Summary
Training for Good is now offering 1-to-1 coaching for EA professionals.
Successful applicants will have a 3 month coaching relationship with a professional coach from the EA ecosystem: Daniel Kestenholz, Tee Barnett or Steve Thompson. This will entail four sessions, each 60 minutes, spaced roughly 3 weeks apart.
Our goal is to help you clarify your aims, reduce self-imposed friction, and to help you improve your leadership and relationship skills. We’ll help you debug your plans and increase your overall contribution to the world while taking care of yourself.
Fees for the coaching will be means-based and you will decide the amount you pay (between $0 and $175).
Apply here by 25th February.
The Coaches
We have brought together a small panel of coaches from across the community who have a variety of backgrounds.
- Daniel Kestenholz: “I help people in the community face difficult challenges and make their biggest contribution to the world while taking care of themselves. My clients include staff at CEA/80K, Charity Entrepreneurship, CLR/EAF, FHI, Rethink Priorities, and OpenAI”.
- Tee Barnett: “Working with me is about having a ‘personal strategist’ that helps guide the discovery, navigation and refinement of deep perceptual constructs that meaningfully affect your personal and professional life. I’m currently trialling my coaching with leaders of organisations in Effective Altruism (Rethink Priorities, HLI, Nonlinear Fund, Fortify Health, Centre for Long-Term Resilience, etc.)
- Steve Thompson: “I have coached and trained mid and senior level leaders for ~10yrs working as a leadership development consultant in the corporate sector. I’m interested in helping you simply and plainly identify the areas of your work and life that, if improved, would make the most difference for you and the world”.
The Content
Coaching differs from mentoring or advising in that it is primarily led by the client. The coach is there to help you think through the aspects of your life and work that you most want to focus on and to do so with a higher degree of accountability and investigation than you likely generate alone. So the “content” of coaching sessions therefore is not a set of topics, but rather you’ll be looking at how you think, and how that affects what you achieve.
Fees & Application
Training for Good is organising this initiative, vetting the participants, and measuring the impact.
Fees for the coaching will be means-based and you will decide the amount you pay. TFG will subsidize this coaching to ensure it is available to those who’ll most benefit from it, regardless of their financial circumstances. Those with budgets from their employers will be expected to pay $175 per session, but those who are paying directly can choose to pay what you like on the basis that it’s the maximum (i.e. it’s not prohibitive) you can afford while being reflective of the value of the coaching and the coach's time and experience.
Apply here by 25th February.
This is super cool and seems to fill a current gap in the community (e.g., career advising is more one-off). Whom is your target audience/do you think is most likely to benefit?
Thanks for the question Miranda! We think coaching could be beneficial to a lot of different people. A few groups we had in mind that might particularly benefit from this coaching include:
However, I'd encourage anyone who's on the fence or that doesn't quite fit into the above groups to just go ahead and apply - or feel free to reach out to me directly cillian [at] trainingforgood [dot] com and we can chat about it
I have a similar question to Miranda! More specifically, how do group organizers fit into your target audience/thoughts regarding scope for benefit?
We'd be pretty excited to see applications from group organisers. I think it's a really important role and imagine that coaching could help multiply the impact of a lot of organisers!
How is this different from just applying to those coaches directly?
As far as I understand sessions will be fully subsidised by TfG. If you can’t afford them you can choose to pay 0$—unsure if this is standard among EA coaches.
I also think centralisation of psychological services might be valuable as it makes it easier to match fitting coaches/coachees and assess coaching performance.