Every year, representative members from central organization gather in what is called a āleaders forumā, to cultivate collaboration and coordination. The forums are selective and not open to everyone. Reports about the forums or decisions that were taken there are sparse.
As you say, the purpose of the event is to further collaboration and coordination.
To be clear, this typically looks like sharing updates on what various organizations are working on, identifying problems, getting advice, etc. To our knowledge (Iāve helped out with this event as a CEA staffer), the event hasnāt been used to make broad decisions about EA in general.
I doubt organisations would attend the forums if it would not influence their decision making afterwards. It is exactly the type of meeting which I would love to see more transparency around.
Iām sure the Forum does influence decision-making, and in much the same way EA Global does; people talk to each other, learn things, and make different decisions than they might have otherwise.
But as far as weāre aware (and as CEA, we would probably be aware), orgs arenāt coming together to make āofficialā decisions about EA as a whole. 80,000 Hours might change its priorities, and Open Phil might change its priorities, but there isnāt some unified set of priorities that everyone agrees upon, or some single task that everyone decides to work together on afterward. People come in with differing views and leave with differing views, even if they make some updates during the event.
As you say, the purpose of the event is to further collaboration and coordination.
To be clear, this typically looks like sharing updates on what various organizations are working on, identifying problems, getting advice, etc. To our knowledge (Iāve helped out with this event as a CEA staffer), the event hasnāt been used to make broad decisions about EA in general.
I doubt organisations would attend the forums if it would not influence their decision making afterwards. It is exactly the type of meeting which I would love to see more transparency around.
Iām sure the Forum does influence decision-making, and in much the same way EA Global does; people talk to each other, learn things, and make different decisions than they might have otherwise.
But as far as weāre aware (and as CEA, we would probably be aware), orgs arenāt coming together to make āofficialā decisions about EA as a whole. 80,000 Hours might change its priorities, and Open Phil might change its priorities, but there isnāt some unified set of priorities that everyone agrees upon, or some single task that everyone decides to work together on afterward. People come in with differing views and leave with differing views, even if they make some updates during the event.