edit: no longer relevant since OP has been edited since. (Thanks!)
Personally, if given the choice between finding an extra person for one of these roles who’s a good fit or someone donating $X million per year, to think the two options were similarly valuable, X would typically need to be over three, and often over 10.
(emphasis mine)
This would also mean that if you have a 10% chance of succeeding, then the expected value of the path is $300,000–$2 million (and the value of information will be very high if you can determine your fit within a couple of years).
Just to clarify, that’s the EV of the path per year, right?
The funding overhang also created bottlenecks for people able to staff projects, and to work in supporting roles. [...]
I’d typically prefer someone in these roles to an additional person donating $400,000–$4 million.
I assume this is also per year?
Clarifying because I think numbers like this are likely to be quoted/vaguely remembered in the future, and it’s easy to miss the per year part.
edit: no longer relevant since OP has been edited since. (Thanks!)
(emphasis mine)
Just to clarify, that’s the EV of the path per year, right?
I assume this is also per year?
Clarifying because I think numbers like this are likely to be quoted/vaguely remembered in the future, and it’s easy to miss the per year part.
Yes, they’re all per year. I’ll add them.