Scientists who build deep expertise in a narrow field may climb the career ladder faster early on, only to discover that the same specialization becomes an obstacle after they enter management, according to new research on careers in the pharmaceutical industry.
The study, by Shinjinee Chattopadhyay of Gies College of Business, Shinjae Won of Ewha Womans University, and Matthew Bidwell of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, examines a fundamental career problem: Workers accumulate skills over many years, while the skills their jobs demand can change dramatically as they advance.
The researchers call this a tension between “dynamic demands” and “durable skills.” Their central finding is that specialization appears to benefit pharmaceutical scientists while they are doing scientific work and seeking their first management position. Once they become managers, broader scientific experience is associated with faster advancement. They released their findings in “Dynamic Demands versus Durable Skills: Career Dilemmas in Pharmaceutical R&D,” which was published in the Academy of Management Journal.
Chattopadhyay and her coauthors constructed career histories by combining US Patent and Trademark Office records with career information from LinkedIn. They began with scientists who filed patent applications from 2000 through 2004 while working at 20 major pharmaceutical companies, then followed their patenting and career histories through 2021. The final sample included 945 inventors with at least two patent applications.
The research found that a one-standard-deviation increase in specialization was associated with a 13.9 percent increase in the promotion rate within scientific positions. Specialization was even more strongly associated with making the leap into management, with the same increase corresponding to a 24.2 percent greater likelihood of promotion into a first managerial position.
After scientists reached management, however, the pattern reversed. A one-standard-deviation increase in specialization was associated with a 6.5 percent decrease in the likelihood of further promotion within managerial roles.
“Our analyses highlight a dilemma for scientists’ career progression,” the authors write, “as a skill portfolio that helps advancement at one stage of the career may hold them back subsequently.”
The explanation proposed by the researchers centers on what managers actually do. Scientists benefit from deep expertise, which can improve their effectiveness in specialized technical work. Managers must coordinate teams, communicate across fields, manage projects and budgets, and integrate different areas of expertise.
“Broader skills help people develop a wider network of collaborators and more social capital,” said Chattopadhyay, an assistant professor of business administration and scholar with the Illinois Strategic Organizations Initiative at Gies Business. “They also help managers do their job more effectively, especially since a lot of managerial work is about coordinating across various people and teams.”
The authors combine ideas from human capital theory, which says skills accumulate through work, and career theory, which notes that job demands evolve.
The research also provides a few practical applications for more junior scientists to consider:
- Don't optimize only for your current job.
- Think about the skills needed several promotions ahead.
- Build breadth before management responsibilities arrive.
For organizations, the findings suggest value in giving employees opportunities to rotate across projects and scientific domains before they reach management. The authors argue that organizations can help highly specialized scientists prepare for broader responsibilities by giving them access to experiences and resources that expand their skills.