This may apply, for example, to taking a job with Givewell, who likely follow a process more akin to ‘threshold hiring’.In this case, it seems likely that taking this job may increase the number of overall jobs by close to 1.
Not very good evidence, though, without word directly from GiveWell.
More on threshold hiring here, but no EA-specific examples.
Note that GiveWell stated longer-term plans to “more than double” the size of their research team by early 2022. I assume that one of their bottlenecks is that they recently chose a new Managing Director who will add more research management capacity, but who doesn’t start until July 2020. I wouldn’t be surprised if hiring scales up after that (though I don’t know for sure that it will).
From this older article:
Not very good evidence, though, without word directly from GiveWell.
More on threshold hiring here, but no EA-specific examples.
Thanks Michael. As you said, we would need to confirm it from GiveWell. In 2019 they planned to hire 3-5 for new research staffs. It looks like they are physically limiting the growth of GiveWell compared to the available “talent pool” as expressed in Open Phil’s hiring round. Also the priors suggest that GiveWell would like to “grow slowly”: https://blog.givewell.org/2013/08/29/we-cant-simply-buy-capacity/
So I really doubt we should go by the claim of 80k in this regard.
Note that GiveWell stated longer-term plans to “more than double” the size of their research team by early 2022. I assume that one of their bottlenecks is that they recently chose a new Managing Director who will add more research management capacity, but who doesn’t start until July 2020. I wouldn’t be surprised if hiring scales up after that (though I don’t know for sure that it will).