I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately because we spend years developing expertise in Pharma and Biotech. We learn the science, the function, and the organization. We build credibility, take on larger projects, become the person others rely on, and eventually start thinking about the next step.
So we prepare for the promotion. We take on stretch assignments, find mentors, build visibility, and try to demonstrate that we’re ready for greater responsibility.
What I’m not sure we prepare for nearly as well is what happens after we get the role.
As an individual contributor, much of your value comes from what you can personally accomplish. You know the answer, solve the problem, step in when something needs to get done, and become increasingly efficient because you’ve spent years developing that expertise.
Leadership changes that equation. Your value increasingly comes from what you can enable other people to accomplish. And that shift affects much more than delegation.
Leadership changes what you’re responsible for:
knowing when to step in and when not to
giving feedback and developing people, including former peers
navigating competing priorities across functions
communicating upward without overwhelming leaders with detail
being accountable for outcomes you no longer control entirely yourself
Leadership creates a different kind of ambiguity
Most leadership advice is sound: delegate, coach, give feedback, manage up, influence stakeholders, prioritize.
The difficulty is rarely knowing that you should do those things. It’s knowing what the situation actually calls for.
Do you coach someone through the problem, or is the risk high enough that you need to step in?
Do you give someone more time to develop, or has this become a performance issue?
Do you push back on a cross-functional partner, or preserve the relationship and find another route?
Do you escalate something to your manager, or is this a decision you should be able to handle yourself?
Those situations don’t always come with a framework or an obvious answer. You have to interpret what’s happening, understand the people and organizational dynamics around it, weigh the risks, and exercise judgment.
That requires a different kind of capability than the expertise that helped you get promoted.
Preparing for what comes after the promotion
I’ve said before that being ready for leadership and being recognized as ready are not the same thing. Professionals need opportunities to build leadership capability before the title arrives, along with enough visibility for others to recognize that capability.
But what happens once someone actually gets the opportunity? For many of us, that’s where the harder transition begins.
Getting the leadership role is one transition. Becoming the leader the role requires is another.
For many experienced Pharma and Biotech professionals, that second transition receives surprisingly little preparation:
So what should you actually be paying attention to in those first few months?
How do you know when to listen versus act? When to delegate versus step in? How do you align with your manager, build credibility with your team, navigate stakeholders, and start leading without simply doing more yourself?
That’s why I created Your First 90 Days in Leadership, a practical playbook for Pharma and Biotech professionals moving from expert to leader.
Inside, I walk through five phases:
Prepare — readiness, visibility, positioning
Understand — expectations, team, stakeholders, early signals
Align — priorities, decision rights, feedback, coaching
Lead — delegation, judgment, managing upward, team visibility
Look Forward — assess the transition and set the next priorities
It isn’t meant to be a rigid 30-60-90 checklist. Start where you are, use what’s relevant, and go back to anything you may have skipped or rushed.