I see, that makes sense. I understood value of information as creating valuable information for the whole community. You seem to be talking about valuable information for oneself. And maybe as an added bonus increasing the information about your organization more than a replacement worker would otherwise.
But yes, it makes sense to me that if you work for a speculative cause you are in a better position to assess if you should donate to them.
The point I was trying to make is less about value of information for yourself but information for others. Your donation ould fund a new employee for example who 1. gathers a lot of information like you would if you were in there position and 2. brings valuable information to the community in general. The questions is of course whether that person would be as productive as you.
I understood value of information as creating valuable information for the whole community. You seem to be talking about valuable information for oneself.
Well, any information I gather individually could be shared.
~
Your donation could fund a new employee for example who 1. gathers a lot of information like you would if you were in there position and 2. brings valuable information to the community in general.
Right. That would be one way to do it, if you could trust the person you hire to be interested in gathering information. Right now, my perception is that people who are interested in gathering information and reporting it are kind of rare.
That’s an interesting point. I strongly agree that less proven charities should do more internal research and especially reporting about their effectiveness. I think this could fuel an important discussion. Even if the results aren’t that amazing I think certain people would consider donating to them more simply because they are more aware of the opportunity and/or less uncertain about it.
I’m not quite sure yet what exactly you refer to by information though. It sounds like this refers to reporting about the effectiveness of the charities. Or are you talking about information like cost-effectiveness research and research papers/blog posts as well?
I see, that makes sense. I understood value of information as creating valuable information for the whole community. You seem to be talking about valuable information for oneself. And maybe as an added bonus increasing the information about your organization more than a replacement worker would otherwise.
But yes, it makes sense to me that if you work for a speculative cause you are in a better position to assess if you should donate to them.
The point I was trying to make is less about value of information for yourself but information for others. Your donation ould fund a new employee for example who 1. gathers a lot of information like you would if you were in there position and 2. brings valuable information to the community in general. The questions is of course whether that person would be as productive as you.
Well, any information I gather individually could be shared.
~
Right. That would be one way to do it, if you could trust the person you hire to be interested in gathering information. Right now, my perception is that people who are interested in gathering information and reporting it are kind of rare.
That’s an interesting point. I strongly agree that less proven charities should do more internal research and especially reporting about their effectiveness. I think this could fuel an important discussion. Even if the results aren’t that amazing I think certain people would consider donating to them more simply because they are more aware of the opportunity and/or less uncertain about it.
I’m not quite sure yet what exactly you refer to by information though. It sounds like this refers to reporting about the effectiveness of the charities. Or are you talking about information like cost-effectiveness research and research papers/blog posts as well?
I’m thinking here information about impact, or evidence that would lower our uncertainty about the effect of a certain intervention.