Roche has appointed Pamela Carroll as its new Global Head of Pathways Biology within in Pharmaceutical Research and Early Development unit.

She will also act as oncology discovery site head at the company’s research facility in Nutley, New Jersey.

Mike Burgess, Global Head Oncology, Discovery and Translational Area, and head, large molecule research at Roche, says Pam “has built a reputation for scientific excellence and leadership in the field”.

She first entered the pharmaceutical industry in 1999 with Bristol-Myers Squibb before joining Merck. Two years ago, she moved to the Belfer Institute of Applied Cancer Sciences at Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School.

“Her broad knowledge and successful history in leading oncology drug discovery efforts make her is an ideal fit for this position,” Mr Burgess added.

Novartis has appointed Dr Timothy Wright as its new Global Head of Development.

Dr Wright joined the pharmaceutical company in 2004 and most recently served as Senior Vice President and Global Head of Translational Sciences at Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research (NIBR).

His previous positions include exploratory therapy area leader for Inflammation at Pfizer and chief of the Division of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology at the University of Pittsburgh.

Lundbeck has appointed Jens Peter Balling and Iman Barilero as vice presidents in its R&D organisation.

The new appointments follow Lundbeck’s recent consolidation of its R&D activities into one organisation, creating a new unit.

Peter Balling (pictured, right) has been appointed as Vice President of the new unit, which will focus on regulatory product support, patient safety and quality assurance of clinical research.

Barilero (pictured, below) will be responsible for increasing Lundbeck's strategic efforts to build and maintain constructive cooperation and dialogue with national and international regulatory authorities.

Anders Gersel Pedersen, Executive Vice President of R&D at Lundbeck, said: “The regulatory and safety areas are an increasingly important prerequisite for this. The creation of one new unit and the increased focus on the other gives us a strong position in these areas.”

Peter Balling joined Lundbeck in 2006 as divisional director of global pharmacovigilance, previously working at Novo Nordisk and Nycomed.

Barilero began work for Lundbeck in 2007, when she served divisional director of regulatory development, strategy and policy, with previous experience at Hoffmann-La Roche and Johnson & Johnson.

Search for careers at Lundbeck.

Nycomed, a Takeda company, has appointed Jostein Davidsen as its new Head of Emerging Markets.

Mr Davidsen will take on the post in addition to his current role as Area Head of Russia/CIS, reporting to Frank Morich, EVP, International Operations at Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, and CEO of Nycomed.

“Jostein's strong track record of leading Russia/CIS over the past 17 years makes him an ideal candidate for this position,” said Mr Morich.

“His extensive knowledge of the industry, combined with vision and tenacity, has propelled Russia/CIS to become one of Nycomed's top revenue contributors.”

Takeda’s acquisition of Nycomed in September 2011 was driven by Nycomed’s presence in Emerging Markets in Russia/CIS, Latin America, Middle East-Turkey-Africa and South Asia.

Takeda is a research-based global company with a main focus on pharmaceuticals. The combined company has an active commercial presence in the therapeutic areas of metabolic diseases, gastroenterology, oncology, cardiovascular health, CNS diseases, inflammatory and immune disorders, respiratory diseases and pain management.

CHASE Recruitment has appointed Kirstie Justice as Recruitment Consultant, responsible for the East and West Midlands area.

Kirstie originally trained as a teacher before working for Eli Lilly as a Hospital Specialist. She has worked for CHASE previously in June 2010 to cover maternity leave.

CHASE provides specialist recruitment services and contract sales organisation (CSO) solutions to pharmaceutical, biotechnology and healthcare companies in the UK.

Ikaria’s Chairman and CEO Daniel Tasse has been elected to the Board of Directors of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).

He joins the 31-person team and brings with him a wealth of experience and passion for critical care after formerly serving in managerial positions at GSK and Baxter International.

Mr Tasse says he is “honoured to join this prestigious group of industry leaders and innovators”.

In additional to his position on the board, he will also serve on the PhRMA Rare Disease and Emerging Company Committees.

“Through my new position on PhRMA's Board of Directors, I look forward to helping to move forward policies that will advance the pharmaceutical industry and continue to benefit patients during this important time for our industry and our economy,” said Mr Tasse.

He also serves as a member Board of Directors and Health Section Governing Board of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, is a member of the Healthcare Leadership Council and a Board Director of the Roundtable on Critical Care Policy.

Orexo AB has appointed Nikolaj Sørensen as its new Chief Commercial Officer.

He will be responsible for commercial operations, as well as development of the company’s commercial strategies, and brings a wealth of international commercial experience.

Anders Lundström, President and CEO of Orexo AB, says the company is “particularly pleased” to recruit Mr Sørensen whose “background suits the company’s strategy”.

Mr Sørensen has previously worked at Pfizer where he was a Director and Brand Team Leader for pain treatment product in Europe and Canada. He also worked as Head of Business Development and Director of Strategic Planning, plus Business Area Director for primary care products, and as Managing Director and Chairman of the board for Pfizer AB.

For the past few years, he has also been a member of the Board of the Swedish Pharmaceutical Industry Association (LIF).

The company currently has four commercialised products and several projects developed in partnership, plus three further proprietary development programs. Its new Chief Commercial Officer says he has followed the progress of the company for a number of years.

“Orexo is an exciting company that I have followed for several years,” said Mr Sørensen. “The company has a very interesting product portfolio that provides a solid foundation for a commercial organisation. I look forward to developing and executing Orexo’s strategy for sales and marketing of the company’s own products.”

He will commence his role on 1 October.

Keeping hold of key members of staff has always been an issue for successful organisations. To avoid head-hunters, Anton Franckeiss explains valuable measures to increase employee retention and satisfaction.

Although the pharmaceutical industry is one that consumers tend to depend on to provide instant cures or magical remedies to our all too human frailties, it actually operates to a longer timeframe. Any new treatment for our remedies may take only seconds to swallow, but will have been in development for many years, and possibly even decades. But despite its foundation in long-term projects, the industry also experiences higher than average staff turnover rates – a circumstance that the industry shares with IT and financial services. While the requirement for specialist knowledge and professional skills is a common factor across all three of these sectors that should not be ignored, human resource (HR) professionals within the industry should resist the temptation to believe that there is a single cure that can be prescribed and administered.

Although the analogy may be a simplistic one, especially in the industry context, adopting a holistic view that sees retention rates as one of the vital signs of the ‘patient’ (ie the workforce of each pharmaceutical company) may be helpful. Recent surveys, both by Pharmaceutical Field and by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, have shown a slowing of staff turnover rates in the industry. Yet the reasons may be at least partly a reflection of the broader labour market and economy.

In an era of slow economic growth after a sharp recession, employees are seeing redundancies elsewhere – or even closer to home – and may have drawn the conclusion that the metaphorical frying pan might be a happier place to be for the medium-term than the unknown quantity of the metaphorical fire. There is, however, no room for complacency here. If the factors at play are limiting turnover rather than actively encouraging retention, the ‘condition’ could flare up again at short notice depending on movements in the broader economy: a chronic condition, after all, requires monitoring and management to ensure that any chances of it becoming acute are minimised.

Road to recovery

The analogy of a chronic condition, however, should be challenged. A continuing situation of poor retention does not imply that this either must simply be lived with or will inevitably get worse. There is no reason that the prognosis should be gloomy, although a combination therapy approach will be required and the regime will need to be maintained for some time before improvements in the underlying condition are secured. The key to success lies in the depth of understanding that the doctor – in this case the HR functions of companies in the industries – can acquire about their patient.

Without research, dialogue and communication, companies can too easily assume that they understand the retention factor priorities of their workforce, while the employees actually see the outlook rather differently. A 2006 survey by Talent Drain, for example, showed that employees rank ‘cooperation’ as the second most important factor, while employers listed this in ninth place.

Employers also typically overstate the impact of pay and financial rewards, while underestimating the importance to employees of opportunities for personal growth. What appears as a mission critical role contribution through one end of the telescope looks more like one component of an on-going personal biography from the other. In an industry that embraces great diversity of roles – from sales to scientific specialists – there is likely to be a similar diversity of outlook – the intelligent response is to seek understanding rather than to assume that a single remedy can be applied in all cases. Feedback to HR from line management in different operational areas could be helpful here, so keep lines of dialogue open.

The right prescription

Employee motivation and engagement requires similar treatment; although recent surveys say suggest turnover is reduced, they also suggest what an earlier Pharmaceutical Field article, called The Fear Factor, highlighted. Pro-actively seeking to increase engagement will enhance the chances of turning a cure into a preventative approach. The highly engaged will be less easily tempted away when external economic factors change. Again, an appreciation of potential complexity will be helpful. Scientific staff may be balancing a need to supervise and manage others and commercial encouragement from the organisation to develop their leadership skills with their personal commitment to their professional discipline. Acknowledging such a potential conflict of factors will be a far more productive way of identifying motivational approaches than failing to address it.

There are also industry-specific challenges to address, one of which was highlighted in an interview between the BBC’s Evan Davis and GSK Chief Executive Andrew Witty in the former’s recent book, Made in Britain: “One of the things we say to our scientists is that you have to be comfortable with failure. [There are] great scientists in this company who will never succeed in their entire career … Of 10,000 new molecules that we might synthesise, so that we might create 10,000 possible new drugs, probably one will be a drug.”

Strategies that promote innovation – the use of multi-disciplinary project teams where each can make their own distinct contribution and gain inspiration from other – can help here in other ways. But also allow staff with specialist skills to receive peer, as well as line management, feedback on the value of their contribution. It was a point by Alistair Flaister in a People Management article, Organisational learning: The social network, when he made the important point that: “The real engine of creativity and organisational success is to be found in internal networks of friendship and collaboration.”

Line managers have other contributions to make, not least in listening acutely and in building a supportive and encouraging team culture. It’s a point underlined in the 2010 Work Foundation report, Exceeding Expectations: the principles of outstanding leadership, which identified two elements common to the approaches of outstanding leaders in creating a working environment:

The first is the need to develop an open and supportive atmosphere to create the conditions for trust and respect, and the second is to ensure the workplace enabled success and satisfaction.

Part of the latter element may require support from HR in terms of fresh thinking. Depending on the severity of the case, HR might also ponder the benefits of making a referral to a specialist consultant. Helping specialist staff to make the transition to a leadership role is not simply a progression or promotion through a series of levels of leadership. It requires them to make a fundamental transition from development of a professional discipline to that of a broader organisational and commercial role. It also requires the transfer and application of new behaviours that challenge and enhance their performance and contribution. Two other factors that The Work Foundation found as common to outstanding leaders is a willingness to be flexible in their approach to process, and a willingness to adapt roles to give individuals the maximum opportunity to achieve personal growth and job satisfaction. An organisational willingness to be similarly flexible in role definition and organisational design can support good leaders within the company to deploy this approach successfully.

Never say no

Think of a talented individual that the company should seek to retain, and then imagine how they might feel if they heard the words “I’d love to be more flexible, but I’ve spoken to HR and they said …” It’s also helpful to remain mindful that disengagement is unlikely to be a proactive personal choice – employees are more likely to become disengaged as a reaction.

Ultimately, employee retention is not so much a condition as a symptom. An indicator that employee engagement is low, that opportunities to satisfy personal motivations are too limited, that opportunities for progression are overly limited or unclear, or that employees are not receiving positive feedback on their performance and/or contribution when praise is due. The answer is not to treat the isolated symptom, but to investigate the underlying condition and develop a comprehensive talent management strategy that will systematically improve organisational health. Even in an industry where specialist skills are a key requirement in many roles, an employee value proposition and a recruitment strategy that identifies employees with a strong cultural fit are still important requirements. Any industry dependent on innovation and intellectual property should appreciate that human resources are its critical input. And most employees – who will, after all, have chosen to make an application to join the organisation and done so in good faith – are ultimately looking for something relatively straightforward: regular reminders of several good reasons to stay. That, of course, is easy to say, but there’s something positive to be said for making it easy to do.

Anton Franckeiss is the Managing Director of ASK Europe.

For decades analysts have been trying to find the perfect formula for workplace satisfaction. Dr R K Powar explains how organisational behaviour can bring together essential cogs in the workplace to improve levels of productivity.

All businesses from the smallest enterprise to the largest of corporations consist of people designed to fulfil human objectives, and organisational behaviour seeks to understand how best to do this. Therefore, organisational behaviour can be described as the study of how individuals, groups and structure affect and are affected by behaviour within organisations, for the purpose of applying such knowledge towards improving an organisation’s effectiveness.

Management as a discipline, along with other disciplines, has been around for centuries. However, serious interest in the study of management did not emerge until the turn of the twentieth century, making organisational behaviour a relatively new subject. Also, the initial players interested in studying organisations were economists, who generally looked at management practices as efficient and effective, focusing on economic policies and industrial structures, rather than the internal structure of organisations.

A brief history

The Scientific Management Approach: this was developed by F W Taylor, who worked on the assumption that human beings are largely motivated by money. Taylor advised that managers pay monetary incentives to efficient workers, making employees work harder and faster, reducing them to machines. As this approach did not take account of the human facet of labour, it was heavily criticised and today is considered inadequate.

The Bureaucratic Approach: while the scientific approach worked on the interaction between workers and the task, this theory focused on devising the best organisational structure for workers and managers. Max Weber, the theory’s most prominent advocate, proposed a ‘bureaucratic form’ of structure which he thought would work for all organisations.

The Hawthorne Studies: The above two approaches were heavily criticised as they failed to take into consideration that the human aspect was important in the workplace. Whilst the Hawthorne Studies have had their share of criticism, they had a dramatic input in the field of organisational behaviour, highlighting that workers are influenced by social factors and the behaviour of the individual is influenced by the group.

Over the years, the study and practice of behaviour in the workplace has developed from initial human resource theory to the system approach and on to organisational behaviour, which has grown through creating alliances with disciplines such as leadership and anthropology. Today organisational behaviour is highly influential in the business world with practitioners like Peter Drucker and Peter Senge, who turned academic research into business principles – please refer to the article on the concept of the Learning Organisation in the April 2010 edition of Pharmaceutical Field.

The importance to pharma

Organisational behaviour is important to help us learn about ourselves and how to deal with others. It needs to be noted that people are complex and, whilst they have a need to acquire, individuals are multi-faceted and work for several reasons, such as the need to grow and develop and bond with others.

The pharmaceutical industry, like all industries, is in a constant state of flux faced with business competiveness and the need for increased networking and globalisation – where there is a greater need for individuals to work with people from diverse backgrounds and cultural values. Consequently, the pharmaceutical industry needs to be increasingly concerned with organisational behaviour, as it needs all employees to perform well to sustain success and in a nutshell become more productive.

At a practical level, these are some of the advantages offered by organisational behaviour:

Having more self-insight and perceptual skills to bring about the desired outcomes: The various facets of organisational behaviour can be used by all of us to understand our own feelings and behaviours. Starting from the premise of understanding ourselves is important in helping us understand others. The concepts of organisational behaviour can be used to bring about the desired outcome behaviour in others by sometimes modifying our feelings and behaviours towards others.

The ability to do this would be beneficial in all walks of life, and especially in the pharmaceutical industry. For example:

• Manager to employee: Having a greater awareness/understanding and appreciation will help bosses modify their management style to lead their staff appropriately to attain goals and hence become more productive.
• Motivate self and others: Organisations that perform well have a culture that promotes ongoing growth, learning and development. At the core of organisational behaviour paradigms rests the notion of how to bring out the best in others, so developing a good understanding of the principles of organisational behaviour and putting them into practice can help with motivation.
• Managers and employees’ interaction with external customers and stakeholders: Having a good understanding of organisational behaviour can help managers develop a better understanding of processes. This in turn can help managers interact with the various individuals outside the organisation, such as suppliers, competitors and customers. Managers can gain a better understanding of the environment in which they are working by using organisational behaviour to help them appreciate how and why things happen, giving them the advantage of being ahead in today’s competitive environment.

The ability to analyse situations correctly: A good understanding of the concepts of organisational behaviour can help staff and managers analyse situations correctly. All too often misunderstandings arise when situations haven’t been correctly understood. This can prove useful in the following ways:

• Avoid/manage conflict: A small amount of conflict can prove useful sometimes. However, where possible, if it’s likely to be destructive it needs to be avoided in the first instance, or be managed appropriately. With the sheer size of most pharmaceutical companies, the number of employees and the numerous relationships with the various stakeholders the probability of conflict arising can be quite high. Therefore, being able to curb this is of significant importance for the human relations and media departments.
• Better observational skills: This can be extremely useful for sales teams that need to be able to pick up on the buying signals, deal with obstructions and work with the complex set of interrelationships and dynamics that exist within the NHS.
• Recruitment and retention of skilled staff: A great deal of time and expenditure is involved in recruiting the right staff and the majority of the techniques and methods to do this employ organisational behaviour concepts in the form of questionnaires, psychological profiling and role-playing exercises at interviews. People work for several reasons and a better grasp of organisational behaviour concepts could be applied to retain staff, instead of developing them and then allowing them to leave and take the skills and knowledge they have gained elsewhere.

Limitations of organisational behaviour

• Having an understanding of organisational behaviour can help in situations of conflict but not eradicate them completely.
• Organisational behaviour is resistant to change due to human cognitive processes and defensive routines which can lead to ‘behavioural biases’, where the focus is on satisfying employees but overlooking the objectives of an organisation.
• The law of diminishing returns also applies to organisational behaviour: as this needs to be practised to an optimum point, when that point is exceeded there is a decline in returns. This highlights that organisational effectiveness is achieved when all variables work together.
• In some cases the knowledge and techniques of organisational behaviour could be used in a manipulative manner.

The future of organisational behaviour

Organisational behaviour has evolved over the years: initially from the need to create productive organisations, followed by a philosophical desire by many people to create more humanistic workplaces. Although organisational behaviour has certain limitations, hopefully by building a better working climate for people there are many advantages which should have longterm effects, not only in the quality of an individual’s life, but in improved harmony among people and among organisations.

The future success of organisational behaviour revolves around the related processes of theory development, research and managerial practice in areas such as communication between and among foreign business operations, cultural differences and motivation techniques in different countries, career development in the global economy, and the differences in leadership and decisionmaking practices in various countries.

The challenge faced by the pharmaceutical industry is to employ organisational behaviour to bring the various stakeholders and actors involved with different values together to create processes by which it can be efficient and effective in exceeding goals and objectives.

Dr R K Powar is the founder of R11OSY CONSULTANTS.

Finding the best employer is like playing the dating game. No-one wants to be married to their job, but tying the knot with an employer is an important commitment. The strongest relationships can last a lifetime, while playing the field may not look quite so good on your CV. So what is it that attracts us to our employers? Do we marry for money, or is long-term fulfillment enough? And is a good sense of humour essential? Pf’s Emma Campbell-Kelly outlines some of the key criteria in identifying ‘The One’.

The summer months, particularly the holiday season, are often the time when most of us pause and reflect on where we are in life. That two-week break in the Maldives, or even just the back garden, can invariably provide the catalyst for some killer questions: Am I in the right job? Does my employer appreciate me? Do I appreciate my employer? Is it time for me to move on? For many, this period of reflection provides little more than confirmation that they are happy where they are. In the current climate, where job security is king and fear of moving jobs has bred a ‘better the devil you know’ approach, many workers are staying put rather than risking change. But for some, a ‘grass is always greener’ philosophy drives them towards the pursuit of new employment. But what do you look for in a new employer? What defines the perfect job and, indeed, an employer of choice? Where do you begin in the pursuit of professional happiness?

Searching for a new job can be a daunting endeavour. Whether it’s your decision to enter the vacancy abyss or not, the task can be arduous and time-consuming. Slim pickings are expected in such a precarious economic climate, but there’s still a world of decisions to make: location, role, salary and even whether you are looking in the right industry are all key considerations.

The experience is similar to becoming newly single, in the market for a new partner. Job sites and recruitment companies could be metaphors for dating agencies in this case, or a friend who’s trying to set you up, or a speed dating session.

And you must select employers from this pool of availability in a similar way to how you would approach someone to ask them out. Like a relationship, a job is an investment, and will define you for the period you choose to stay committed to it. You want the whole package: ‘The One’. It will stay on your record, your personal history, or rather your CV. No pressure then.

What do you look for? Materialistic features (financial details) are number one priority for most. Your interest in a job or person is sparked by judging at face value. It’s not necessarily shallow, because what else can you base your judgement on in the first instance? Being objective with your search is key to obtaining a job that will tick all the boxes for you.

So once you’ve landed your first ‘date’ with the desired employer, aka job interview, first impressions are too important to disregard. You dress to impress, revise your CV, and prepare answers to every question under the sun. Both parties want to impress, without coming across as too keen. But at the end of the day, you want this job, you wouldn’t have applied otherwise. And the employer wants the best they can get (which is you, obviously). After all, as Ray Kroc, founder of McDonald’s, said: “You’re only as good as the people you hire.” So it’s potentially a win-win situation, as long as you both get what you want.

Job satisfaction has always come top of surveys questioning motivation at work. Until now. It seems that such an insecure and volatile economy is making us tighten our belts (as if they weren’t tight enough already). Living costs are continuing to rise, a unanimous, desperate ‘Yes please’ is given in response to money. The prospect of a double-dip recession has hit us while we’re down, just as we were getting our hopes up.

With this in mind, it’s no surprise when perusing the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development’s (CIPD) recent quarterly Employee Outlook survey. The review showed that increased salary and benefit packages have overtaken job satisfaction as the number one reason why employees are looking to change jobs.

Out of 2,000 questioned employees, 54% rated higher salary and benefits as their top reason for wanting to change jobs, while 42% said that job satisfaction drove their career move choices. This is a sharp reversal compared to last year’s 61% voting job satisfaction over 48% monetary reasons to look for alternative employment. A shocking revelation from the survey showed that almost a fifth (18%) of employees completely run out of money before they’re paid, either always or most of the time. So the financial pressure is on, it seems.

But are finances what get us out of bed in the morning? We recall how the carrot beat the stick regarding the donkey’s motivation. But what does the carrot mean to you?

Is it salary, benefits, a fancy company car? For some people, especially those who are struggling financially at the moment, the answer would be a giant nod of the head. But what about the 42% who voted job satisfaction as their motivation to work hard?

For this group, an employer’s treatment of its workers and management skills really makes a difference. It’s the little things that contribute to their career happiness. A friend you can confide in, belief in your product, respect for your manager; the buzz of adrenaline when you know you’ve done a good job.

Company culture has always been a vital aspect of work life. Your co-workers are with you for a significant portion of the day, so team dynamics are important. Henry Ford of Ford Motor Company had the right thinking: “Our employees are like extended members of our family.” The company should run like a well-oiled machine at all levels, complementing and developing each other’s roles and responsibilities. Confidence and trust glue the team together and make everyday errands pass by effortlessly.

There’s no doubt about it, your happiness at a company is largely directed by what you do for at least 40 hours a week. And let’s face it – your working life is a long one, so it’s best to do something you enjoy. It’s been proven time after time that you’re more likely to work harder if you’re passionate about your job. Happy people are more energetic, proactive, creative and optimistic, and quicker to learn. In which case it’s in your employer’s interest to make you happy.

This is largely down to how you’re managed. Management and guidance at work largely affect your work ethic and the company’s dynamics. “Management is nothing more than motivating other people,” stated Lee Iacocca, Chairman for Chrysler Motors. Management is a crucial role to play, because your workforce implicitly relies on your motivation to work. Donald Trump once said, “Good people = good management and good management = good people.”

Money can only promise a limited amount of will-power from an individual; pride in their work will give them the edge and a hunger for success. Belief in your product, trust, loyalty and commitment to the employer are also invaluable attributes for an employee to embody, and are recognised by good employers. As Mary Kay Ash, Head of Mary Kay cosmetics, stated: “People are definitely a company’s greatest asset. A company is only as good as the people it keeps.”

So perhaps, most of all, we just need to feel loved. Being treated well, as in a committed relationship, ensures that we’re in it for the long haul.

In July, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) published a report on what makes Brits happy. Not money, as it turns out. Health, family and friends topped the list when around 34,000 people were asked “What is wellbeing?” and “What in life matters to you?”

The survey was commissioned by David Cameron to help him develop future policies, but ironically critics have since complained that the £2 million to conduct the survey was a waste of money as the results are quite obvious. We’re never happy, are we?

But at the end of the day, as much as money is a necessity to live, happiness in yourself and at work increases quality of life, and helps boost your company at the same time. A happy workforce is a productive workforce after all.

From an employer, you want to be pushed to your full potential, appreciated for your effort, made responsible for important decisions, making you believe in your product and employer.

Working life is most enjoyable if you’re lucky enough to be in the position of not worrying about money. To have an enthralling occupation puts a spring in your step.

And as much as looking for a new job can be tiresome and sometimes feels like a dead end, just remember, it’s all in aid of finding ‘The One’, your soulmate that offers the whole package: an invigorating role with great prospects. And if the money’s good at the same time, all the better. So make it a good one with good people.