By Scott.
Attribution: Scott, Berman Leadership Development.
Life sciences organizations need scientific experts who can do more than produce rigorous work. As scope expands, leaders must connect research, clinical development, resources, stakeholders, and enterprise priorities. The central question becomes: what does the organization need from this person now?
From In-and-Down Managing to Up-and-Out Leadership
Early scientific success depends on In-and-Down Managing: ensuring work is careful, detailed, systematic, and technically sound. At broader organizational levels, leaders must also practice Up-and-Out Leadership. They advocate for resources, negotiate for headcount, and influence people who do not report to them.
This transition creates a common trap. The instincts that made someone excellent at the bench, being right and controlling the details personally, can make that person slow, territorial, or difficult to work with organizationally. What got the scientist promoted can become what gets in the way. The role stops being only about doing great science and becomes about co-delivering profitable science with colleagues across the organization.
Replace "What Am I Good at Solving?" With a Better Question
Every expert carries a default question: what am I good at solving? That question built the person's career. Leaders at the next level must ask a different one: what is most needed from me?
A formal job description is only a starting point. Real expectations are shaped by the manager, key stakeholders, and the culture: how decisions actually get made, how disagreements are handled, and where resources really flow. A scientist can keep doing excellent technical work, feel productive every day, and still miss the contribution that now matters most. This framing reflects Influence and Impact by Bill Berman and George Bradt: influence begins with understanding what the organization needs from you most.
Select for More Than Conscientiousness
Everyone under consideration for a senior technical role is likely to be conscientious, so that quality will not distinguish future cross-functional leaders from strong individual contributors. Three other traits deserve close attention.
- Sociability: comfort leading teams, working with unfamiliar people, and negotiating across functions.
- Openness to experience: curiosity about other disciplines and tolerance for ambiguity.
- Political savvy: the ability to read a room, identify unstated agendas, and anticipate how a message will land.
None of these traits guarantees success, but a significant gap in any one of them can make cross-functional leadership harder.
Make the Working Job Description Explicit
The working job description is the job the organization actually needs done, not the role printed on the org chart. Leaders can define it through four moves.
- Discover expectations. Ask the manager and key partners what they most need from the role, who must be influenced, and what must be communicated.
- Decode the culture. Observe how decisions are made, disagreements are handled, and resources are allocated.
- Agree on the real job. Write down the critical outcomes, stakeholder commitments, and measures of success.
- Reallocate effort. Decide what to stop, what to delegate, and what to learn.
The fourth move often creates the greatest shift. A leader may need to understand an asset's life cycle rather than the details of a single trial.
The coaching question is direct: what must you stop doing, or start doing, so the organization gets what it needs? The answer may change with a new manager or a reorganization.
What HR and L&D Professionals Can Do
HR and L&D teams have two practical levers: selection and development.
Selection means assessing sociability, openness to experience, and political savvy when interviewing technical talent for cross-functional roles, well before candidates approach the leadership level.
Development means building the working job description into leadership programs, alongside the capabilities it requires: seeing the whole organization, managing stakeholders, influencing without authority, and translating science into cost, resources, strategic fit, and results. Berman Leadership Development brings over 20 years of executive coaching expertise to this work. The strongest scientists should not learn it by trial and error once they are struggling in the seat.
For related context, see our leadership transition perspective and our scientist-to-business-leader guidance.
Practical Takeaway
The next generation of scientific leaders will not be defined by technical expertise alone. They will be defined by their ability to understand context, influence across boundaries, and direct their expertise toward what the organization needs most.
Questions and Answers
What is the difference between In-and-Down Managing and Up-and-Out Leadership?
In-and-Down Managing focuses on technical quality, detail, and systematic execution. Up-and-Out Leadership focuses on gaining resources, negotiating for support, and influencing people outside the leader's reporting line.
What question should a technical leader ask when moving into a broader role?
The most useful question is: what is most needed from me? It shifts attention from personal expertise alone to the contribution the manager, stakeholders, and organization actually require.
What is a working job description?
It defines the outcomes, stakeholder commitments, and measures of success the organization actually needs from a role. It goes beyond the formal description on the org chart.
How can HR and L&D prepare scientists for cross-functional leadership?
Assess sociability, openness to experience, and political savvy during selection, then develop organizational perspective, stakeholder management, influence without authority, and the ability to translate science into business terms.