thanks as always for the thoughtful comments ollie! I’ll respond to the P2P piece right now because I think there’s , but definitely want to come back to your other points.
I think our suggestion here stems from a more fundamental difference than just “make more of connection type X”—it was a pushback to the idea that your primary goal should just be to get advice. I think there are some tendencies towards too much deference and people not knowing what to do next (e.g. not knowing what to do after the intro fellowship).
Our theory of change here is something like: peers can invest significantly more time in you / getting to know you than senior people can and can support you over the course of your journey. So more P2P activities → more supportive / constructive friendships
It’s plausible that the solution here isn’t a P2P support group or something, and just “run more socials”.
I might also be more optimistic than others that well-structured programs which offer some guidance and accountability can help a lot in making P2P interactions more valuable, although I’m very unsure by how much.
I also think there are some benefits to signalling “it is possible to make progress on difficult issues with peers” is an important message to send (and I think events are a good time to signal such things).
Otherwise I agree—if the goal we’re striving for is “get people advice”—then it makes sense that senior people are ranked higher than peers. I think it would be great to see how we could better leverage senior peoples’ time. (and thanks for sharing attendee feedback on what kinds of interactions they find valuable.)
I also agree about doing more with people “slightly ahead of you”—we didn’t discuss it much, but on reflection it definitely feels like fairly low hanging fruit.
Got it. Agree P2P makes sense if your goal is to build your social network / support group and that this is also valuable. I guess this doesn’t need to replace the goal of seeking advice, and can be pursued in parallel :)
thanks as always for the thoughtful comments ollie! I’ll respond to the P2P piece right now because I think there’s , but definitely want to come back to your other points.
I think our suggestion here stems from a more fundamental difference than just “make more of connection type X”—it was a pushback to the idea that your primary goal should just be to get advice. I think there are some tendencies towards too much deference and people not knowing what to do next (e.g. not knowing what to do after the intro fellowship).
Our theory of change here is something like: peers can invest significantly more time in you / getting to know you than senior people can and can support you over the course of your journey. So more P2P activities → more supportive / constructive friendships
It’s plausible that the solution here isn’t a P2P support group or something, and just “run more socials”.
I might also be more optimistic than others that well-structured programs which offer some guidance and accountability can help a lot in making P2P interactions more valuable, although I’m very unsure by how much.
I also think there are some benefits to signalling “it is possible to make progress on difficult issues with peers” is an important message to send (and I think events are a good time to signal such things).
Otherwise I agree—if the goal we’re striving for is “get people advice”—then it makes sense that senior people are ranked higher than peers. I think it would be great to see how we could better leverage senior peoples’ time. (and thanks for sharing attendee feedback on what kinds of interactions they find valuable.)
I also agree about doing more with people “slightly ahead of you”—we didn’t discuss it much, but on reflection it definitely feels like fairly low hanging fruit.
Got it. Agree P2P makes sense if your goal is to build your social network / support group and that this is also valuable. I guess this doesn’t need to replace the goal of seeking advice, and can be pursued in parallel :)