Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
NBjork1
0
0

Thanks so much for doing this Ben!

I've found AIM's Applicant Resources page to be really useful, and I've especially enjoyed reading Atomic Habits and Failing Forward. Are there any resources on (or not on) that page that you've found especially helpful, or which you think are important for people to see before applying to AIM programs?

Reply
Ben Williamson3
0
0

I'm glad you found this useful! It's something we've tried to highlight more this cycle. A purely personal recommendation would be a grounding in Stoicism - e.g. reading some of Ryan Holiday's books. Founding requires a lot of grit and perseverance, and some of the principles of stoicism and exercises for practicing these are the most practical guidance of finding on how to cultivate these traits.

Reply
See in context
by Ben Williamson
2 min read 16

51

Career choiceGlobal health & developmentAsk Me AnythingCareer advisingEntrepreneurship
Frontpage

As AIM's Director of Recruitment, I'm running an AMA to answer any questions you may have about applying for our programs, as well as any questions that may be of interest from my other experience (such as co-founding Maternal Health Initiative).

Ambitious Impact (formerly Charity Entrepreneurship) currently has applications open until September 15th for two of our programs.

You can read more about both programs in this earlier EA Forum post. Please consider applying!

 

Why a personal AMA?

Answers to questions can often be subjective. I do not want to claim to speak for every member of AIM's team. As such, I want to make clear that I will be answering in a personal capacity. I think this has  a couple of notable benefits:

  • My answers can be a little more candid since I don't have to worry (as much) that I'll say something others may significantly disagree with
  • Application season is busy for us! This saves coordination time in getting agreement on how to respond to any tricky questions

It also means that people can ask me questions through this AMA that go beyond AIM's recruitment process and application round...

 

A little about me

I've been working at AIM since April 2024. Before that, I co-founded the Maternal Health Initiative with Sarah Eustis-Guthrie. We piloted a training program with the Ghana Health Service to improve the quality of postpartum family planning counseling in the country. 

In March, we made the decision to shut down the organisation as we do not believe that postpartum family planning is likely to be as cost-effective as other family planning or global health interventions. You can read more about that decision in a recent piece for Asterisk magazine, as well as an earlier EA Forum post. 

I started Maternal Health Initiative through the 2022 Charity Entrepreneurship Incubation Program. I spent the year prior to this founding and running Effective Self-Help, a project researching the best interventions for individuals to increase their wellbeing and productivity.

My job history before that is far more potted and less relevant - from waiting tables and selling hiking shoes to teaching kids survival skills and planting vineyards. 

 

Things you could ask me

  • Any questions you may have about what AIM looks for in candidates for our programs and how we select people
  • Questions about getting into entrepreneurship - why to pursue it; how to test fit; paths to upskilling; lessons I've learned from my own (mis)adventures
  • Questions about Maternal Health Initisomething in my experience ative - what we did; lessons I learned; how it feels to shut down
  • More general questions about building a career in impactful work if something in my experience suggests I might be a good person to ask!

 

How the AMA works

  1. You post a comment here[1]
  2. You wait patiently while I'm on holiday until August 28th[2]
  3. I reply to comments on August 29th and 30th
  1. ^

    If you have a question you'd like to ask in private, you can email me: ben@ charityentrepreneurship [dot] com

  2. ^

    This was coincidental rather than planned but has the wonderful benefit of ensuring I avoid spending a week refreshing this article feverishly waiting for questions...

51

1
0

Reactions

1
0

More posts like this

Comments16


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
defun 🔸6
0
0

Thanks for doing this, Ben!

Regarding the Founding to Give program:

  • Did you get many applicants?
  • What are their backgrounds?
  • What percentage of the selected candidates are technical?
  • What kind of profiles would you have liked to see more of?
Reply
Ben Williamson3
0
0
1

I'll leave out the specific data on this but we were pleased with the number and quality of applicants for this from our first recruitment round earlier this year. I'd say in general we've got a mix of more 'CEO' and 'CTO' type candidates - ones with significant experience in building startups and fundraising, and those with significant technical experience and skill. Possibly a bit of a skew to the former so we're especially excited for applicants from a more technical side this time around.
 

Reply
AxellePB 🔹3
0
0

Hi Ben! I found your account of the MHI shut down in Asterisk Magazine very inspiring.

I'm curious how, in your opinion, a charity culture could be foster in which this kind of courageous decision (shuting down projects that fail to meet the bar) is made more often and more easily, despite all the powerful incentives not to follow the evidence that you mention in the article.

I find that publicly sharing the shut down process plays a role in setting an example and fostering accountability on this matter (I also really liked the post about the Center for Effective Aid Policy shut down). Can you think of other ideas?

Reply
Ben Williamson3
0
0

Thank you! This is something we're thinking about at AIM in terms of fostering an openness to shutting down amongst our charities where this makes sense. Strong public examples certainly helps. I think providing evaluation and research support to charities so that they can draw conclusions on impact they're confident enough in to make shut down decisions makes a differnce. 

I also think fostering a culture that places less emphasis on founders as the ultimate driver of success or failure would help. Organisations succeed for a combination of several key reasons - one of which is the talent and skill of the founders - and highlighting some of these other factors more (the idea; the timing; luck!) makes it easier for founders to close an organisation without feeling like it's a huge personal failure

Reply
Toby Tremlett🔹3
0
0

Hi Ben! Thanks for doing this. 
No worries if you can't speak to this question, but I'd love to know a bit more about the rationale of running the founding to give program. From an external perspective, I noted that I was quite surprised/ I couldn't instantly see a link between charity entrepreneurship expertise, and the expertise required to start a for-profit business. What am I missing here? (I'm sure, a lot). 

Reply
Ben Williamson2
0
0

Hey Toby, yeah I'm not best-placed to answer this but a few quick thoughts:
- I think the skills to build and run an excellent organisation transfer quite strongly across, though the day-to-day nature of the work and 'product' might differ substantially
- This is a bit of an experiment! We think there could be incredible value to a program like this if we can make it work, but we're not claiming 100% confidence that this will work as well as hoped
- For a variety of reasons, the number of charities we can found a year currently has a clear cap: the founding to give program offers both an opportunity to scale AIM's impact, and potentially to help reduce the cap on top charities we can incubate through additional mid-stage funding availability

Reply
Tori3
0
0

Regarding recruitment at AIM, are there any common misconceptions applicants have about what it takes to succeed in impact-driven entrepreneurship? Did you have any doubts about yourself when you first applied to the program?

Reply
Ben Williamson2
0
0

I certainly had doubts when I first applied to the program! I was rejected in 2021 and then accepted in 2022: I got further in the process than I expected to in 2021 so in that sense the rejection was actually a source of confidence that this might be a realistic avenue for me in future. 

I think applicants tend to believe that they need more prior experience than they do (we've had multiple excellent participants in their very early 20s), and perhaps underestimate the value of flexibility, particularly in your organisation's first 12 months. Several of our organisations have made significant early pivots from what the preliminary research report suggested might be the best path, and people's preference for which charity idea they'd like to found often changes during the program.

Reply
huw2
0
0

What do you think about candidates who might not be 'culturally EA' or come from an EA background (i.e. know what EA is, have previous affiliation, consume EA content), but who would otherwise be good at running a cost-effective charity? (ex. How important is it to have them? How upset would you be if you got a cohort of 100% culturally EA people? Do you worry if the recruitment process selects against them?)

Reply
Ben Williamson4
0
0

A good question - we try and make our application effectively 'EA-neutral' but in practice I expect that our recruitment process is a little skewed in favour of people from an EA background. My guess is that's down to a greater familiarity with the types of questions or tasks we ask for (e.g. making a weighted factor model), and it being easier to pick up on key things we care about - like a commitment to cost-effectiveness - when people communicate this in an EA way.

Ultimately, we care about finding people who have the base traits we care about - we're equally open to a 0% or 100% culturally EA cohort if we feel like that's the best group of people who applied.

Reply
Tori1
0
0

Hey Ben, thanks for doing this AMA! What do you consider the most valuable skills you developed while co-founding MHI, and how do you plan to apply them to your current and future career endeavors?

Reply
Ben Williamson2
0
0

Excellent question! Running an organisation really stretched my strategic thinking and ability to choose a coherent path through a lot of uncertainty. Your time, and the time of everyone who works for you, could be used on seemingly 100 different highly valuable things. Often you don't have robust information to differentiate between these and decide which to prioritise, making it easy to try and do too many things simultaneously. I think one of the biggest lessons I learnt from MHI is being ruthless in prioritisation - choosing a very small number of things and doing these as well as possible. It's easy to choose to 80/20 a whole lot of stuff instead that all seems necessary but in hindsight you could have, and should have, scrapped maybe 75% of it. 

I'd like to think this is a skill I got a lot better at with time, and that this sort of strategic thinking and prioritisation applies to almost any kind of role - e.g. it's a big emphasis for me at the moment in thinking about the many different ways AIM can look to recruit and selecting a few key avenues to execute.

Reply
NBjork1
0
0

Thanks so much for doing this Ben!

I've found AIM's Applicant Resources page to be really useful, and I've especially enjoyed reading Atomic Habits and Failing Forward. Are there any resources on (or not on) that page that you've found especially helpful, or which you think are important for people to see before applying to AIM programs?

Reply
Ben Williamson3
0
0

I'm glad you found this useful! It's something we've tried to highlight more this cycle. A purely personal recommendation would be a grounding in Stoicism - e.g. reading some of Ryan Holiday's books. Founding requires a lot of grit and perseverance, and some of the principles of stoicism and exercises for practicing these are the most practical guidance of finding on how to cultivate these traits.

Reply
Chris Rouse1
0
0

Do you ever direct applicants towards applying to work at incubated charities instead of founding them?

Is that something you’d recommend for someone who is considering founding but is unsure?

Reply
Ben Williamson2
0
0

We definitely have done this and we look to recommend late-stage applicants for consideration for potential job opportunities at AIM-incubated organisations where this is a good fit. I think exposure to a startup organisation - whether non- or for-profit - is a great way of getting a better sense of personal fit for founding yourself

Reply
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Neel Nanda
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
TL;DR Having a good research track record is some evidence of good big-picture takes, but it's weak evidence. Strategic thinking is hard, and requires different skills. But people often conflate these skills, leading to excessive deference to researchers in the field, without evidence that that person is good at strategic thinking specifically. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, but it's hard, and you shouldn't assume I succeed! Introduction I often find myself giving talks or Q&As about mechanistic interpretability research. But inevitably, I'll get questions about the big picture: "What's the theory of change for interpretability?", "Is this really going to help with alignment?", "Does any of this matter if we can’t ensure all labs take alignment seriously?". And I think people take my answers to these way too seriously. These are great questions, and I'm happy to try answering them. But I've noticed a bit of a pathology: people seem to assume that because I'm (hopefully!) good at the research, I'm automatically well-qualified to answer these broader strategic questions. I think this is a mistake, a form of undue deference that is both incorrect and unhelpful. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, and I think this makes me better at my job, but this is far from sufficient. Being good at research and being good at high level strategic thinking are just fairly different skillsets! But isn’t someone being good at research strong evidence they’re also good at strategic thinking? I personally think it’s moderate evidence, but far from sufficient. One key factor is that a very hard part of strategic thinking is the lack of feedback. Your reasoning about confusing long-term factors need to extrapolate from past trends and make analogies from things you do understand better, and it can be quite hard to tell if what you're saying is complete bullshit or not. In an empirical science like mechanistic interpretability, however, you can get a lot more fe
Ronen Bar
 ·  · 10m read
 · 
"Part one of our challenge is to solve the technical alignment problem, and that’s what everybody focuses on, but part two is: to whose values do you align the system once you’re capable of doing that, and that may turn out to be an even harder problem", Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO (Link).  In this post, I argue that: 1. "To whose values do you align the system" is a critically neglected space I termed “Moral Alignment.” Only a few organizations work for non-humans in this field, with a total budget of 4-5 million USD (not accounting for academic work). The scale of this space couldn’t be any bigger - the intersection between the most revolutionary technology ever and all sentient beings. While tractability remains uncertain, there is some promising positive evidence (See “The Tractability Open Question” section). 2. Given the first point, our movement must attract more resources, talent, and funding to address it. The goal is to value align AI with caring about all sentient beings: humans, animals, and potential future digital minds. In other words, I argue we should invest much more in promoting a sentient-centric AI. The problem What is Moral Alignment? AI alignment focuses on ensuring AI systems act according to human intentions, emphasizing controllability and corrigibility (adaptability to changing human preferences). However, traditional alignment often ignores the ethical implications for all sentient beings. Moral Alignment, as part of the broader AI alignment and AI safety spaces, is a field focused on the values we aim to instill in AI. I argue that our goal should be to ensure AI is a positive force for all sentient beings. Currently, as far as I know, no overarching organization, terms, or community unifies Moral Alignment (MA) as a field with a clear umbrella identity. While specific groups focus individually on animals, humans, or digital minds, such as AI for Animals, which does excellent community-building work around AI and animal welfare while
Recent opportunities in Career choice
145
Projects I'd like to see in the GHW meta space
Melanie Basnak🔸
· · 8m read
3
3
19
GiveWell is hiring a Talent Acquisition Specialist
GiveWell
· · 1m read
0
0
33
Stripe Economics of AI Fellowship
basil.halperin
· · 3m read
0
0
View more