TL;DR Community retreats don't pull their weight as EAGx conferences and one-day summits are  more cost-effective per person and per connection made.

Retreats come in many different forms, so note that here I’m talking about the “retreats-as-we-know-and-love-them-in-the-EA-community”^[1]. I have attended and organised many such events, and I absolutely love them^[2]. But in my opinion, such retreats don’t pull their weight^[3]. This is because they are expensive yet typically engage only a small number of participants (usually around 20). They tend to be fully subsidised, often including travel costs.

When Ollie from CEA looked into this, he found that organising EAGx conferences is simply more cost-effective in terms of cost per new connection^[4]. However, organising a conference is harder to pull off and needs a bigger baseline community; he can’t just tell all organisers to do that instead.

Well, until now.

CEA has launched their new program to support EA groups putting on summits, which is also a great stepping stone to eventually put on conferences. These are one-day events that engage a minimum of at least 60 people, but some can accommodate up to 200. I have made the case that the AI Safety version of these events should happen.

What retreats offer—and larger-scale events lack—is cosiness, which makes them so appealing. Yet, when you look at specific impact stories from past retreats, none appear beyond what a larger event can produce.

Creating deeper connections is great, but they are only effective insofar as they help people move into a high-impact career. The sad truth is that only a couple of people are committed and skilled enough to eventually move to an impactful role.

My impression is that the “retreats-as-we-know-them-in-the-EA-community” don’t have a high enough bar for attendees. and they are more about bringing together the local community, rather than being a cost-effective asset to accelerate people’s careers.  This is because most communities are not big enough to have a selective bar for retreat attendees. It would also be awkward to reject local members of the community from a community event.

I’m not saying retreats are not worth it, just that we can do better. Keeping talent levels constant, I would rather have 2-5x times as many people attend a 1-day event for a similar cost!

1. ^{^}

   As opposed to:

   • retreats aimed at a specific org’s staff
   • high-net-worth individuals
   • policymakers
   • International retreats focusing on highly talented young people, such as SPARC, ESPR, etc.
2. ^{^}

   Which is why it pains me to argue against these — I mean, look at how awesome they are.

3. ^{^}

   Unless they are done in self-funded unconference style, perhaps.

^{^}

And EA Summits are likely even more so, though people attending these events will on average be newer to EA, so they are less likely to make the most out of these connections.

Show all footnotes