Filling a VP of Regulatory Affairs at a Biotech Consultancy

Write down whether your firm's more urgent need is deep scientific credibility that clients respect in the room, or hands-on regulatory submission experience that keeps engagements moving through agency review. Few candidates are equally strong at both, and being explicit about which matters more for this particular seat will sharpen your search on either platform.

If scientific credibility is the priority, Hunt Club's referral model can surface candidates whose reputations are already known within a specific therapeutic area through peer introductions. If regulatory execution is the more pressing gap, Bolster's marketplace lets you browse directly for people with hands-on submission experience, including on a fractional basis.

A useful test: think back to your firm's last two client engagements that hit real friction. If both stalled on the science, prioritize scientific depth; if both stalled on agency paperwork or process, prioritize regulatory execution instead.

A permanent VP of Regulatory Affairs, best sourced through Hunt Club, fits a firm that needs someone owning regulatory strategy across a growing client roster indefinitely. A narrower need, like guiding one client through a specific submission or building out a regulatory practice before committing to permanent headcount, is a better fit for a fractional or interim engagement through Bolster.

Many firms default to a permanent search because the title sounds senior, when the actual near-term need is really a defined project with a clear endpoint and a natural stopping point once the submission clears agency review.

The gap between SHRM's two 2025 averages is worth sitting with: $5,475 to fill a typical nonexecutive role, climbing all the way to $35,879 once a search is executive-level and every agency fee and internal hour gets tallied¹. A retained Hunt Club search for a permanent regulatory leader will track toward that higher figure, and the specialized nature of the role can push costs toward the top of that range given how thin the qualified talent pool often is.

SHRM's 2025 data put the median time-to-fill for a nonexecutive role at 44 days from requisition to offer accepted, with executive roles often running longer, and a regulatory affairs search with a narrow qualification bar can extend well past that median². If a client engagement's timeline depends on this hire, build in buffer rather than promising a date that assumes an average search, and communicate that buffer to the client early rather than discovering it together as a deadline approaches.

Ask candidates for specific, verifiable examples of submissions they led, including the therapeutic area and the regulatory pathway involved, and confirm those details with named references rather than accepting a general resume summary. A candidate whose regulatory experience is described only in broad terms is a real risk sign for a role this specialized.

Go one step further and ask what feedback the agency gave on that submission, positive or negative. A candidate who can speak honestly about a rejected or delayed submission usually understands the process better than one who only describes clean approvals.

Whoever fills this seat will likely need to establish credibility with client scientific and regulatory teams quickly, especially on an active engagement. Plan a structured introduction for the new hire's first weeks, including which client relationships they'll take over first, rather than letting that handoff happen informally.

A regulatory leader will likely attend meetings with agency reviewers on behalf of client programs, and it's worth clarifying early how much independent authority they have to make representations in those settings versus when a principal or client sponsor needs to be present. This matters more for a permanent Hunt Club hire who will represent the firm indefinitely than for a narrowly scoped Bolster engagement tied to one submission.

Put this expectation in writing before the first agency meeting happens, not after a miscommunication creates a problem with a regulator or a client relationship the firm has spent years building.

In short, run the search in this order:

1. Decide whether scientific credibility or hands-on regulatory submission experience matters more for this seat right now.
2. Match the engagement to the need: a permanent leader through Hunt Club, or a fractional leader for one submission or a practice buildout.
3. Plan for a longer timeline than usual, since a narrow qualification bar can stretch a regulatory search well past the median.
4. Verify submissions with named references, including the therapeutic area and regulatory pathway of each example.
5. Plan the first client introductions and agree how much independent authority the leader has in agency meetings.