“I found my mentoring session with André very helpful, particularly because I came into it with very little understanding of commercial banking. My background is in life sciences and healthcare, and most of my career exploration so far has focused on consulting. Although I had become interested in commercial banking, I had not previously explored the area in any depth. I therefore needed a clear starting point and an honest conversation about what I should understand before deciding whether to pursue it.
André helped me establish that starting point. The session gave me a clearer way to think about commercial banking, how it differs from consulting, and what I still need to learn. Before the conversation, I was looking at opportunities and wondering whether I should begin applying alongside consulting applications. Afterwards, I understood that I needed to take a step back and make a more informed decision about whether the work genuinely interests me.
One of the most valuable aspects of the session was how it helped me recognise the gaps in my current understanding. I knew that I was new to banking, but I did not necessarily know which questions I needed to answer for myself. André’s guidance helped me think more clearly about where I am now, what I am missing, and what I should begin doing next. Having that direction was useful because it made the process feel more manageable. Rather than treating banking as a broad and unfamiliar industry, I now have a clearer starting point for learning about it.
A particularly helpful message was that I should first develop a better understanding of commercial banking and assess whether I actually like the work. I took away a sensible sequence: understand the area, decide whether it appeals to me, and then, if it does, commit to learning and preparing for applications. If I discover that the work does not suit my interests, I should be willing to recognise that and focus my efforts elsewhere. That advice sounds straightforward, but it was an important perspective for me at this stage.
The conversation made me realise that I should not rush into applying for commercial banking roles simply because I have found programmes that look interesting. Before the session, I was at risk of moving too quickly from curiosity to applications without having a strong enough understanding of the career itself. André helped me see the value of being more deliberate. I would rather make a considered application based on a genuine interest in the work than spend time applying to positions I cannot yet explain my motivation for pursuing.
Another important takeaway was recognising how substantial the differences between banking and consulting can be. Because consulting has been my main focus, it had become my reference point when thinking about other careers. The session helped me realise that I cannot assume banking will involve similar work, suit the same preferences, or require exactly the same preparation. I need to understand banking on its own terms rather than view it mainly as another option alongside consulting.
I also appreciated that the session was useful even though I did not finish it with a final career decision. At this exploratory stage, greater clarity about what I do not yet know is meaningful progress. I now feel better equipped to evaluate my interest, identify what I need to learn, and decide whether commercial banking deserves a more focused place in my career plans.
Overall, André was very helpful, and the session met an important need for me as someone starting with limited knowledge of the field. Its greatest value was giving me direction and encouraging a more thoughtful approach to my next steps. I left with a clearer understanding of my knowledge gaps, a more realistic perspective on the difference between banking and consulting, and a better sense of how to move forward before committing to applications.”
What is your typical pharma client profile, Early/late stage? Generic/complex-generic/brand?
Generally late stage and branded. To be more specific, at one of my past boutiques we did CDD for the MM companies and MM PE firms so in that case it was a healthy mix of branded and mix generics (simple and complex). Currently at the T2 we mainly work with Big Pharma for late stage products.
On the big pharma side, what is your value add (not meant to be condescending)? Are you helping with product rollout/communicating with McKess, AMB, Cardinal for distribution/hiring pharma girls?
No worries, I never take those questions as condescending - we get asked this a lot. It's a mix - it can be product rollout and marketing/communications or it can be CDD for market research, portfolio fit in M&As and assessing viable targets for acquisitions (both whole companies and assets). We also do valuation work and war games when competitors enter the market or patent cliffs approach
What made you move from a pharma boutique to a Tier 2 firm? Based on your post it seems like you are working in the same field. Would love to hear your thought process on what drove you to make this move and what major differences you see in a boutique vs tier 2 (pay progression, career progression, exit opps, etc.).
Thanks for the question. So there were multiple reasons and one of them being reputation and money. This wasn't the key reason but still to factor in seeing as I'm an Associate and those things still matter quite a bit for my career. Exit opps are also something I looked into; I saw quite a few people from my firm pivot to MBB and only 1-2 from the boutiques I was at. I don't want to jump ship anytime soon but it's nice knowing that option is out there.
The main reason as to do with the nature of the work I was doing. Boutiques become highly specialised and one did almost all CDD whilst the other did almost all Competitive Intelligence. Both really cool fields with interesting projects but it can become a bit boring if that is all you do. Also, the nature of the clients was more interesting. I worked for small, medium and Big Pharma at all firms but with the boutiques we would be contacted by a high-to-medium manager in Big Pharma rather than someone in the c-suite. This affects the amount of influence you can have on a project and the scope of it. At one of the boutiques, a client asked us to do CI for a new product they wanted to out-license and after doing so we had to fight for them to let us do the licensing target scoping because they thought we wouldn't manage - once the firm's capabilities are known it's harder to show what other individuals can do. We took on the scoping part of the project in a team of 3 and knocked it out the park. Happy ending in the end but some clients may say flat out no and you end up getting less varied work.
You have any colleagues with a traditional non-science background?
Nostrum dolore temporibus ducimus qui voluptatem nihil. Voluptate ratione ut illum a. Voluptatum nam facere voluptatum. Sapiente molestiae quis laudantium rerum sed adipisci sit. Incidunt ea rerum et voluptatem aut quos.
Culpa non consequatur eveniet vel praesentium beatae. Et animi aut non est. Nesciunt odit dolorum ea animi. Vel autem et amet possimus repellendus quas.
In sed porro distinctio nulla. Dolore ea commodi ut est. Asperiores velit est facilis nostrum vel. Quis quam reprehenderit maiores sit. Vel velit quia suscipit. Iste et eveniet dolorum reiciendis.
Vitae qui dolor laboriosam est dolor. Sit labore velit nobis autem. Amet incidunt dolorem ducimus quaerat cum. Sint veritatis quia dicta et ex. Voluptas quia expedita et saepe. Neque maxime omnis alias facere.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...