I also downvoted for the same reason. I’ve looked at 80k’s reports pretty closely (bc I was basing our local EA group’s metrics on them) and it seemed pretty obvious to me that the counterfactual impact their advisees have is in fact the main thing they try to track & that they use for decisionmaking.
I haven’t looked into the other orgs as deeply, but your statement about 80k makes me disinclined to believe the rest of the list.
Where do you get the impression that they focus mainly on # of calls?
“Where do you get the impression that they focus mainly on # of calls?”I don’t have this impression. From the original post:
80,000 Hours tracking the number of advising calls they make and the number of career plan changes they catalyze, rather than the long-run impacts their advisees are having in the world.
It would be interesting to see a cohort analysis of 80k advisees by year, looking at what each advisee from each cohort has accomplished out in the world in the following years.
Maybe that already exists? I haven’t seen it, if so.
I don’t have this impression.
In the sentence you quoted, you literally state that 80k tracks the # of calls and # of career plan changes, but doesn’t track the long-run impacts of their advisees.
Saying “80k tracks the # of calls and # of career plan changes, but doesn’t track the long-run impacts of their advisees” is different from saying “80k focus[es] mainly on # of calls”