One idea I keep coming back to is how much progress depends on patience and long-term thinking. In many fields—research, policy, technology, or community building—early results don’t always reflect eventual impact.
We often celebrate fast success, but some of the most meaningful contributions come from people or projects that took years to mature. Skills compound, judgment improves with experience, and understanding complex systems takes time. From an effective altruism perspective, this raises an important question: how do we balance short-term feedback with long-term potential?
I think there’s value in:
- Investing in learning even when outcomes aren’t immediately visible
- Allowing room for iteration, failure, and course correction
- Evaluating progress using evidence over longer time horizons
This doesn’t mean ignoring efficiency or accountability, but rather recognizing that some paths to impact are nonlinear. I’d be interested to hear how others here think about patience, skill-building, and delayed impact when choosing projects or career paths within EA.
