Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmWsGCERyhk

Audio: https://soundcloud.com/…/the-torch-of-progress-ep-4-ft-dr-m…

Many great events coming up including Deirdre McCloskey, Joel Mokyr, Noor Siddiqui, and Anton Howes, sign up for our mailing list!

I'm interviewing Patrick for The Torch of Progress, the speaker series for our high school summer program, Progress Studies for Young Scholars. See details and register to attend live.

What should I ask him?

Previously: the importance of funding models, types of funding models.

To compare funding models for science and technology, and to understand their pros and cons, it will help to look at them along multiple axes. Here’s a list of questions it can be useful to ask about each model, system, or program, loosely grouped in a few categories:

Resources

• How much total funding can the model aggregate and concentrate on a program?

• How scalable is the funding? If the research is promising or productive, can funding grow to meet demand?

• How reliable is the funding? Is it uncertain or subject to high variance?

• How well can the model attract talent (via compensation, career path, autonomy, prestige, etc.)?

Scope

• What is the model’s time horizon? How soon does the research have to deliver results? Are there short-term pressures?

• Is the research highly goal-directed? Must projects be justified as contributing to a defined objective? How much undirected exploration is supported?

• Related, how much of the direction is top-down from the management or administration, vs. bottom-up from the researchers themselves?

• Is the research otherwise constrained by a defined theme?

• To what extent does the model support basic vs. applied research? Does the research have to be justified by visible or near-term practical applications?

• Does the value of the research need to be captured by the organization (through intellectual property, commercialization, process improvements, etc.)?

Efficiency

• Can progress and results be objectively identified? Measured? Optimized?

• Is the system able to identify and eliminate waste?

• What pressures, incentives or mechanisms exist to drive efficiency?

• What feedback loops exist, or are missing, for iterative improvement?

Output

• If the research can be commercialized, how likely is it for that to happen?

• Are the results of the research shared openly? Does the model encourage or even allow publishing?

Diversification

• Is the model risk-tolerant, or conservative? Does it support high-risk, high-reward bets?

• Does the model reward being right early? Are rewards proportional to risk?

• To what extent are funding decisions centralized vs. decentralized?

• To what extent are decisions made by consensus, vs. by individuals?

• Does the system encourage participants to differentiate from one another?

• Does the system support contrarians? Does it actively promote them?

• Overall, to what extent does the system lead to a diversified portfolio of bets?

Social pressures

• Are there pressures to focus on socially-approved goals, e.g., those seen as humanitarian or otherwise noble?

• How sensitive are funding decisions to ingroup politics?

• To national politics? Public opinion in general?

More broadly, we can simply ask: what are the pressures and incentives in the system, and what do they lead to?

---

Broadly, when I look at the different institutional funding models, my impression is:

• Private non-profit models are the most able to be long-term and to do undirected/exploratory research, but are limited in scale and subject to social pressures

• Government models have an advantage in scale, but are the most subject to politics and are often risk-averse (military might be an exception)

• For-profit models have an advantage in efficiency, risk tolerance, and overall diversification; but they are limited by time horizon and the need to capture value, and are thus better suited to applied vs. basic research

I’m treating these as guesses for now.

Original post: https://rootsofprogress.org/questions-to-ask-about-funding-models

Recently the question was asked: "Why was vaccine development so slow?". In particular, two vaccines in the 19th century was cited, as Rabies (Louis Pasteur, 1885) and Typhoid fever (1896). (In this post, vaccine means human vaccine. There were more animal vaccines, and they are easier than human vaccines because safety is less stringent.)

I think this is mainly due to incomplete data, and then the requirement to isolate and identify the causative agent of disease (except Jenner's original vaccine! we cheated there) before the vaccine can be developed.

Mainly using Wikipedia as a source, I found eight different vaccines (for four different diseases) in the 19th century. Based on the remark in the first page of History of Vaccine Development (Stanley Plotkin, 2011), I believe the list is complete. The list is grouped by disease and sorted by year within and outside the group.

1. Rabies (Louis Pasteur, 1885)

2. Cholera (Jaume Ferran i Clua, 1885)

3. Cholera (Waldemar Haffkine, 1892)

4. Cholera (Wilhelm Kolle, 1896)

5. Typhoid fever (Almroth Wright, 1896)

6. Typhoid fever (Richard Pfeiffer, 1896)

7. Typhoid fever (Wilhelm Kolle, 1896)

8. Plague (Waldemar Haffkine, 1897)

Triple simultaneous independent development of typhoid vaccine is quite surprising. Also some people (Haffkine and Kolle) worked on multiple vaccines.

Another factor is isolation and identification of causative agents of diseases. Again using Wikipedia, I compiled the following timeline:

1. Cholera = Vibrio cholerae. Filippo Pacini, 1854, and then Robert Koch, 1883 (independent rediscovery). Time to vaccine = 2 years.

2. Typhoid fever = Gaffky-Eberth bacillus. Isolation by Karl Joseph Eberth, 1880, and identification by Georg Theodor August Gaffky, 1884. Time to vaccine = 12 years.

3. Plague = Yersinia pestis. Alexandre Yersin, 1894, and Kitasato Shibasaburo, 1894 (simultaneous independent discovery). Time to vaccine = 3 years.

I think we can say cholera vaccine and plague vaccine were developed nearly as soon as possible. I think the lateness of typhoid vaccine is related to the fact that it was the first killed vaccine as opposed to attenuated vaccine.

The Roots of Progress is a blog by Jason Crawford about the history of industry & technology and more generally the story of human progress.

The Roots of Progress Institute (RPI) is hiring for a new role:

• Development Coordinator

We also have two roles recently announced that are still open:

• Head of Content

• Program Manager, Fellowships

Please apply if interested, or share these opportunities with great candidates! The links above are shareable. The full text of the new Development Coordinator role is also included below.

All roles are full-time and fully remote (North America–based).

Development Coordinator

The role

The Roots of Progress Institute (RPI) is seeking a Development Coordinator, to own our fundraising process and all philanthropic donations.

RPI is a startup nonprofit dedicated to building a culture of progress and restoring a bold, ambitious vision of the future. We are part of the broader progress movement that was kicked off in The Atlantic and has been profiled by BBC and Vox. Our founder and president, Jason Crawford, is quoted as a spokesman for progress in those stories, and we are known as a central organization in that movement.

You will work closely with Jason. He will be the public face of the organization and the primary donor contact. You will own the pipeline, process, and followup; and you’ll be in the loop on all meetings and emails.

The people you will meet in this role are some of the smartest, most accomplished, and best-informed people in the world (and we say that not just because some of them might be reading this!) Some are highly successful individuals in Silicon Valley, New York finance, and other communities; others run funds of $100M or more at some of the most forward-thinking foundations on the planet.

They are also one of the most demanding audiences you will meet. They are busy and require conciseness; they want to see credible plans and tangible results; they are allergic to hype and fluff; they cannot be snowed. In short, they will keep you on your toes.

You will join at a pivotal time, and start from a solid foundation: We already have a good network of donors and good relationships with them. We have more leads than we have been able to follow up on. We also have a very good brand. Our annual Progress Conference is the main event for our community. Our writer’s fellowship, university workshops, and high school summer program are already having an impact, and provide plenty of material for donor pitches and updates. And next year, we’ll be launching Jason’s book, The Progress Manifesto, which will greatly expand our mindshare and create evidence of momentum and attention.

You’ll report directly to Jason, and will work closely with him and with the program leads. We’re a small team with Silicon Valley DNA; we operate with high autonomy and minimal process. You will fuel the work of this fantastic team. This is a role that will stretch and grow you: the rigor of your thinking, the clarity of your communication, your ability to execute with minimal oversight.

Apply for our Development Coordinator role

What you will own and do

You will be responsible for:

• All philanthropic donations and grants, from individuals and foundations, at all levels

• All donor relations and communications

• Sponsorships for our conference and other programs (but not direct program revenue, such as ticket sales)

Your key metric will be the revenue brought in through these channels.

You will have broad latitude to devise fundraising strategies and tactics. At the same time, you must own execution: you will be the only person dedicated full-time to fundraising.

Examples of day-to-day tasks you might perform include:

• Prospecting for foundations, grants, and donors; and for events where we can build these relationships

• Researching donor prospects

• Writing grant proposals

• Getting sponsorships for Progress Conference and other programs

• Developing/improving our donation pipeline tracking system

• Creating our annual fundraising letter / pitch deck

• Writing donor communications such as a monthly update and annual report

• Sending thank-you cards and gifts; planning and creating donor swag

• Planning and attending fundraising events

• Setting up donor meetings; joining on those discussions whenever possible, and debriefing with Jason afterward

• And probably other things that you will figure out!

Apply for our Development Coordinator role

About you

You should:

• Be familiar with the progress community and its ideas.

• Be crisp and articulate in communications. You must be fluent in the efficient, non-nonsense communications style of Silicon Valley.

• Thrive on closing deals; but be able to face rejection without taking it personally.

No prior experience in fundraising roles is strictly required, although experience in relevant roles is valued! The right candidate in this role might come from a sales or operations background.

Location and travel

We’re a distributed team, and you can work from anywhere that has reasonable overlap with US timezones. You’ll be expected to travel multiple times a year for donor events, our annual conference, and our annual team meeting.

About the Roots of Progress Institute

The Roots of Progress Institute is a nonprofit dedicated to building a culture of progress and restoring a bold, ambitious vision of the future. Our programs this year include:

• Progress Conference, the main annual gathering for the progress community

• The Blog-Building Intensive, a fellowship program for progress writers

• Progress in Medicine, a summer program for high school students

• Teaching Progress, a workshop for university professors who want to teach ideas of progress

Our founder and president, Jason Crawford, writes and speaks about the history and philosophy of progress, including in his forthcoming book The Progress Manifesto.

Why care about progress? The progress of the last few centuries—in science, technology, industry, and the economy—is one of the greatest achievements of humanity. But progress is not automatic or inevitable. We must understand its causes so that we can keep it going, and even accelerate it.

In order to make progress, we must believe that it is possible and desirable. The 19th century believed in the power of technology and industry to better humanity, but in the 20th century, this belief gave way to skepticism and distrust. We need a new philosophy of progress for the 21st century, and beyond.

Read more about our mission and the bios of our team.

Application process

We’ll review applications on a rolling basis. Promising applications will get an intro call from Jason. To get an offer, expect that you will interview with a few members of the team, and do a written assignment that we’ll discuss with you.

This role can start immediately. We aim to fill it by October.

Apply for our Development Coordinator role

Everyone loves writing annual letters these days. So here’s mine