Pros
Many scientists are highly skilled and dedicated to their work and most facilities are well-equipped
Cons
bit.bio used to be a good company with a strong mission, but the recent leadership changes have made it clear there is no stable strategy or direction. In just two months, the company went through three different CEOs — even governments don’t rotate leaders that fast.
In both 2024 and 2025, roughly 20–30% of the workforce was made redundant. These cuts were followed almost immediately by hiring sprees and promotions at senior management level, which made little sense. Internal roles were often tailored to people already chosen to stay, and redundancy packages were inconsistent.
What’s worse, company documents from as far back as November 2023 indicated financial instability, yet new hires were still brought on — some only to be let go within weeks or months. Promotions are almost exclusively for senior-level staff; research assistants, even those with 3–6 years of experience, remain stuck in the same role without salary reviews, and requests for progression are met with vague, dismissive explanations.
The lack of strategic clarity is striking. For example, in 2024 the company invested in building a cell therapies department, only to make the entire team redundant within months, then shifted focus to commercial hiring, and now seems to be exploring media component development. The result is a constant feeling of uncertainty: offices are half-empty, morale is low, and employees feel undervalued.
HR has also not helped the situation — redundancies were handled with minimal transparency and support, with packages kept to the bare minimum.
Overall, bit.bio has gone from a place with real potential to one marked by instability, unclear priorities, and poor treatment of staff.
