the thing I find confusing is that you âdidnât have particularly strong opinions about whether EA jobs are still hard to get.â⌠So I donât really understand why you present a lot of data that all points the same way, yet remain unconvinced by the conclusion they lead to.
I think Iâm largely like âbruh, literally zero of our product manager finalist candidates had everhad the title âproduct managerâ before, how could we possibly be more selective than Ashby?â[1]
Some other data points:
When I reach out to people who seem like good fits, they often decline to apply, meaning that they donât even get into the data set evaluated here
When I asked some people who are well-connected to PMs to pass on the job to others they know, they declined to do so because they thought the PMs they knew would be so unlikely to want it it wasnât worth even asking
I acknowledge that, if you rely 100% on the data set presented here, maybe you will come to a different conclusion, but I really just donât think the data set presented here is that compelling.
As mentioned, our candidates are impressive in other ways, and maybe they are more impressive than the average Ashby candidate overall, but I just donât think we have the evidence to confidently say that.
Hmm, if we are still talking about comparing CEA versus Ashby, Iâm not sure this carves reality at the joints: itâs certainly true that people with zero experience have an uphill battle getting hired, but I donât think CEA is unusual in this regard. (If anything, I would guess that we are more open to people with limited experience.)
Sorry, Iâm not sure I understand what your point is. Are you saying that my point 1 is misleading because having even any relevant experience can be a big boost for an applicantâs chances to getting hired by CEA, and any relevant experience isnât a high bar?
Yeah, job experience seems like a major difference between CEA and Ashby. Iâd guess that salary could be quite different too (which might be why the CEA role doesnât seem interesting to experienced PMs).
It sounds like one of the reasons why EA jobs are hard to get (at least for EA candidates) is because EA candidates (typically young people with great academic credentials and strong understanding of EA but relatively little job experience) lack the job experience some roles require. To me this suggests that advising (explicitly or implicitly) young EAs that the most impactful thing they can do is direct work could be counterproductive, and that it might be better to emphasize building career capital.
I think Iâm largely like âbruh, literally zero of our product manager finalist candidates had ever had the title âproduct managerâ before, how could we possibly be more selective than Ashby?â[1]
Some other data points:
When I reach out to people who seem like good fits, they often decline to apply, meaning that they donât even get into the data set evaluated here
When I asked some people who are well-connected to PMs to pass on the job to others they know, they declined to do so because they thought the PMs they knew would be so unlikely to want it it wasnât worth even asking
I acknowledge that, if you rely 100% on the data set presented here, maybe you will come to a different conclusion, but I really just donât think the data set presented here is that compelling.
As mentioned, our candidates are impressive in other ways, and maybe they are more impressive than the average Ashby candidate overall, but I just donât think we have the evidence to confidently say that.
It sounds like there are two, separate things going on:
Jobs at CEA are very hard to get, even for candidates with impressive resumes overall.
CEA finds it hard to get applicants that have particular desirable qualities like previous experience in the same role.
Hmm, if we are still talking about comparing CEA versus Ashby, Iâm not sure this carves reality at the joints: itâs certainly true that people with zero experience have an uphill battle getting hired, but I donât think CEA is unusual in this regard. (If anything, I would guess that we are more open to people with limited experience.)
Sorry, Iâm not sure I understand what your point is. Are you saying that my point 1 is misleading because having even any relevant experience can be a big boost for an applicantâs chances to getting hired by CEA, and any relevant experience isnât a high bar?
Yeah, job experience seems like a major difference between CEA and Ashby. Iâd guess that salary could be quite different too (which might be why the CEA role doesnât seem interesting to experienced PMs).
It sounds like one of the reasons why EA jobs are hard to get (at least for EA candidates) is because EA candidates (typically young people with great academic credentials and strong understanding of EA but relatively little job experience) lack the job experience some roles require. To me this suggests that advising (explicitly or implicitly) young EAs that the most impactful thing they can do is direct work could be counterproductive, and that it might be better to emphasize building career capital.