Strongly upvoted. This kind of post is extremely valuable and I would encourage anyone to write more of these kinds of posts: It helps us as a community to coordinate much better. Thanks Anya and Katie for all your efforts and research putting this together and sharing it.
Reg. “There are probably more efforts we’re not aware of” There are EA-aligned newsletters including job openings relevant to that newsletter’s scope, e.g. like this.
Reg. “We’re not sure what the optimal level of coordination between hiring organizations in the EA community is”: I guess the different points of the spectrum is something like
2. Well coordinated network of hiring agents (coordinated & decentralized)
3. Having one big “EA hiring agent” (centralized)
Ideally we would be at 2. (I’m uncertain whether it’s better to tend towards 1. or tend towards 3.)
3. Has many downsides (incl. the ones you’ve mentioned) whereas the prototype for 2. could look something like this:
There are different “EA hiring agents” (orgs, individual headhunters, CRMs, hiring/vetting projects etc.) that coordinate among each other (*) incl. supporting projects/org you mention (such as the “value-vetting” service)
The coordination of these hiring agents is incentivized by some type of “EA Hiring Hub” (which focus isn’t to store the candidates’ data), but that could take over activities such as
Developing centralized statistics about overall candidate pool (imagine Our World in Data but just for hiring)
Developing a secure, compliant system for the different agents to share candidates among each other
Developing a system that incentivizes coordination among these agents over the long-term
*I’m less certain about what the hiring scope of each agent ought to be, but it seems best for different agents to optimize for different hiring scopes (cause area, specific org, anything that the EA community might need in the future...)
Please see this comment as unstructured, half-baked thoughts I had after reading this post and wrote in a couple of minutes vs. a well-thought idea.
Thanks for the kind feedback, Christina and for sharing your thoughts!
And I think I generally agree that the optimal place is somewhere around 2, with some centralized provision of certain goods and services that are valuable to lots of decentralized hiring agents.
Strongly upvoted. This kind of post is extremely valuable and I would encourage anyone to write more of these kinds of posts: It helps us as a community to coordinate much better. Thanks Anya and Katie for all your efforts and research putting this together and sharing it.
Reg. “There are probably more efforts we’re not aware of” There are EA-aligned newsletters including job openings relevant to that newsletter’s scope, e.g. like this.
Reg. “We’re not sure what the optimal level of coordination between hiring organizations in the EA community is”: I guess the different points of the spectrum is something like
1. Fully uncoordinated hiring agents (uncoordinated & decentralized)
2. Well coordinated network of hiring agents (coordinated & decentralized)
3. Having one big “EA hiring agent” (centralized)
Ideally we would be at 2. (I’m uncertain whether it’s better to tend towards 1. or tend towards 3.)
3. Has many downsides (incl. the ones you’ve mentioned) whereas the prototype for 2. could look something like this:
There are different “EA hiring agents” (orgs, individual headhunters, CRMs, hiring/vetting projects etc.) that coordinate among each other (*) incl. supporting projects/org you mention (such as the “value-vetting” service)
The coordination of these hiring agents is incentivized by some type of “EA Hiring Hub” (which focus isn’t to store the candidates’ data), but that could take over activities such as
Developing centralized statistics about overall candidate pool (imagine Our World in Data but just for hiring)
Developing a secure, compliant system for the different agents to share candidates among each other
Developing a system that incentivizes coordination among these agents over the long-term
*I’m less certain about what the hiring scope of each agent ought to be, but it seems best for different agents to optimize for different hiring scopes (cause area, specific org, anything that the EA community might need in the future...)
Please see this comment as unstructured, half-baked thoughts I had after reading this post and wrote in a couple of minutes vs. a well-thought idea.
Thanks for the kind feedback, Christina and for sharing your thoughts!
And I think I generally agree that the optimal place is somewhere around 2, with some centralized provision of certain goods and services that are valuable to lots of decentralized hiring agents.