EA UK is hiring a new director, and if we don’t find someone who can suggest a compelling strategy, shutting down is a likely outcome despite having ~9 months of funding runway.
Over the last decade EA in the UK has been pretty successful, Loxbridge in particular has the highest number of people involved in EA, there are multiple EA related organisations, and many people in government, tech, business, academia, media, etc who are positively inclined towards EA.
Because of this success (not that we’re claiming counterfactual credit), there is less low hanging fruit for a national/city group to do.
For example:
Conferences—EAG London and student summits are run by CEA
Co-working—There are at least 3 different places to co-work (LEAH, LISA, AIM) for 100+ people, as well as many other orgs that have space for guests
Student groups—A combination of Arcadia Impact and CEA
Incubation of new organisations—AIM/CE
Media outreach—Mainly done by the most relevant organisations/CEA
I’m not saying mission accomplished, but for EA specific community building in the UK, I think there will have to be a good understanding of the existing landscape and ideas for what is missing and is unlikely to be done by someone else.
I’m not sure how many 1-1s EA UK does with people who are new to EA, but first timer 1-1s seem especially valuable at helping people who are very new to the movement who maybe didn’t get into it through a typical university pipeline or randomly read about it online.
If EA UK existed solely as a lone, gifted community organizer who took a few hundred 1-1s with new members and sought value-adding connections and resources for the EA UK ecosystem, I think might well be worth a 100k yearly budget.
As non-sexy as it might be, how much value might there be in maintaining the success you’ve had? What do you think are the chances of decline without a new director? How much does the energy/strategy of the director contribute to collaboration/multiplication between those orgs you named?
Also could you consider hiring a Queen of the North instead, if there’s untapped potential up there? Or is realistically too cold to be productive in such places?
Thank you for asking this question! I have the feeling that for some national groups, we might be upholding them based on path dependence, not because they have intentionally selected the right target group. I wrote a recent comment about this, based on my experience at EA Germany.
I’m most excited about national organisations that can reach specific, narrow target groups, as many of the scalable programs would seem more efficient to do on a larger scale.
That being said, a larger organization operating at the continental or international level could still hire contractors to experiment with smaller interventions. This would mean having only one organization with one director, potentially increasing cost-effectiveness while allowing for experimentation with different target groups and markets.
A director of EA Europe could hire a team to organize a conference in the North of the UK, for example, while having an Italian-speaking contractor doing 1- 1s for Italy and organizing group calls for European CBs. As a UK CB, you take away these possibilities as you artificially narrow the focus without much reason.
I would be excited for EA UK to think more broadly in scope, connect with other European national groups, and expand the parameters within which the director would be allowed to operate.
It’s clear EA UK has built a strong foundation, especially in London and the Loxbridge area! In all transparency, I have not been involved with the EA UK community, but I am relocating to the UK soon, and am hopeful there is still a community there to engage with and learn from! With that in mind, from an outsiders perspective, and from having skimmed the strategy of EA UK, I’d be curious if it may be worth exploring any of the following;
Regional & sector-specific communities outside London: Would cities like Manchester, Glasgow, Birmingham, and Belfast have untapped talent outside of students? Could they become vibrant EA hubs with local events, mentorship, and partnerships?
Law and policy career support: Your strategy document noted a gap in engaging legal professionals, despite their huge influence on areas like AI regulation and biosecurity. An EA Law Network or targeted fellowships could really boost impact here. * I noticed that there hasn’t been a focus here as historically there hasn’t been much interest from lawyers – has anyone identified why?
Corporate EA chapters: You’ve identified that many sympathetic professionals work in large firms with EDI/ESG programs. Could a pilot “EA@Work” model could help build impact-focused groups inside these companies.
Narrative & communication training: Helping EA-adjacent professionals tell their story better and build bridges with other movements might expand reach and improve collaboration.
Life transitions as engagement moments: Career breaks, relocation, or sabbaticals could be key moments to re-engage people with EA through retreats or online cohorts.
Better data on mid-career EA engagement: Developing tools or surveys to track how professionals connect with and stay in EA could inform smarter strategies going forward.
Again, this is from the outside looking in, so maybe all of these have been explored historically and found to be not worth it, or maybe they don’t entirely align, but just throwing some ideas out there and wondering if any of these areas could complement the existing ecosystem and open up new avenues for growth and inclusion.
It seems 1- 1s are done remotely, which means this could also be done by an international organization. I assume this would allow it to be more cost-effective as you would only need one organization, director, CRM, and training for several people who could do 1-1s for several regions.
However, if you do shut down EA UK as a paid organisation, consider what can be done to leave it in such a manner as to allow any core work arising in future to be handled by ad-hoc volunteers, or to be picked back up if the org is restarted in future.
Also, given that the application states that you receive donations of approx. 30% of costs without fundraising, you should give serious consideration to hiring at whatever level of part-time that implies rather than giving up.
We should shut down EA UK, change our mind
EA UK is hiring a new director, and if we don’t find someone who can suggest a compelling strategy, shutting down is a likely outcome despite having ~9 months of funding runway.
Over the last decade EA in the UK has been pretty successful, Loxbridge in particular has the highest number of people involved in EA, there are multiple EA related organisations, and many people in government, tech, business, academia, media, etc who are positively inclined towards EA.
Because of this success (not that we’re claiming counterfactual credit), there is less low hanging fruit for a national/city group to do.
For example:
Conferences—EAG London and student summits are run by CEA
Co-working—There are at least 3 different places to co-work (LEAH, LISA, AIM) for 100+ people, as well as many other orgs that have space for guests
Student groups—A combination of Arcadia Impact and CEA
Incubation of new organisations—AIM/CE
Media outreach—Mainly done by the most relevant organisations/CEA
I’m not saying mission accomplished, but for EA specific community building in the UK, I think there will have to be a good understanding of the existing landscape and ideas for what is missing and is unlikely to be done by someone else.
I’m not sure how many 1-1s EA UK does with people who are new to EA, but first timer 1-1s seem especially valuable at helping people who are very new to the movement who maybe didn’t get into it through a typical university pipeline or randomly read about it online.
If EA UK existed solely as a lone, gifted community organizer who took a few hundred 1-1s with new members and sought value-adding connections and resources for the EA UK ecosystem, I think might well be worth a 100k yearly budget.
As non-sexy as it might be, how much value might there be in maintaining the success you’ve had? What do you think are the chances of decline without a new director? How much does the energy/strategy of the director contribute to collaboration/multiplication between those orgs you named?
Also could you consider hiring a Queen of the North instead, if there’s untapped potential up there? Or is realistically too cold to be productive in such places?
meta-comment: “X-change my mind” is a great opportunity for a debate slider (if you want more input/ comments)
Thank you for asking this question! I have the feeling that for some national groups, we might be upholding them based on path dependence, not because they have intentionally selected the right target group. I wrote a recent comment about this, based on my experience at EA Germany.
I’m most excited about national organisations that can reach specific, narrow target groups, as many of the scalable programs would seem more efficient to do on a larger scale.
That being said, a larger organization operating at the continental or international level could still hire contractors to experiment with smaller interventions. This would mean having only one organization with one director, potentially increasing cost-effectiveness while allowing for experimentation with different target groups and markets.
A director of EA Europe could hire a team to organize a conference in the North of the UK, for example, while having an Italian-speaking contractor doing 1- 1s for Italy and organizing group calls for European CBs. As a UK CB, you take away these possibilities as you artificially narrow the focus without much reason.
I would be excited for EA UK to think more broadly in scope, connect with other European national groups, and expand the parameters within which the director would be allowed to operate.
It’s clear EA UK has built a strong foundation, especially in London and the Loxbridge area! In all transparency, I have not been involved with the EA UK community, but I am relocating to the UK soon, and am hopeful there is still a community there to engage with and learn from! With that in mind, from an outsiders perspective, and from having skimmed the strategy of EA UK, I’d be curious if it may be worth exploring any of the following;
Regional & sector-specific communities outside London: Would cities like Manchester, Glasgow, Birmingham, and Belfast have untapped talent outside of students? Could they become vibrant EA hubs with local events, mentorship, and partnerships?
Law and policy career support: Your strategy document noted a gap in engaging legal professionals, despite their huge influence on areas like AI regulation and biosecurity. An EA Law Network or targeted fellowships could really boost impact here. * I noticed that there hasn’t been a focus here as historically there hasn’t been much interest from lawyers – has anyone identified why?
Corporate EA chapters: You’ve identified that many sympathetic professionals work in large firms with EDI/ESG programs. Could a pilot “EA@Work” model could help build impact-focused groups inside these companies.
Narrative & communication training: Helping EA-adjacent professionals tell their story better and build bridges with other movements might expand reach and improve collaboration.
Life transitions as engagement moments: Career breaks, relocation, or sabbaticals could be key moments to re-engage people with EA through retreats or online cohorts.
Better data on mid-career EA engagement: Developing tools or surveys to track how professionals connect with and stay in EA could inform smarter strategies going forward.
Again, this is from the outside looking in, so maybe all of these have been explored historically and found to be not worth it, or maybe they don’t entirely align, but just throwing some ideas out there and wondering if any of these areas could complement the existing ecosystem and open up new avenues for growth and inclusion.
Upvoted, tentatively disagreed.
Your last paragraph is exactly why such a position focused on UK specific community-building should exist.
Whether director of EA UK is that position, I simply do not know.
It seems 1- 1s are done remotely, which means this could also be done by an international organization. I assume this would allow it to be more cost-effective as you would only need one organization, director, CRM, and training for several people who could do 1-1s for several regions.
However, if you do shut down EA UK as a paid organisation, consider what can be done to leave it in such a manner as to allow any core work arising in future to be handled by ad-hoc volunteers, or to be picked back up if the org is restarted in future.
Also, given that the application states that you receive donations of approx. 30% of costs without fundraising, you should give serious consideration to hiring at whatever level of part-time that implies rather than giving up.