 to 30%;
By 2025, the number of licensing transactions for Chinese innovative drugs exceeded 150, with a total amount exceeding $130 billion, with companies like HengRui and Innovent having orders in the billions;
By 2025, the global sales of the cell therapy drug developed by Legend Biotech, Carvykti, surpassed $1 billion, becoming another &#34;billion-dollar molecule&#34; made in China after BeiGene's Brukinsa.
On the other hand, under the multiple pressures of a tightening global situation, shortened innovation cycles, and dynamic adjustments in market supply and demand, the industry's development inevitably touches its own bottlenecks.
The decline in the average number of employees is a visible sign. This is accompanied by the replacement of old and new companies, upgrades, and also signifies a reduction in the tolerance for personnel.
For example, jumping to a startup for a high salary used to be a hallmark of innovation, but now it may be labeled as &#34;unstable&#34;; working at major companies like WuXi AppTec and Kelun used to be a halo, but now it may very well be a nightmare of being a cog in the machine... There are many such interesting narrative shifts.
Recently, &#34;Health News Consulting&#34; interviewed a senior pharmaceutical headhunter. Over the past decade, he has searched for targets for numerous multinational and local pharmaceutical companies globally, witnessing the choices and outcomes of practitioners of different ages, identities, and backgrounds.
This &#34;human&#34; centered perspective provides us with a new coordinate system to observe the trends in China's innovative drug industry.
We have organized the interview content into 30 key points for readers.
Traditional pharmaceutical companies raise job thresholds
<ol>
<li>
The pharmaceutical talent market is experiencing a stark contrast; although positions are continuously being released, most are not new but rather replacements. New startups and new businesses from mature companies are few, with many people leaving and few being hired, making the market demand-driven
</li>
<li>
Practitioners in the generic drug industry have it the hardest. In recent years, many traditional pharmaceutical companies have reduced their generic drug teams from hundreds of people to just a few dozen, leading to a significant decrease in overall talent demand for generics. Over the past two years, many professionals in the generic drug field have been unemployed at home, and even if they receive offers, they generally have to accept a salary reduction of over 30%.
</li>
<li>
For those who have left, unless an entire business line has been cut, it is difficult to find a satisfactory new employer. In the eyes of companies, those who are eliminated tend to have some issues, whether it be age, lack of ability, poor reputation, insufficient drive, or high salary demands... The market always tends toward efficiency and optimal benefits, which is ruthless, cruel, and realistic.
</li>
<li>
Companies with demand have recruitment conditions that can be described as strict; a position for frying French fries will definitely not require experience in frying corn. The talent profile provided by companies is specific and precise, with educational background, relevant experience, and stability being indispensable. The flip side of the difficulty in finding talent is that once a suitable candidate is found, the offer is made very decisively.
</li>
<li>
In traditional pharmaceutical companies, having high emotional intelligence, being able to interact with different departments, effectively utilizing resources, and coordinating resources remains one of the strong competitive advantages.
</li>
<li>
Currently, the ideal scientist profile favored by traditional pharmaceutical companies and biotech firms is: under 50 years old, with a bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degree from a 985 university, preferably having studied for their doctorate in the United States, and having worked in a U.S. pharmaceutical company for 10-15 years, followed by 2-3 years in a major domestic pharmaceutical company. Companies generally offer an annual salary of 2-3 million yuan.
</li>
<li>
The path of returning to China for &#34;retirement&#34; is no longer viable; the market has set an age warning line at 55 years and above. Scientists over 55 years old returning to work in traditional pharmaceutical companies find that their leaders are only in their 40s, leading to a mismatch in age hierarchy.
</li>
<li>
In R&amp;D, local PhDs under 40 years old offer the best cost-performance ratio. With three to five years of experience, they are already considered usable by companies. Under this premise, the annual salary for a PhD who stays in the U.S. is $200,000, approximately 1.5 million yuan. A local PhD with the same work experience has an annual salary of at most 400,000 to 500,000 yuan.
</li>
<li>
In the past, many domestic pharmaceutical companies had not engaged in innovative drugs, and any overseas returnee could bring back experience. Now, companies have figured out what kind of people can deliver results, and the allure of overseas returnees has gradually diminished.
</li>
<li>
Around 2018, there was a high willingness among overseas scientists to return to China, but the situation has changed. During the pandemic, prices soared in the U.S., leading to salary increases for R&amp;D personnel in pharmaceutical companies, making it difficult for domestic companies to offer competitive salaries, let alone premium ones. Now, the domestic talent pool has been filled, and the halo of overseas returnee scientists has faded, making it unprofitable to return to China as expendable resources.
</li>
</ol>
Employees in Big Companies, Helpless Workers
<ol>
<li>
With the boom over, BeiGene, Innovent, and Kintor have emerged, but other biotech companies are no longer dreaming of biopharma. After the capital market warms up, the money that companies have worked hard to raise will first be used for clinical trials, then to sell seedlings for cash. Beyond that, building production lines and cultivating sales teams is too difficult; without new business, there are no new positions.
</li>
<li>
Those who entered biotech a few years ago, upon discovering the problems in startup companies, chose to jump to the next startup as a solution. The consequence of changing jobs every year is a tarnished resume, making it difficult to gain favor from traditional pharmaceutical companies
</li>
<li>
The industry threshold for research and development is high, but it is not a guaranteed job. In the past few years, there have been large-scale adjustments in early pharmaceutical research and CMC early research.
</li>
<li>
No matter which CXO company you are in, if you can't climb up and get older, you will become a victim. During the team adjustments in the past two years, the leading companies that made a fortune tried every means to squeeze people out by using compliance issues, clock-in records, interview records, etc., to avoid giving N+1.
</li>
<li>
High-paid &#34;screws&#34; are, to some extent, non-recyclable consumables. The essence of high salaries for top CXOs is that the company spends the money of four people to hire three people to do the work of five people. Earning such quick money comes at a cost; after a few years, when the body and energy can't keep up, being replaced at that time is not much better than the 35-year crisis in the internet industry.
</li>
<li>
Whether it is a domestic or foreign enterprise, only by moving to management can salaries rise. Relatively speaking, the ceiling is higher in foreign enterprises. A senior engineer in a domestic company, without managing people, after 20 years, may have a salary cap of two to three hundred thousand, while in a foreign enterprise, the ceiling can reach four to five hundred thousand. If you take the management route, reaching the manager level at 30 can lead to a salary of six to seven hundred thousand.
</li>
<li>
Any well-known pharmaceutical company, whether in research, clinical, or sales, has fast-running business behind it, which definitely involves workers who work overtime, with 8 or 9 PM off work being the norm.
</li>
<li>
Employees from large companies like WuXi AppTec find it difficult to find suitable companies to take over after leaving. For example, a director with many years of experience from a large company, earning a salary of seven to eight hundred thousand, is only responsible for &#34;cost accounting.&#34; What kind of job can such a person find after leaving? Even if they lower their salary to join a small company, the small company may have subtle worries: &#34;He once earned such a high salary; what if he runs away when he encounters a suitable opportunity?&#34;
</li>
<li>
Flat management is good for companies, but employees will suffer. Suppose a big director leads a team of twenty to thirty people; in a flat model, there are project groups within the team but no direct management authority. After five, eight, or ten years, those twenty to thirty people who can't get promoted will be adjusted, and outside there will be younger competitors. How will they find work?
</li>
<li>
Companies pursuing stable growth tend to atomize and screw down employees to eliminate dependence on individuals and reduce risks. If one screw leaves, the person next to them will immediately take over, and if they can't, another can be hired at a very low cost.
</li>
</ol>
Is spring far away?
<ol>
<li>
It seems that every company has a star VC/PE + scientist, but companies driven by different motivations have different styles: in capital-led companies, scientists mainly serve to endorse; in scientist-led companies, the capital's voice is somewhat lower.
</li>
<li>
Startups led by scientists offer relatively low salaries; founders can maintain the stability of strategic layout, but if they want to control the purse strings, they will treat people as research laborers, with low salaries and busy schedules, which increases the likelihood of achieving results.
</li>
<li>
Companies incubated by capital offer much higher salaries than scientist-led startups, but the risk is that management and management teams that do not align with shareholder philosophies can be replaced at any time, making it difficult to maintain strategic continuity
</li>
<li>
Emerging fields have high salary levels, but fewer positions and even fewer talents. For example, in AI pharmaceuticals, leaders generally earn between 1 to 2 million, while a PhD with three years of work experience can earn around 700,000 to 800,000, and fresh PhD graduates earn about 400,000. Traditional pharmaceutical companies typically offer a maximum of around 300,000.
</li>
<li>
Not all PhDs are the same. Traditional pharmaceutical companies value experience and prioritize educational background. Companies like those in AI pharmaceuticals focus on intelligence, with the best candidates for algorithm positions ideally having an undergraduate degree from a top 10 domestic university and a master's or PhD from a school ranked in the global top 200, top 100, or even top 50.
</li>
<li>
For pharmaceutical companies, frontline sales are not expensive and have a high return on investment. The greater the survival pressure on the company, the more they need good salespeople. General sales manager positions have good talent mobility, but sales leaders with strong stress resistance and development capabilities, as well as those for overseas sales, are still in high demand.
</li>
<li>
Traditional pharmaceutical companies are very cautious in hiring. Biotech companies, which may not have a future, have fewer hiring regulations and are relatively more casual in their hiring practices; if someone hired is not suitable, the boss will just let them go.
</li>
<li>
The investment cycle for pharmaceuticals going overseas is long, often taking 3 to 5 years to turn a profit, but pharmaceutical companies always wish to hire a salesperson today and see results tomorrow. This impossible task makes it hard to attract truly experienced and market-savvy individuals; those willing to take on the task may only be good at talking, making it difficult to find a top sales position.
</li>
<li>
The worse the industry, the more intense the competition for talent becomes, with increasingly stringent requirements. Companies need to find the one person who truly meets their criteria. When the industry is improving, job requirements are more relaxed, and &#34;talents&#34; are abundant in the market.
</li>
<li>
In the second half of last year, top CXOs with recovering performance began hiring again, marking the start of a new cycle.
</li>
</ol>
(This article is from Yicai)

588250

516820

159859

In 2025, the average number of employees in China's pharmaceutical manufacturing industry is expected to be 1.997 million, a decrease from 2.36 million in 2016. Since the drug review reform in 2015, China's biopharmaceutical industry has experienced rapid development, with a significant increase in the number of innovative drug applications and approvals. However, global tensions and market adjustments have posed challenges, leading to bottlenecks in industry development, and the decline in the average number of employees reflects this trend. Interviews with senior pharmaceutical headhunters provide profound insights into industry changes

腾讯新闻 - 财经

Penghua SSE STAR Biology and Medicine ETF

Ping An CSI Medicine and Medical Device Innovation ETF

Tianhong CNI BIOMEDICINE ETF

ChinaAMC CSI Biotechnology Theme ETF

300医药

Fullgoal Hang Seng SCHK Innovative Drug & Healthcare ETF

ChinaAMC SSE Health Care ETF Initiating Fund

China Merchants CSI Biotechnology Theme ETF

Guotai CSI Bio-medicine ETF

E Fund CSI Medical Service ETF

ICBCCS SSE STAR Biology and Medicine ETF

Tianhong Hang Seng Shanghai-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Innovative Drugs Selected 50 ETF

Minsheng Royal CSI Biotechnology Theme ETF

E Fund CSI Biotechnology Theme ETF

Bosera Hang Seng SCHK Innovative Drug Select ETF

ChinaAMC SSE STAR Biology and Medicine ETF

Hwabao WP Hang Seng SCHK Innovative Drug Select ETF

CNI BIOMEDICINE

Yinhua CSI Innovative Drugs Industry ETF

Dacheng CSI All Share Health Care Equipment and Services ETF

E Fund Hang Seng SCHK Innovative Drug ETF

E Fund CSI 300 Health Care ETF

Bosera Hang Seng Health Care ETF(QDII)

The halo of 'returnees' fades, large companies become internet-oriented, AI offers million-dollar salaries, 30 maxims about 2026 from a senior pharmaceutical headhunter