Thank you for reading! It was awesome to see your response.
I was referring to the ‘long term follow up with users to see how their careers/lives have changed.’
And super happy to elaborate. I’ve found myself wondering things like:
Is the coaching vs. the website (vs. certain aspects of the website) more likely to lead to people making changes to their careers? Or to be more engaged in EA? Does one lead to a certain kind of change more than the other?
Is anything at 80K (to borrow something I read first at your website) is having a ‘Scared Straight’ effect?
Many of the first people to use 80K coaching/services have presumably been in their careers for a while now. What did they end up doing? It’s hard to trace things like this, but what within it might be traceable to 80K?
Sometimes my friends who say they’re most convinced by my EA type arguments act on EA ideas least (i.e., less than my friends who didn’t initially seem as convinced/excited). Basically, immediate excitement hasn’t always correlated to longterm action. Do we know if anything like this is happening and if it’s impacting design at 80K? (i.e., 80K does more of thing X because it gets a response, but it doesn’t translate to longterm action).
What could we (the larger EA community) learn from who/how 80K has convinced people to make longterm changes? (So that we could be better at convincing people to make changes too).
Thanks again!
I really like the idea of crowdsourcing. In conjunction with everything you said above, I’ve seen a lot of rejections that seem to be written by someone who seems very uncomfortable with the idea of rejection and/or isn’t imagining what it’s like to be on the receiving end.
I think crowdsourcing could give a distance that allows analysis for rejection letters that they’re rarely written with—e.g., think about what impact it will have on EA, think about what impact it’ll have on the recipient.