The “la Caixa” Junior Leader Fellowship is one of the most competitive postdoctoral programmes in Europe. If you’ve reached the interview stage, congratulations: you are already among a very small group of top-ranked candidates in your field. But excellence alone is not enough. The interview is not a formality. It is a structured, high-stakes evaluation, designed to assess not only your project, but you as a future research leader. Based on official selection guidelines, the interview rules outlined in the call documents, information sessions, and years of experience supporting candidates, here is what you really need to know.
How selective is the interview stage?
The number of candidates invited to interview depends on how many applications are received in each field and how many panels are formed. In practice, each panel usually preselects only 1 to 3 candidates.
Recent calls give a sense of the odds:
-
Retaining call: 418 eligible applications → 60 interviews
-
Incoming call: 281 eligible applications → 40 interviews
Insight from the TPM team: If you’re invited to interview, you’re already in a very small circle. At this stage, panels aren’t looking for brilliance alone — they are selecting applicants from a very competitive pool of applicants across different research fields.
The interview format
The interview follows a strict and standardised structure, as defined in the official selection process:
-
Duration: ~30 minutes
-
Language: English only
-
Format:
-
Short oral presentation by the candidate (~10 min)
-
Followed by a structured Q&A with the panel (~20 min)
-
-
Materials:
-
No slides, no new documents, no additional material
-
You may only refer to what was included in your submitted application
-
- Interview committee: 5-8 expert interviewers. The composition of the committee is blinded, which means that candidates do not know the identity of the evaluators
Interviews are conducted by videoconference, while the evaluation committeemeets in person at the headquarters of the la Caixa Foundation in Barcelona (Spain).
Insight from the TPM team: Think of this less as a presentation and more as a conversation under pressure. If you need slides to explain your project, that’s a warning sign.
How is the interview committee formed?
The committee is composed of independent international experts and is organised into disciplinary committees, depending on the number of candidates invited to interview in each field. Committees are multidisciplinary and typically include 5 to 8 university professors, researchers, or professional experts, covering the relevant disciplines of the candidate’s application. Interviews are chaired by an officer from the la Caixa Foundation, who moderates the session and ensures consistency across interviews.
Panels are structured around two broad areas of knowledge: Life Sciences and Physical Sciences, Mathematics and Engineering. Importantly, panel members have already evaluated the written proposals at the shortlisting stage, ensuring continuity between the proposal assessment and the interview.
Panel members are bound by strict conflict-of-interest and confidentiality rules, ensuring fairness and independence in the evaluation. Here you can find the list of evaluators who evaluated the applications for the La Caixa Junior Leader fellowship 2025 call.
Every year, after the results of awarded applications are released, the list of evaluators who participated in the evaluation of proposals is published.
Insight from the TPM team: Your panelists are not highly likely to be experts in your project topic, but will likely be experts in your research field. Thus, you must take their profile into account when defining the messages and language you will use to address them. Make it general enough for everybody to follow your project and focus on why your research matters to keep them engaged in your interview.
What the interview is really testing
Although the interview starts from your written application, it is not a repetition of the shortlisting stage.
The panel focuses on:
-
your ability to explain complex ideas clearly
-
your intellectual independence
-
your capacity to defend choices and assumptions
-
your maturity as a future group leader
Insight from the TPM team: Panels do not expect perfect answers. They are watching how you reason, how you react, and whether you actually own your project.
Metrics matter — but they will not carry you
Bibliometric indicators are required, but evaluators are explicitly instructed not to rely solely on numerical metrics.
They assess:
-
coherence of your trajectory
-
quality and originality of contributions
-
leadership and independence signals
Insight from the TPM team: Numbers get attention, but they do not do the talking for you. What matters most is whether your story makes sense when the numbers are taken away.
Host institutions: important, but not binding
The host institution and supervisor named in your application are not binding. If you are awarded the fellowship, you may change them.
Evaluators know this — and they explicitly take it into account during interviews.
Insight from the TPM team: Changing hosts is not a red flag. What raises eyebrows is when candidates can not clearly explain why they chose one in the first place.
No quotas, no nationality bias
There are no country or nationality quotas in the Junior Leader programme.
Insight from the TPM team: Once you are in the room, everyone is compared on the same scale. The clearer your positioning, the less your background matters.
Fellowship compatibility and mobility
The fellowship is not compatible with other contracts or fellowships covering salary costs.
However, changing host institutions is possible for justified reasons.
Insight from the TPM team: This fellowship is meant to be your main professional focus. Panels are wary of candidates who seem to be keeping too many doors open at once.
Reference letters: freedom, with consequences
There are no formal restrictions on referees. Still, evaluators sometimes react negatively when:
-
most referees represent the same institution
-
one of the referee is the host supervisor of the “la Caixa” Junior fellowship project
Generic reference letters are often criticised.
Insight from the TPM team: A glowing letter from the wrong person can be weaker than a thoughtful one from someone who truly knows your independence.
Prestige of the host institution: how panels see it
Yes, host institutions matter — but not as a proxy for quality.
During interviews, evaluators often assess:
-
whether the host is appropriate for the project
-
whether the candidate’s progression in the host is well-justified
They are fully aware that the host may change later.
Insight from the TPM team: A famous name won’t save a poorly thought-out choice. Panels quickly spot when “prestige” replaces strategy.
What is evaluated — and how it’s weighted
Shortlisting stage
-
50% excellence of the CV
-
35% motivation and research project
-
15% reference letters
Interview stage
-
50% academic and professional background
-
30% candidate potential
-
20% motivation and impact of the proposal
Importantly, the shortlisting score is carried forward and combined with the interview score to compute the final ranking.
Insight from the TPM team: The interview does not wipe the slate clean. It sharpens what was already visible in your written application — for better or worse.
What happens after the interview
Following the interviews, each evaluator has up to 15 calendar days to upload a written justification of their assessment to the online evaluation platform. This justification includes the panel’s reasoning and an overall impression of the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses.
Once all individual assessments have been submitted, the process moves into a consolidation phase. An automated system compiles the evaluations into a summary, which is then reviewed and validated by experts to ensure consistency and procedural correctness before final approval.
As a result, while the 15-day deadline applies to the evaluators’ submissions, candidates typically receive the final outcome around 3–5 weeks after the interviews have concluded.
Each candidate receives a final score that combines:
-
the score obtained during the shortlisting phase
-
the score obtained during the interview
This combined score determines the final ranking.
In case of ties, panels apply predefined criteria to establish the final order. Candidates who are not immediately awarded a fellowship may be placed on a reserve list, which can be used if selected candidates decline the offer or become ineligible.
Importantly:
-
the interview does not reopen eligibility checks
-
the panel’s decision is final and not subject to appeal
-
individual feedback is not systematically provided
Insight from the TPM team: Panels do not vote emotionally. They score, compare, and rank — and consistency across criteria really matters.
Final takeaway: this is a leadership interview
At the interview stage, nearly all candidates are excellent scientists.
What differentiates finalists is:
-
clarity under pressure
-
ownership of ideas
-
strategic reasoning
-
the ability to articulate why this project, why now, and why you
Ultimately, the panel must be able to rank candidates, not just appreciate them individually.
Insight from the TPM team: At this stage, many candidates are excellent scientists. The ones who stand out are those who already sound like future leaders.
More details on the Selection Process Guidelines can be found here.
If you are interested in a broader overview of “la Caixa” Junior Leader fellowship, you can find dedicated blog posts on our website.
In addition, the official broadcast of the Postdoctoral Junior Leader Fellowships 2026 Call Informative Session is freely available at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuOsosK4vbk. (If you are interested in the Q&A session, it starts from minute 26:00.)
Please contact us for more support in your proposal development and best of luck with your “la Caixa” Junior Leader fellowship application!
If you’ve made it to the interview, the panel already believes in your potential. The interview is your moment to shine and to show that you believe in it too.