Thanks for posting this! I’m one of the 80,000 Hours advisors, but the following opinions are my own.
I had a few thoughts while reading your post and some of the answers:
I think one assumption to avoid is that you can only have an impactful career if you work for an “EA organization”.
I don’t think this is true. There are so many problems that need to be resolved, and EA organizations only work on a select number. More importantly, EA organizations are usually not the only organizations tackling the “most pressing problems”. There are so many different careers you can pursue to do good and if you approach your career strategically/in a scope-sensitive way, I think it is likely that you’ll be able to have a bigger impact than you would with your default career path.
I’d go so far as to say that the vast majority of impactful jobs in the world are at organizations unconnected to the effective altruism community.
If you get rejected now, that doesn’t mean you’ll never get a job at a high-impact organization.
If you apply for competitive high-impact jobs, the chances of getting rejected are very high. Getting rejected doesn’t necessarily mean that you are not qualified for the job. Or maybe it means that you are not qualified yet, but would be with another year or two of relevant work experience.
Also, people may apply for positions they don’t really have much relevant experience for.
I think a good example is the post you linked to: the person clearly has a stellar CV and would easily get jobs in medicine and academia. I’m not very surprised that they weren’t hired for operations positions – maybe the organization just preferred to hire someone with operations experience?
“Many are not even able to get 1-1 in 80.000h”
I understand your frustration, and I have heard from several people who have felt this way, too. However, it is important to keep in mind that a rejection doesn’t mean that we think the person doesn’t have the potential to have an impactful career. Our capacity is limited, so we unfortunately don’t get to speak with everyone!
Furthermore, I think it is important to be aware that not everyone has the same opportunities:
Most of the “EA jobs” are in the UK or US, and if you’re a citizen of these countries, you have a significant advantage.
There’s often less job security in high-impact positions, and not everyone is able to take the same risks (e.g. if they have families or a lack of financial runway).
I don’t think starting from a disadvantaged position makes people “mediocre”.
Thanks for posting this! I’m one of the 80,000 Hours advisors, but the following opinions are my own.
I had a few thoughts while reading your post and some of the answers:
I think one assumption to avoid is that you can only have an impactful career if you work for an “EA organization”.
I don’t think this is true. There are so many problems that need to be resolved, and EA organizations only work on a select number. More importantly, EA organizations are usually not the only organizations tackling the “most pressing problems”. There are so many different careers you can pursue to do good and if you approach your career strategically/in a scope-sensitive way, I think it is likely that you’ll be able to have a bigger impact than you would with your default career path.
I’d go so far as to say that the vast majority of impactful jobs in the world are at organizations unconnected to the effective altruism community.
If you get rejected now, that doesn’t mean you’ll never get a job at a high-impact organization.
If you apply for competitive high-impact jobs, the chances of getting rejected are very high. Getting rejected doesn’t necessarily mean that you are not qualified for the job. Or maybe it means that you are not qualified yet, but would be with another year or two of relevant work experience.
Also, people may apply for positions they don’t really have much relevant experience for.
I think a good example is the post you linked to: the person clearly has a stellar CV and would easily get jobs in medicine and academia. I’m not very surprised that they weren’t hired for operations positions – maybe the organization just preferred to hire someone with operations experience?
“Many are not even able to get 1-1 in 80.000h”
I understand your frustration, and I have heard from several people who have felt this way, too. However, it is important to keep in mind that a rejection doesn’t mean that we think the person doesn’t have the potential to have an impactful career. Our capacity is limited, so we unfortunately don’t get to speak with everyone!
Furthermore, I think it is important to be aware that not everyone has the same opportunities:
Most of the “EA jobs” are in the UK or US, and if you’re a citizen of these countries, you have a significant advantage.
There’s often less job security in high-impact positions, and not everyone is able to take the same risks (e.g. if they have families or a lack of financial runway).
I don’t think starting from a disadvantaged position makes people “mediocre”.