Should large EA nonprofits consider splitting?
| Owners | ||
|---|---|---|
| Reserved | 0 | – |
The article: “Should large EA nonprofits consider splitting?”
Fundamental Justification
What outcomes were to be expected before you started the project? What were unusually good and unusually bad possible outcomes? (Please avoid hindsight bias and take the interests of all sentient beings into account.)
I'm trying to persuade large organisations to give up responsibility, so my expected outcome was very little change. Unusually good would be more support for EA service agencies of the sort linked in the post, to at least start building up the infrastructure to allow orgs to have more distinct responsibilities. Exceptionally good would be at least one large EA nonprofit (IMO most plausibly CEA) split off one or more of their 'products' in the next 12 months.
What actual outcomes are you aware of?
None.
Who can make a legitimate claim to a fraction of the impact, and have you talked to them?
In some sense the people acknowledged in the post, though I doubt they would claim a meaningful fraction. Siao put in a decent amount of effort, maybe 10% of total (I haven't discussed this with her).
Who are the current owners of the impact and what fraction do they each own?
I'm not sure how to answer this, inasmuch as it differs from previous Q.
Procedural Questions
What is your minimum valuation under which you’ll not sell any shares in your impact?
€40
What would you have done had there been no chance to get retro funding? (This helps us assess our impact but has no effect on our evaluation of the certificate’s impact.)
Very likely written the same post, but been slightly less motivated, so ~5% chance I wouldn't have finished it,
What can we improve about this process?
I've shared most of my thoughts with Dony via message, but as it's currently set up, the questions generally don't feel like they map well onto forum posts, which are usually quite speculative, written without much of a sense of expected impact, etc. This particular post had relatively concrete recommendations, but even so they still seemed too abstract to claim 'direct impact'. It's the kind of scenario where if I'm right, I would expect many people to need to develop their own versions of the ideas and public sentiment to gradually grow before any of the old guard change their behaviour.