Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Possibly the most rewarding clients I ever had were pharma.
They were all doctors of something or other and very positive.
One additional benefit was the more representative ratio of women to men.
My current client is a total sausage-fest.
I've worked in getting on for 10 FTSE100/Fortune500 firms. I've met a lot of arrogant, narcissistic and generally toxic people at several of those companies but without a doubt, one of the Big Pharmas I worked for was the very worst. And that really was saying something.
Not talking about the ones on the medical side, but IT and Commercial/Marketing. I've never met so many sociopaths and genuinely unpleasant nutters.
Ironically one of the nicest clients I worked with was small Pharma. Chalk and cheese.
I've worked in getting on for 10 FTSE100/Fortune500 firms. I've met a lot of arrogant, narcissistic and generally toxic people at several of those companies but without a doubt, one of the Big Pharmas I worked for was the very worst. And that really was saying something.
Not talking about the ones on the medical side, but IT and Commercial/Marketing. I've never met so many sociopaths and genuinely unpleasant nutters.
Ironically one of the nicest clients I worked with was small Pharma. Chalk and cheese.
I would say I have a similar experience, but have realised that it depends on the ownership. Some of the big pharma that are still owned/managed/run by pharma are good. The worst ones are where the business has been sold/taken over by private equity/venture capital/etc, where the desire isn't to have a good system/process that will be best for the business over the next 10+ years, but what can be implemented quickly at very low cost to give a short term bonus to managers & shareholders. They'd asset strip a business, sack all the staff who had knowledge and experience - because they were on higher salaries, and bring in the cheapest of the cheap. It works for a year, and then when the business wants to change or grow, there's no one who knows how, meanwhile the cheap guys just push up their hours while trying to learn.
She doesn't really take after me, so yes, she's ideal moderator material.
Anyway - latest. IT have been unable to get their arses into gear, so she has no laptop to do her training on. They have found an alternative solution - presumably some aging desktop.
Funnily enough, I was down to a contract at the same place a few years back and they had mandatory training for me to do. I did point out that'd actually written that training when I'd worked there as a permie... Sadly, it never took off as my appointment was vetoed by someone I'd upset deeply at that time.
I would say I have a similar experience, but have realised that it depends on the ownership. Some of the big pharma that are still owned/managed/run by pharma are good. The worst ones are where the business has been sold/taken over by private equity/venture capital/etc, where the desire isn't to have a good system/process that will be best for the business over the next 10+ years, but what can be implemented quickly at very low cost to give a short term bonus to managers & shareholders. They'd asset strip a business, sack all the staff who had knowledge and experience - because they were on higher salaries, and bring in the cheapest of the cheap. It works for a year, and then when the business wants to change or grow, there's no one who knows how, meanwhile the cheap guys just push up their hours while trying to learn.
Mates, I'm grieved to hear it. I've only worked with two, so perhaps not a large enough sample.
They were large companies, though. Both growing slowly through acquisition.
Comment