Thanks for letting us know! That's useful data.

I don't ever learn how good the people I rejected were!

Definitely agree this is a challenge and limits learning from hiring rounds. I don't quite agree with the strength of this statement though. A great thing about the agency and tenacity of people in our community is that people often apply to a bunch of roles at similar organisations, and so you end up seeing what people you turned down work on from afar, and how well that goes. It seems reasonably informative to me to track which people end up doing great work at other orgs, and thinking through how much of that seems down to the role being different vs your hiring process having been a false negative, and thinking through what the process would have looked like to have avoided the false negative. 

This post really resonates with me, and its vision for a flourishing future for EA feels very compelling. I'm excited that you're thinking and writing about it!

Having said that, I don't know how to square that with the increased specialisation which seems like a sensible outcome of doing things at greater scale. Personally, I find engaging on the forum / going to EAGs etc pretty time/energy-intensive (though I think a large part of that is because I'm fairly introverted, and others will likely feel differently). I also think there's a lot of value in picking a hard goal and running full pelt at it. So from my point of view, I'd prefer solutions that looked more like 'create deliberate roles with this as the aim' and less like 'harangue people to take time away from their other roles'. 

I do not have the spirit to throw myself into a direct work project^[3]

Fwiw, GTP seems like reasonably little evidence about whether you could find a role you enjoyed that you also thought had substantial direct impact. There are so many different roles with direct impact, and setting up your own charity start up is very different from working at existing charity in a more defined role, or working in government, or for a large tech company. 

Obviously, changing direction in your career is a substantial undertaking, and it's reasonable to not want to do it. But the reason shouldn't be that you hated doing GTP - there are a lot of other options out there that you might find yourself intrinsically motivated by. Seems at least worth a chat with 80k about?
^[1]
 

1. ^{^}

   Not at all biased by how very much I enjoyed working with you at GWWC/CEA :-p 

Yes, connecting with other parents is really useful! My go to place for this right now is the Parents in EA facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/1669940986561413). What people do around EA Global is one of the things that gets discussed in there.

Really glad to hear this resonated with you. Good luck figuring out how and when to go home x

Thanks for such a thorough update!

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 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.

Good to know, thank you!