Hide table of contents

Sparked by this comment over on the Longterm Future April 2019 grants thread:

This is combined with an environment that is starved on management capacity, and so has very little room to give people feedback on their plans and actions.

  • Who in the EA community actively enjoys managing people?
    • Who in EA actively enjoys managing research teams?
    • Who in EA actively enjoys managing operations teams?
    • Who in EA actively enjoys organizing events & conferences?

I feel like I don't have a very clear map of this space, and it seems like an important limiting factor for the community.

7

0
0

Reactions

0
0
New Answer
New Comment


13 Answers sorted by

Me. But also a TON of people outside of the community. I have been a storng advocate for EA orgs hiring outside of the community for senior management roles.

I enjoy organizing events and coordinating new online groups and projects, as well as coaching people, but am rather unskilled at these things at the moment. I expect management to ever-increasingly be an important hat of mine in my future. I would highly welcome marginal domain-specific mentorship here!

(coughcough, to the person reading this who knows something about these things) :)

I actively enjoy managing people, research teams, and operations teams. (It also feels like a particularly effective use of my time in terms of payoff).

Me! (Data Scientists, Data Engineers, Machine Learning Engineers, Programs, and Products)

FWIW, I would enjoy more opportunities to organize events and conferences, and manage operations teams.

I love managing people! It's definitely one of the most fun ways I spend my time. Currently I'm a student government representative at my university and I oversee a team of 50 students in 9 different project teams.

Always looking for ways to improve, so if there are any more experienced managers out there, I'd love to chat!

I actively enjoy managing people, although it has taken about a decade of experience to get to this point. I'm also good at it, which I think is very important as well.

I've done management (of software engineers in a startup) and decided to move away from it for now, but can see a future in which I do more of it.

I strongly suspect the reason EA is so obsessed (read: dependent) on high agency operations types is because of a lack of managerial talent

Me! I don't just enjoy people management, I am passionate about leadership and consider it to be my strongest skill set.

[I see I'm a bit late to the party on this once since the latest replies were in 2019. It seems like the underlying concern about lack of management capacity in EA organizations is still a pressing issue though. Does anyone strongly agree/disagree? Please comment as I'd love to chat further, or send me a message]

I have 11.5 years of experience managing software teams in industry (Amazon, Bloomberg). I'm now pivoting my career to EA and have been deeply engaged in the community for about 6 months. I love managing and growing high-performance teams, and scaled an organization from 8 people (1 team) to 25 people (3 teams). I take a people-oriented, supportive, coaching approach to management - this helps me find the win-win of happy employees who are learning and growing in their careers, and delivering amazing results. If someone reads this and is hiring for an operations or technology manager role in EA, please feel free to send me a message. My preferred cause areas are EA movement building, AI safety, and alternative proteins, but I'm open to other causes in order to gain experience and do good.  

I also am piloting a pay-what-you-can leadership coaching program for current and aspiring EA managers. If you're interested, send me a message!

I enjoy managing at my policy job, and I'm actively working on growing that skill set, but I'm not sure how closely that aligns with your sub questions. I second the comment below - what kind of answer are you looking for?

Comments2
Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Could you clarify a bit what you mean by "who"? As in, are you looking for organizations, names of individuals, personality types, or backgrounds of people who'd be more interested in management, or something else?

FWIW, I would enjoy more opportunities to organize events and conferences, and manage operations teams.

[This comment is no longer endorsed by its author]Reply
Curated and popular this week
Sam Anschell
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
*Disclaimer* I am writing this post in a personal capacity; the opinions I express are my own and do not represent my employer. I think that more people and orgs (especially nonprofits) should consider negotiating the cost of sizable expenses. In my experience, there is usually nothing to lose by respectfully asking to pay less, and doing so can sometimes save thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per hour. This is because negotiating doesn’t take very much time[1], savings can persist across multiple years, and counterparties can be surprisingly generous with discounts. Here are a few examples of expenses that may be negotiable: For organizations * Software or news subscriptions * Of 35 corporate software and news providers I’ve negotiated with, 30 have been willing to provide discounts. These discounts range from 10% to 80%, with an average of around 40%. * Leases * A friend was able to negotiate a 22% reduction in the price per square foot on a corporate lease and secured a couple months of free rent. This led to >$480,000 in savings for their nonprofit. Other negotiable parameters include: * Square footage counted towards rent costs * Lease length * A tenant improvement allowance * Certain physical goods (e.g., smart TVs) * Buying in bulk can be a great lever for negotiating smaller items like covid tests, and can reduce costs by 50% or more. * Event/retreat venues (both venue price and smaller items like food and AV) * Hotel blocks * A quick email with the rates of comparable but more affordable hotel blocks can often save ~10%. * Professional service contracts with large for-profit firms (e.g., IT contracts, office internet coverage) * Insurance premiums (though I am less confident that this is negotiable) For many products and services, a nonprofit can qualify for a discount simply by providing their IRS determination letter or getting verified on platforms like TechSoup. In my experience, most vendors and companies
jackva
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
 [Edits on March 10th for clarity, two sub-sections added] Watching what is happening in the world -- with lots of renegotiation of institutional norms within Western democracies and a parallel fracturing of the post-WW2 institutional order -- I do think we, as a community, should more seriously question our priors on the relative value of surgical/targeted and broad system-level interventions. Speaking somewhat roughly, with EA as a movement coming of age in an era where democratic institutions and the rule-based international order were not fundamentally questioned, it seems easy to underestimate how much the world is currently changing and how much riskier a world of stronger institutional and democratic backsliding and weakened international norms might be. Of course, working on these issues might be intractable and possibly there's nothing highly effective for EAs to do on the margin given much attention to these issues from society at large. So, I am not here to confidently state we should be working on these issues more. But I do think in a situation of more downside risk with regards to broad system-level changes and significantly more fluidity, it seems at least worth rigorously asking whether we should shift more attention to work that is less surgical (working on specific risks) and more systemic (working on institutional quality, indirect risk factors, etc.). While there have been many posts along those lines over the past months and there are of course some EA organizations working on these issues, it stil appears like a niche focus in the community and none of the major EA and EA-adjacent orgs (including the one I work for, though I am writing this in a personal capacity) seem to have taken it up as a serious focus and I worry it might be due to baked-in assumptions about the relative value of such work that are outdated in a time where the importance of systemic work has changed in the face of greater threat and fluidity. When the world seems to
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Forethought[1] is a new AI macrostrategy research group cofounded by Max Dalton, Will MacAskill, Tom Davidson, and Amrit Sidhu-Brar. We are trying to figure out how to navigate the (potentially rapid) transition to a world with superintelligent AI systems. We aim to tackle the most important questions we can find, unrestricted by the current Overton window. More details on our website. Why we exist We think that AGI might come soon (say, modal timelines to mostly-automated AI R&D in the next 2-8 years), and might significantly accelerate technological progress, leading to many different challenges. We don’t yet have a good understanding of what this change might look like or how to navigate it. Society is not prepared. Moreover, we want the world to not just avoid catastrophe: we want to reach a really great future. We think about what this might be like (incorporating moral uncertainty), and what we can do, now, to build towards a good future. Like all projects, this started out with a plethora of Google docs. We ran a series of seminars to explore the ideas further, and that cascaded into an organization. This area of work feels to us like the early days of EA: we’re exploring unusual, neglected ideas, and finding research progress surprisingly tractable. And while we start out with (literally) galaxy-brained schemes, they often ground out into fairly specific and concrete ideas about what should happen next. Of course, we’re bringing principles like scope sensitivity, impartiality, etc to our thinking, and we think that these issues urgently need more morally dedicated and thoughtful people working on them. Research Research agendas We are currently pursuing the following perspectives: * Preparing for the intelligence explosion: If AI drives explosive growth there will be an enormous number of challenges we have to face. In addition to misalignment risk and biorisk, this potentially includes: how to govern the development of new weapons of mass destr