Is there some kind of metric tracking net positive impact on the world as a result of CFAR workshops? For ex: YCombinator has made a decent amount of money and they can measure how well they did over a period of years. I understand CFAR is not a startup incubator, but I would imagine there are things you can track (e.g: fitness, income, citations etc).
I think as a starting point something like physical fitness should be tracked (e.g: you could start a running club and measure if they were able to run a 10k after the workshop is over) and publish statistics on this. Another example would be to make people grind on Leetcode and improve their income.
For many people, if there is no information on how well an organisation’s members are doing—there is no incentive to join that organisation.
I don’t know what kind of people are interested in CFAR in the first place[1], so maybe there is no market for something like this. Sorry for the somewhat rambling comment, but I think the basic issue was too much variation in goals of the people.
[1] I was never interested because I’m very anti-woo stuff and think Circling is ridiculous and insane etc. I got the impression a lot of people in the community were into things like this (which is fine but not for me).
Is there some kind of metric tracking net positive impact on the world as a result of CFAR workshops?
There’s the longitudinal study. I do think that CFAR was, generally speaking, good for participants that attended its workshops, while suspecting that ‘more was possible’ and it performed somewhat poorly on its main goals.
[Like, if the goal of CFAR had been more like “increase life-satisfaction QALYs”, then I think having a broad impact would have been much better, and it would have moved more from “workshops that can cultivate large changes for small numbers of people” to “online classes that can cultivate small changes for large numbers of people”.]
Is there some kind of metric tracking net positive impact on the world as a result of CFAR workshops? For ex: YCombinator has made a decent amount of money and they can measure how well they did over a period of years. I understand CFAR is not a startup incubator, but I would imagine there are things you can track (e.g: fitness, income, citations etc).
I think as a starting point something like physical fitness should be tracked (e.g: you could start a running club and measure if they were able to run a 10k after the workshop is over) and publish statistics on this. Another example would be to make people grind on Leetcode and improve their income.
For many people, if there is no information on how well an organisation’s members are doing—there is no incentive to join that organisation.
I don’t know what kind of people are interested in CFAR in the first place[1], so maybe there is no market for something like this. Sorry for the somewhat rambling comment, but I think the basic issue was too much variation in goals of the people.
[1] I was never interested because I’m very anti-woo stuff and think Circling is ridiculous and insane etc. I got the impression a lot of people in the community were into things like this (which is fine but not for me).
There’s the longitudinal study. I do think that CFAR was, generally speaking, good for participants that attended its workshops, while suspecting that ‘more was possible’ and it performed somewhat poorly on its main goals.
[Like, if the goal of CFAR had been more like “increase life-satisfaction QALYs”, then I think having a broad impact would have been much better, and it would have moved more from “workshops that can cultivate large changes for small numbers of people” to “online classes that can cultivate small changes for large numbers of people”.]