Autonomous-Assay Orchestration Recovery Authority — Drug Discovery

The mandate

A lead-series review found that robot method versions, reagent lots, compound locations and plate maps could not be reconciled for several high-throughput runs. Scientists contained the affected decisions, but the automation director resigned during the investigation. The site needs one executive able to restore trustworthy experimental execution while discovery teams continue essential, deliberately bounded laboratory work.

The interim must begin within two weeks and hold the seat for ten months, leading run reconstruction, control redesign, instrument qualification coordination and successor induction. A permanent search starts after the first seventy-day reproducibility baseline. Five weeks are protected for overlap; the assignment will not extend to absorb new therapeutic programmes or a broader laboratory-estate consolidation.

At handover, every priority result must resolve to hypothesis, protocol, method version, compound and reagent identity, plate map, robot command, instrument calibration, environmental exception, raw output, analysis and scientific disposition. Two unseen runs—including a mid-sequence instrument swap—must reproduce within scientist-approved limits, and the successor must accept remaining legacy-method and vendor-interface debt.

The authority may stop autonomous queues, quarantine results, impose manual witnessing, reprioritise automation capacity, direct the approved ₹48 crore recovery and appoint temporary control leads. Discovery executives retain target and candidate investment; accountable scientists judge scientific validity; Quality and Biosafety own their approvals. Permanent hiring, estate closure and expenditure above delegation require sponsor consent.

Medicinal-chemistry strategy, replacement of every laboratory information system and retrospective reconstruction of experiments without current decision consequence are outside scope. The interim may require evidence-bearing interfaces but cannot redesign assays unilaterally or override safe laboratory practice. Recovery is limited to execution integrity, reproducibility and accountable human intervention within the existing discovery portfolio.

Why this seat is open

The disputed run histories interrupted confidence at the boundary between scientific method and automated execution, then the incumbent’s departure removed cross-functional authority. Scientists can repeat individual assays but cannot repair fleet-wide control while meeting programme commitments. The company intends to recruit permanent leadership once a credible operating baseline exists.

What you will own

• Reconstruct affected experiments across protocol, method, material identity, plate topology, robot action, instrument state, output and disposition.
• Define immutable run and material identifiers with effective method versions, calibration applicability, exception evidence and authorised correction.
• Decide which autonomous workflows may restart, require witnessed operation, need scientific requalification or remain quarantined.
• Command exercises covering swapped reagent, displaced plate, stale method, instrument substitution, sensor exception and interrupted transfer.
• Establish capacity and escalation rules that prevent throughput pressure from bypassing scientist, Quality or Biosafety decisions.
• Govern remediation against reproducible runs, bounded result exposure, exception closure, transparent queue state and reduced manual reconstruction.
• Transfer command through two unseen assays and successor acceptance of legacy protocols, instruments and supplier integration limitations.

Candidate qualifications

• Held executive laboratory-automation, high-throughput screening or autonomous-experiment authority in pharmaceutical or advanced biotechnology research.
• Reconstructed experimental provenance across materials, liquid handlers, scheduling software, instruments, raw data and scientific analysis versions.
• Stopped high-value discovery decisions when execution evidence could not support a reproducible scientific conclusion under portfolio pressure.
• Led robot and instrument requalification with assay scientists, Quality and Biosafety while respecting their distinct accountable judgements.
• Managed mixed proprietary equipment where method portability, time synchronisation and vendor correction histories were operational constraints.
• Handed a recovered automated laboratory to permanent leadership through live runs and adversarial material or equipment substitutions.

Non-negotiables

• Available within two weeks for exclusive Bengaluru service and controlled access to operating discovery laboratories.
• Has commanded production-scale scientific automation recovery; generic manufacturing robotics or research informatics is insufficient.
• No undisclosed relationship with automation, instrument, reagent or laboratory-platform suppliers inside the affected environment.
• Will preserve original run evidence and scientific authority even when quarantine delays a prominent discovery programme.

1. 49 words maximum. State your Bengaluru availability and one automated assay whose execution history you reconstructed under pressure.
2. 49 words maximum. How did you distinguish a robot-complete run from a scientifically valid and reproducible experiment?
3. 49 words maximum. Which unseen material or instrument substitution would qualify the permanent leader before handover?