Hide table of contents

I run the 80,000 Hours one-on-one team. We speak to about 1.5k people a year about their careers. Our internal term for these people, which I'll use throughout this post, is 'advisees'. One of the biggest ways we help people is by making introductions to people working in high impact fields (we refer to them internally as 'specialists'). Below is the guidance we give specialists on how to make those introductions worthwhile. 

Background

One of the core things we’re trying to figure out on an advisee call is whether there are other people we know about who could be useful for the person to chat to. People have reported these kinds of introductions to have been surprisingly useful in the past. 

Sometimes it’s very clear what the value of an introduction can be, such as putting a hiring manager in touch with someone who has the profile they’re looking for. But there are quite a few other things that have turned out to be useful over the years, such as:  

  • Specialists giving a sense of their day to day in a particular job and thereby give someone a sense of whether they’re likely to be suited to that role or not
  • Specialists talking about their background and how they got into a job, to give a sense of how to get into their role
  • Social proof - putting a face and voice to a particular sector, and making an advisee feel more like they too could get into that sector
  • Particular esoteric knowledge about a field or path which it’s hard to find as an outsider to it. 

I do really want to recommend that people thinking about their careers seek out more conversations with people working in fields they’re interested in or who have thought through similar kinds of decisions. It’s also worth taking time to prep in order to get additional value from them. It’s nerve wracking to ask for conversations like this (some advice from Michael Aird on how to do this). But I think people are often happy to be asked for their advice. In fact, people working in a field may themselves feel reticent to offer calls to talk about how they got to where they are. To them, it’s far more salient how far they have to go rather than how much they’ve already achieved. I thought seeing our list of tips might give people on either side of this a little more confidence to initiate these conversations.  

The below are the suggestions we make to the experts in the field to whom we make introductions. They were in large part written by Alex Lawsen and Anemone Franz, with input from some specialists. The system is now run by Zac Richardson.

 

Tips on how to make the conversations you have more useful

  • It’s sometimes useful to ask the advisee to come to the call with a list of questions or topic prepared. If you’d like us to ask all advisees to do this, just let us know!
  • If you’re happy to take a bit more ownership of part of the call, it can be helpful to ask the person you’re speaking to what they are most hoping to get out of the conversation (we typically do this on advising calls).
  • We will have given both of you some context on each other in the introductory email, but it can still be worth giving a brief personal introduction, for example explaining what you’re working on at the moment.
  • Starting the call by asking some open-ended questions of the person you’re advising can be helpful to get a better sense of them. This could be about their current career plans, or something broader, like what they have been thinking about recently.
  • It can be helpful to set clear expectations at the beginning of the call about the scope of your expertise and the topics you feel comfortable discussing, especially if you work in a complicated field with lots of internal disagreement.
  • Not giving a take on a particular question is fine, as is giving one but flagging that you know others disagree.
  • Don’t underestimate the value of just describing who you are and how you ended up in your current position.
  • If you find yourself saying the same thing to lots of the people you speak to, consider writing down an FAQ or ‘document of common advice’. Rohin Shah has a public example here. If you’d rather yours wasn’t shared as widely (or if you just don’t want to go to the effort of building a personal website), a Google Doc or forum post works perfectly well, and if you’d like, we can share anything you do write with advisees before introducing them.
  • Treat the conversation as a professional interaction, with the same norms around discourse and personal familiarity that you would expect from a conversation at a large conference. 

If you’d like to chat to our team, we’d love to hear from you - just fill in this form

Comments10


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Don’t underestimate the value of just describing who you are and how you ended up in your current position.


I had several conversations with 'specialists' after my 80k advising call, and personally found the seemingly generic 'tell me about your career path' information surprisingly helpful! I found that people usually ended up sharing little tidbits of information that helped clarify the landscape of different fields, who is entering them and by what channels, and what alternative pathways might look like.
 

It’s sometimes useful to ask the advisee to come to the call with a list of questions or topic prepared. If you’d like us to ask all advisees to do this, just let us know!


I personally find it extremely useful when people provide questions beforehand, even if it's just a couple of bulletpoints. But I've also found (in contexts other than this[1]) that sometimes asking people to send a few bulletpoints is too high a barrier to entry and they just won't do that. So I'd suggest making this a suggestion, rather than something that sounds more like a requirement.

  1. ^

    e.g. when people are requesting surveys.

Good to know, thank you!

All fantastic advice and resonates with my experience on both sides of the aisle here. I was racking my brain for things I'd disagree with or add and I struggled, because I think you've covered it pretty well.

One thing I might add, is to be open to challenging (gently and with great care) basic assumptions career seekers might have even early in the conversation. It often surprises me how people dismiss or haven't even considered certain ideas (such as starting their own thing/org), or are stuck thinking thinking down certain paths. People think things are impossible which may be very possible.

Sometimes when you aren't so personally close to someone, its actually easier to challenge assumptions early in the conversation.

 

I think this challenging of career assumptions is especially valuable to people who are young or new to an area.

I've seen people before tunnel vision towards a particular path due to missing some details in the field as a whole and all their questions presupposed some sort of path.

Challenging this can help see the tradeoffs of decisions more clearly.

Thanks for this post Michelle! This seems like generally useful advice, and maybe EAG attendees should read it as well.

I'm curious:

  • What kind of specialists does the advising team feel unusually bottlenecked by access to right now?
  • Same for advisees?
  • Do you feel constrained most heavily by access to specialists vs advisees right now?

No worries about responding if you're busy :)

One type of specialist we're pretty bottlenecked on is people who work in cybersecurity, and have a good sense of how to succed in that industry. 

On advisees, we're particularly keen to speak to people later on in their careers, who can credibly join government agencies who care a lot about years of experience. 

I would say that it's reasonably even on these right now, and actually what we're most bottlenecked on is hiring to our team. If you know someone who you'd appreciate getting career advice from, please encourage them to apply!

Thanks for sharing this. How do you identify specialists with whom to arrange calls?

Thanks for the question! We find specialists in lots of different ways, including: 
- People working at high impact orgs who we actively reach out to because we are fans of their work. 
- People who applied for coaching themselves in the past 
- Meeting them at conferences (we try to attend both generalist conferences like EA Global and more specialist ones like the AI Security Forum). 
- People referred to us by others already in our network.

Thank you for writing about this. High Impact Medicine has also linked to several articles from our mentoring programme website (https://www.highimpactmedicine.org/mentorship-programme) on how to build mentoring relationships and suggestions for mentees and mentors. I'm sharing this in case it's helpful to anyone reading :)

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 22m read
 · 
The cause prioritization landscape in EA is changing. Prominent groups have shut down, others have been founded, and everyone’s trying to figure out how to prepare for AI. This is the third in a series of posts critically examining the state of cause prioritization and strategies for moving forward. Executive Summary * An increasingly common argument is that we should prioritize work in AI over work in other cause areas (e.g. farmed animal welfare, reducing nuclear risks) because the impending AI revolution undermines the value of working in those other areas. * We consider three versions of the argument: * Aligned superintelligent AI will solve many of the problems that we currently face in other cause areas. * Misaligned AI will be so disastrous that none of the existing problems will matter because we’ll all be dead or worse. * AI will be so disruptive that our current theories of change will all be obsolete, so the best thing to do is wait, build resources, and reformulate plans until after the AI revolution. * We identify some key cruxes of these arguments, and present reasons to be skeptical of them. A more direct case needs to be made for these cruxes before we rely on them in making important cause prioritization decisions. * Even on short timelines, the AI transition may be a protracted and patchy process, leaving many opportunities to act on longer timelines. * Work in other cause areas will often make essential contributions to the AI transition going well. * Projects that require cultural, social, and legal changes for success, and projects where opposing sides will both benefit from AI, will be more resistant to being solved by AI. * Many of the reasons why AI might undermine projects in other cause areas (e.g. its unpredictable and destabilizing effects) would seem to undermine lots of work on AI as well. * While an impending AI revolution should affect how we approach and prioritize non-AI (and AI) projects, doing this wisel
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
This is Part 1 of a multi-part series, shared as part of Career Conversations Week. The views expressed here are my own and don't reflect those of my employer. TL;DR: Building an EA-aligned career starting from an LMIC comes with specific challenges that shaped how I think about career planning, especially around constraints: * Everyone has their own "passport"—some structural limitation that affects their career more than their abilities. The key is recognizing these constraints exist for everyone, just in different forms. Reframing these from "unfair barriers" to "data about my specific career path" has helped me a lot. * When pursuing an ideal career path, it's easy to fixate on what should be possible rather than what actually is. But those idealized paths often require circumstances you don't have—whether personal (e.g., visa status, financial safety net) or external (e.g., your dream org hiring, or a stable funding landscape). It might be helpful to view the paths that work within your actual constraints as your only real options, at least for now. * Adversity Quotient matters. When you're working on problems that may take years to show real progress, the ability to stick around when the work is tedious becomes a comparative advantage. Introduction Hi, I'm Rika. I was born and raised in the Philippines and now work on hiring and recruiting at the Centre for Effective Altruism in the UK. This post might be helpful for anyone navigating the gap between ambition and constraint—whether facing visa barriers, repeated setbacks, or a lack of role models from similar backgrounds. Hearing stories from people facing similar constraints helped me feel less alone during difficult times. I hope this does the same for someone else, and that you'll find lessons relevant to your own situation. It's also for those curious about EA career paths from low- and middle-income countries—stories that I feel are rarely shared. I can only speak to my own experience, but I hop
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
I am writing this to reflect on my experience interning with the Fish Welfare Initiative, and to provide my thoughts on why more students looking to build EA experience should do something similar.  Back in October, I cold-emailed the Fish Welfare Initiative (FWI) with my resume and a short cover letter expressing interest in an unpaid in-person internship in the summer of 2025. I figured I had a better chance of getting an internship by building my own door than competing with hundreds of others to squeeze through an existing door, and the opportunity to travel to India carried strong appeal. Haven, the Executive Director of FWI, set up a call with me that mostly consisted of him listing all the challenges of living in rural India — 110° F temperatures, electricity outages, lack of entertainment… When I didn’t seem deterred, he offered me an internship.  I stayed with FWI for one month. By rotating through the different teams, I completed a wide range of tasks:  * Made ~20 visits to fish farms * Wrote a recommendation on next steps for FWI’s stunning project * Conducted data analysis in Python on the efficacy of the Alliance for Responsible Aquaculture’s corrective actions * Received training in water quality testing methods * Created charts in Tableau for a webinar presentation * Brainstormed and implemented office improvements  I wasn’t able to drive myself around in India, so I rode on the back of a coworker’s motorbike to commute. FWI provided me with my own bedroom in a company-owned flat. Sometimes Haven and I would cook together at the residence, talking for hours over a chopping board and our metal plates about war, family, or effective altruism. Other times I would eat at restaurants or street food booths with my Indian coworkers. Excluding flights, I spent less than $100 USD in total. I covered all costs, including international transportation, through the Summer in South Asia Fellowship, which provides funding for University of Michigan under