Results of the 2025 US SIRS® Benchmark: Life Sciences survey
If you support HR or compensation in a life sciences organization, you already know the stakes: niche skill sets, intense competition for experienced talent, and fast-changing business models (especially across Biotech, Pharma, and Medical Devices). When you’re shopping for salary surveys, you’re not just looking for broad market data—you’re looking for relevant market data that reflects the realities of your industry and captures the nuances of securing the skills and talent you need.
The 2025 US SIRS® Benchmark: Life Sciences survey findings highlight compensation and workforce trends you’ll want to pressure-test in your own programs, especially if you’ve been relying on broader, general-industry benchmarks. Several insights to consider:
1) Base pay is rising across career levels—especially early career
In 2025, base pay moved up across nearly all career levels in life sciences, signaling a continued competitive market. The sharpest year-over-year movement showed up in early pipeline roles:
- Para-professionals: +8.9% median base pay increase year-over-year
- Early technical roles (ET1): +7.0% median base pay increase year-over-year
You can read this as a clear message from the market: organizations are investing more to attract and keep the roles that keep labs running, production moving, and innovation progressing. If your structures haven’t been refreshed recently, especially at entry and mid-level, you may be underestimating what it now takes to hire and retain.
What to do with this insight: If your offers are getting declined or your early-career attrition is rising, validate your salary ranges (and range progression) against life sciences–specific benchmarks, not just broad market medians.
2) Life sciences organizations continue to pay a premium vs. general industry
One of the most important takeaways for anyone evaluating salary surveys: life sciences compensation can outpace general industry benchmarks at nearly every level. The premiums are most pronounced at the professional, management, and executive tiers, reflecting the specialized expertise and leadership demanded in the sector.
A standout data point: median base pay for executives in life sciences in 2025 reached nearly $600,000.
Why this matters for your survey selection: If you benchmark life sciences roles using general industry surveys, you risk anchoring pay too low, especially in functions or levels where specialized expertise is the differentiator. That can lead to longer time-to-fill, higher offer premiums, retention risk, or internal inequity when you’re forced to react.
3) New-hire pay pressure is real—especially for experienced talent
The survey points to rising new-hire median pay, with the most notable increases at the professional and management levels. That suggests many employers are paying more upfront to secure experience quickly.
The data also indicates a widening spread between the 25th and 75th pay percentiles at some levels. This represents an important signal that hiring pay is becoming more variable based on scarcity, specialization, and competitive urgency.
What to do with this insight: Make sure your survey source gives you strong visibility into distribution (not just a single midpoint), so you can set guardrails for offers, understand when/where premiums are justified, and keep internal parity in view.
4) Variable pay is doing more of the heavy lifting
Total cash compensation (TCC) growth is increasingly influenced by short-term incentives (STI). In many job families, TCC grew faster than base pay, suggesting organizations are using variable pay to balance pay competitiveness with cost control and performance differentiation.
Notably, some operational functions, such as Production, Supply Chain, and IT, did not see the same uplift in TCC. This may signal a more targeted incentive strategy, prioritizing roles most directly tied to innovation, growth, and market impact.
What to do with this insight: When you evaluate a salary survey, look for robust incentive data (eligibility, prevalence, and payout levels), not just base pay. Otherwise, you may misread what “competitive” truly means today.
5) LTI remains concentrated and becoming more selective below executive
Long-term incentives (LTI) remain most common at senior levels, with executive eligibility above 80%. But the survey also indicates a growing gap between eligibility and actual award receipt at the professional and management levels, suggesting that LTI is being used more selectively (often tied to performance, scarcity, or retention needs).
What to do with this insight: If you’re redesigning incentives, you’ll want survey data that distinguishes eligibility vs. participation/receipt so you don’t assume “eligible” means “awarded.”
6) Biotech stands out for heavier incentive use
Across life sciences sectors, Biotech appears to use STI and LTI more aggressively. In particular, Biotech introduces LTI earlier in careers and weights incentives more heavily at the management and executive levels. Pharma and medical device organizations, in contrast, appear more likely to rely on base pay, with narrower LTI usage.
What to do with this insight: If your peer group mixes sectors, your relevant market can become complex fast. The right survey should let you build peer cuts by sector so you can benchmark to the talent market you actually compete in.
7) The workplace is moving back on-site, and it’s tied to pay and sentiment
The survey highlights a meaningful shift in work models:
- Full-time on-site: up from 31% (2022) to 49% (2025)
- Full-time remote: down from 35% to 23%
- Hybrid remains relatively stable (but less prevalent than before)
According to last year’s version of Inside Employees’ Minds, on-site and hybrid employees do show stronger engagement and career confidence, and receive higher pay increases than fully remote employees.
What to do with this insight: Your workforce strategy and pay strategy are converging. If you’re managing location strategy, differential policies, or retention risk, you’ll want data that reflects what’s actually happening in life sciences—not assumptions from other industries.
Learn more
Benchmark life sciences pay and incentives with data built for your talent market. Explore SIRS Life Sciences to see how you can analyze pay trends, incentives, and workforce practices by sector and level. Looking for additional assistance? Give us a call at 866-605-1031 or email surveys@mercer.com.
About the Authors
Andrew Dickson, Commercial Industry Strategist
Andrew is the Commercial Industry Strategist for Life Sciences in the US and Canada. In this role, Andrew works with organizations to make the best use of industry surveys and other Mercer products and offerings.
Denise Hasskamp, Data Product Manager SIRS®
Denise is a seasoned compensation and total rewards expert with over 25 years of comprehensive experience across diverse industries. In her current role, Denise is responsible for driving the strategic development and management of data products that empower clients to make informed, data-driven decisions in compensation and total rewards.