Very off-the cuff. I think a more productive version of this would be to go by career path rather than speaking in the abstract.
I think ratios probably depends on the number of candidates vs number of EA roles that are not getting filled with other candidates. I donât think someone needs to choose one or the otherâthey could apply for both kinds of roles simaltaneously. I think in practice people wonât know which path is better until they know what opportunities are avaiable to them, and then rhey would make a decision based on their own career plans/â personal preferences.
If the person thinks the work is high impact, then I think the general advice ofâtrust the EA orgs to know whether youâre the right fit for the job because they have more data than you do on their optionsâ seems pretty safe. If you have an offer from an EA org thatâs been trying to fill a role a long time and has been unable to, then it seems like this opportunity makes sense at least in the near-term.
As a counterpoint, Iâd expect people currently have a strong preference towards EA orgs because they provide scarce non-monetary goods, so it may be that there is some % of people who should actually do ladder-climbing instead (10-20%?). Itâs not clear to me it would be easy for individuals to know whether they fall into this category.
Very off-the cuff. I think a more productive version of this would be to go by career path rather than speaking in the abstract.
I think ratios probably depends on the number of candidates vs number of EA roles that are not getting filled with other candidates. I donât think someone needs to choose one or the otherâthey could apply for both kinds of roles simaltaneously. I think in practice people wonât know which path is better until they know what opportunities are avaiable to them, and then rhey would make a decision based on their own career plans/â personal preferences.
If the person thinks the work is high impact, then I think the general advice ofâtrust the EA orgs to know whether youâre the right fit for the job because they have more data than you do on their optionsâ seems pretty safe. If you have an offer from an EA org thatâs been trying to fill a role a long time and has been unable to, then it seems like this opportunity makes sense at least in the near-term.
As a counterpoint, Iâd expect people currently have a strong preference towards EA orgs because they provide scarce non-monetary goods, so it may be that there is some % of people who should actually do ladder-climbing instead (10-20%?). Itâs not clear to me it would be easy for individuals to know whether they fall into this category.