All Activity

A National Mortgage News/Snapdocs survey of 100 lenders found 90% use some form of what could be considered a digital closing, up from 74% two-years ago. View the full article

The state has largely solved for the industry's biggest concerns but the broader secondary mortgage market could still have some additional responsibilities. View the full article

Electricity network said it had activated plans to restore supplyView the full article

Hello and welcome to Modern CEO! I’m Stephanie Mehta, CEO and chief content officer of Mansueto Ventures. Each week this newsletter explores inclusive approaches to leadership drawn from conversations with executives and entrepreneurs, and from the pages of Inc. and Fast Company. If you received this newsletter from a friend, you can sign up to get it yourself every Monday morning. Nearly 20 years ago, Harvard Business School professor Clayton Christensen published The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, his groundbreaking work about why successful companies often lose their way. But CEOs still struggle with one of the book’s central lessons, which is that companies need to disrupt themselves. “Companies certainly know more about disruption than they did in 1995, but I still speak and write to executives who haven’t firmly grasped the implications of the theory,” Christensen told former Harvard Business Review editor and Inc. columnist Karen Dillon in an interview published shortly after his death in 2020. “The forces that combine to cause disruption are like gravity—they are constant and are always at work within and around the firm. It takes very skilled and very astute leaders to be navigating disruption on a constant basis.” New paths and challenges Indeed, even after leaders make the difficult decision to shed traditional and reliable revenue streams to invest in new products and services, executing such transitions can take years. Such lags can test the patience of investors and other stakeholders, especially when there’s no guarantee that the new business model will succeed. Just ask Michael Weening, president and CEO of Calix, Inc., which took 13 years to transform itself from a networking gear maker into a software and managed services company for rural broadband providers. The company was founded in 1999, at a time when startups and enterprises alike were rushing into the lucrative business of making gear to power the internet. (Remember when Cisco Systems was the most valuable company in the world?) But a decade later, enterprises started to change the way they were deploying technology, moving to cloud-based solutions that began to minimize the need for companies to maintain their own computing equipment. Calix leaders saw the change coming and began laying the groundwork for an entirely new approach in 2012—one that reimagined the company as a software and cloud company for rural broadband service providers. The company hired Weening from cloud trailblazer Salesforce in 2016 to help with the transition. However, a year later, the company’s annual loss had widened to more than $80 million from $27 million on revenue of about $450 million as Calix realigned the business to focus on investments in its software business. The market cap fell to $275 million, about two-thirds of its value at the time of its 2010 initial public offering. Staying the course Weening credits Carl Russo, Calix’s founder and chairman, with having the patience to weather losses. He says: “The founder was the largest shareholder, who could in essence say to the market, ‘We’re making these massive investments because if we don’t do this, we’re going to turn into a low-margin commodity business.’” In addition to making changes to Calix’s core business model and business infrastructure, Weening and his leadership team had to bring in new talent, resulting in restructuring costs for severance and termination benefits. Another big challenge was convincing Calix’s clients, the rural broadband operators, to embrace Calix’s new offering. Rather than selling them gear for their fiber optic networks, Calix wanted to offer a cloud and software platform—with a host of fully integrated managed services, some of which the broadband companies could then sell to their consumers and business customers. For example, Calix customers can sell residential customers a subscription to Bark, a social media-monitoring service for parents. “They’re great at construction; they’re great at reliability and running a network, but this new world of broadband is around experiences,” Weening says. “How do you teach them how to be sales and marketing- and experience-orientated?” Weening drew on his experiences leading customer success at Salesforce to develop resources and training to help Calix clients take advantage of its products and services. New outcomes—a decade later The transformation is starting to pay off. The company in 2023 made Fortune’s list of the 100 fastest-growing companies of the year based on growth in revenue, profits, and stock returns. The company reported lower revenue and losses in 2024 but recently reported first-quarter earnings that beat expectations. Calix’s market capitalization is about $2.4 billion. Ask Weening what he thinks about disrupting Calix now, having gone through a 13-year transformation: He and the company say transformation is ongoing, and he says he relies on his customers to keep innovation on track. “You can never get arrogant,” he says. “You always have to be listening. We have 10 advisory customer boards. And if you’re not arrogant, everyone will tell you where you suck.” He also offers a reminder of why so many companies resist tackling the innovator’s dilemma, even when they understand the risks of inaction. “This,” he says, “is not for the faint of heart.” How does your company navigate disruption? Has your company faced the innovator’s dilemma? How do you, in Christensen’s words, navigate disruption on a constant basis? Send your stories and anecdotes to me at stephaniemehta@mansueto.com. I’d like to share your examples in a future newsletter. Read more: innovator’s dilemma Why companies fail to innovate. An excerpt from The Innovator’s Dilemma Basecamp founder Jason Fried talks to Clayton Christensen How Steve Jobs solved the innovator’s dilemma View the full article

Link building is often 40% of an SEO budget – sometimes more in competitive industries. But here’s the problem: most companies aren’t calculating ROI before building links. That’s a fast way to burn through your budget without knowing what you’re getting in return. If you spend $5,000, $10,000, or even $50,000 a month on link building, you should know what kind of return to expect. This guide will show you how to calculate link building ROI before sending a single outreach email. We’ll cover how to assess a page’s revenue potential, estimate the cost of link building, and determine whether the investment pays off. You’ll know exactly how to forecast ROI, avoid overspending, and prioritize the pages worth investing in. But first, a little about me. I’m Travis Bliffen, CEO of Stellar SEO – an Inc. 5000-ranked link building agency. Since 2012, we’ve built 25,000+ backlinks in over 100 industries and helped clients drive millions in revenue through search traffic. After 13 years in SEO, I’ve seen what works and what doesn’t, and I’ve spoken to many companies that learned the hard way after wasting money on low-quality link campaigns. This guide will help you avoid that. If you’re serious about results, effective link building starts with ROI modeling, whether you are doing it for your brand or using a white label link building service to fulfill your agency’s needs. Why page value comes first in link building strategy Before you consider how many links a page needs, you have to determine whether it’s worth building links in the first place. A solid ROI starts with a page that has real revenue potential. Start by estimating the monthly search volume for your target keywords using tools like Ahrefs or Semrush. Then, apply an estimated click-through rate (CTR) based on where you expect the page to rank. Finally, multiply your estimated traffic by your conversion rate and the value of each lead or sale. For example: A service page ranking in the Top 3 could drive 1,000 monthly visits. At a 3% conversion rate and $500 per lead, that’s $15,000 in potential monthly revenue. That’s the foundation. If the revenue isn’t there, no number of backlinks will make it worth the investment. Key metrics to determine link competitiveness Once you’ve determined a page’s earning potential, it’s time to examine the competition. This will help you determine how many high-quality backlinks you’ll need. Focus on these key metrics: Number of referring domains linking to top-ranking pages. Domain Authority (Moz), Domain Rating (Ahrefs), or Trust Flow (Majestic). Relevance of linking domains to your industry. Variety and natural use of anchor text. Look at the top 3 to 5 ranking competitors. You can estimate how many links you’ll need and determine if your content is as good or better. How many links do you need? Like finding the best link building service, there’s no one-size-fits-all answer. It depends on your current authority, how strong your competitors are, and the quality of your content. But with the data you’ve gathered, you can come up with a solid estimate. For example: If the top page has 50 links and you have 10, you might need 30 to 40 strong links to compete. If your domain is more authoritative, you may need fewer. If your content is weak or new, you’ll probably need more. This data-backed estimate is more helpful than someone promising “10 links a month” without context. Building links strategically vs. tactically Chasing quick wins or buying cheap placements might work for a while, but real ROI comes from strategy. That means choosing the right pages to promote, using anchors that match search intent, and using links from relevant, trusted websites. When your link strategy supports your business goals, it becomes a growth tool rather than just another SEO checkbox. Breaking down link building costs by tier Not all backlinks are created equal, and they don’t all cost the same. Here’s a simple breakdown by link tier: Tier 1: DA/DR 70 and up, niche relevant, editorial placements – $750 to $1,250+ Tier 2: DA/DR 50 to 69, moderately relevant – $400 to $600 Tier 3: DA/DR 30 to 49, less authority but relevant – $250 to $399 Most campaigns use a mix. You can estimate your total cost based on how many links you need. Let’s say you need 25 links: 5 Tier 1 = $4,000 10 Tier 2 = $3,500 10 Tier 3 = $3,000 Total Investment: $10,500 Why high quality backlinks matter in ROI modeling Calculating ROI is not about how many links your competitors have – it’s about how many valuable links they have. If you base your link budget on raw link counts, you will overspend, chase junk, or both. Here’s how we approach it: Start with the top-ranking pages for your target keywords and pull their backlink profiles using tools like Ahrefs. Eliminate low-value links from the analysis. That includes obvious spam, sitewide footers, irrelevant blog networks, and low-trust placements. We don’t judge quality by DR alone. Context matters. For example, a DR 20 link from a local business directory may be worth including if it’s topically and geographically relevant. Segment what’s left into link tiers based on strength and relevance. This gives us a realistic average cost per link and an accurate target count. This filtering step is key. It ensures you’re only modeling ROI based on links worth replicating – links with the potential to pass authority and move rankings. Bad links inflate your projections and waste your budget. A clean, screened link profile leads to smarter forecasting, more efficient budgeting, and a better chance of hitting your goals. How to calculate link building ROI Now that you’ve estimated the page’s revenue and your total link building cost, it’s time to do the math. ROI = (Annual Page Value – Link Building Cost) / Link Building Cost Example: If a page has $60,000 in yearly potential and you spend $10,000 on link building, your ROI is: ($60,000 – $10,000) / $10,000 = 5.0, or 500% Link building isn’t a quick win, but with the right execution, you can break even in a few months and keep earning long after the links are live. How to maximize the ROI of link building Once you know the ROI potential, the next step is to increase your return without increasing your budget. Here’s how: Conversion optimization: Turn clicks into conversions Getting traffic is just the start. Improving your layout, CTAs, load time, and trust elements can dramatically boost the number of visitors who become leads or customers. Even a small conversion rate increase can double your ROI – no extra links required. Content enhancements: Make pages easier to rank You’ll need more links to compete if your content is weak or poorly structured. You can rank with fewer links and hold your position by improving your content’s depth, formatting, and relevance. Anchor text planning: Use links more effectively Smart anchor text helps you rank faster and avoid penalties. Mix branded, partial match, exact match, and generic anchors. Plan your link profile to look natural and stay aligned with your strategy. Link building content strategy: Use linkable assets to support money pages You don’t have to point to every link on a service page. Supporting content (e.g., guides, stats pages, blog posts) can attract great links and boost your main pages through internal linking. A good content strategy supports both SEO and conversions. What to look for in a link building agency Not every agency is built the same. If you’re spending thousands per month, make sure your link building agency: Creates a custom strategy for your business. Manually vets prospects. Prioritizes quality over quantity. Can explain the “why” behind every link they build. At Stellar SEO, we’ve built our reputation doing this. Common mistakes that kill ROI Most failed campaigns don’t fail because of Google – they fail because of bad planning. Here’s what to avoid: Not calculating ROI before you start. Buying cheap, irrelevant, or low-quality links. Building links to pages that don’t convert. Working with link builders who focus on volume, not results. If your agency can’t explain how and when your investment will pay off, it’s time to reevaluate. The long-term value of building domain authority When you build links, you’re strengthening your entire domain. That means: Future pages will rank faster with fewer links. Your site becomes more stable and less affected by algorithm updates. You can target more competitive keywords with confidence. The longer you invest in link building efforts, the more valuable each link becomes. Link building is a calculated investment, not a gamble Link building doesn’t have to be a mystery. With the correct data and a smart plan, you can make confident decisions that generate strong returns. Before starting your next campaign, ask: Is this page valuable enough to rank? How many links will it take to get there? What will those links cost? How long until I break even? If you’re unsure how to answer those questions, that’s where we come in. At Stellar SEO, we help brands build smart, scalable link building campaigns with ROI in mind from day one. Whether you’re spending $5,000 or $50,000 monthly, we’ll help you get more from every link – and every dollar. Ready to build a campaign that pays for itself? Let’s talk. View the full article

The US and Europe have fundamentally different views on the threat from Russia and the protection of democracyView the full article

LLMs don’t need schema; they need structure. Learn how to format your content for visibility in AI Overviews, ChatGPT, and Perplexity. The post How LLMs Interpret Content: How To Structure Information For AI Search appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Kyiv says it secured concession from The President administration not to use proceeds for past military aidView the full article

Getting a sense of the scale of social media platforms can be tricky. While tech companies often share self-serving metrics—like monthly active users or how likely users are to buy products after engaging with brands—they rarely offer a true sense of their platforms’ enormity. But a new study published in Cornell University’s preprint server arXiv aims to change that by quantifying TikTok’s scale over a single day—claiming to be among the first to grasp the platform’s full scope. It also offers insight into what people are watching, how much content is being uploaded, and who is posting it. “The motivation is using this social media data to better understand society,” says Jürgen Pfeffer, one of the study’s coauthors and chair of computational science at the Technical University of Munich. The researchers reverse-engineered how TikTok assigns video IDs to gather their data, eventually capturing what they believe to be at least 99% of all posts from a single hour on April 10, 2024—around five million videos. They also sampled one minute from every hour across a 24-hour span between April 9 and 10. The entire process took five months. Among the team’s findings was the sheer scale of TikTok activity. They estimated 117 million videos were uploaded on that single day. Roughly one in five featured children, based on estimates from an age classification engine the team trained. Videos posted precisely at the 0th second of each minute significantly outperformed others—suggesting timing tricks might influence the algorithm. However, Pfeffer notes this could be due to professional creators scheduling their posts, who are also more likely to achieve success. About a fifth of the videos were deleted within seven months, hinting at large-scale moderation or user regret. The average video was approximately 20.5 seconds long and was viewed between 2,250 and 2,500 times—depending on whether the data came from the hour-long slice or the one-minute-per-hour sample. Pfeffer was also surprised to find that TikTok engagement peaked twice daily. Around 4 a.m. UTC (11 p.m. EST), uploads surged to nearly six million videos per hour, reaching a similar peak again around 1 p.m. UTC (8 a.m. EST). The researchers attributed these spikes to global usage cycles, as morning users in Asia overlapped with late-night uploaders in the U.S., and vice versa later in the day. The team also grouped popular videos into thematic clusters. Among the most common were “images with colorful backgrounds and graphics” and “selfies with fashionable outfits and watermarks.” Less frequent themes included “political commentary on police operations in Pakistan” (0.025% of all videos) and “camouflaged military soldier images,” which accounted for 0.06% of the content. View the full article

We’re facing a career confidence crisis. Work is changing fast, yet many employees feel stuck. At LinkedIn, our data shows workforce confidence has dropped to a five-year low, and only 15% of employees say their manager has supported them with career planning in the past six months. Managers can play a big role in righting the ship—helping employees build the new skills they need to stay relevant and develop into future leaders. But this requires a fundamental shift: transforming them from task-overseers to coaches developing talent and sparking the best ideas from their teams. There are some key steps any company can take now to develop a culture of coaching that starts with your managers—but extends well beyond them. Start to develop your managers as coaches If you want your managers to become coaches, that starts by coaching your coaches. Just like elite athletes rely on coaches to reach peak performance, managers also need coaching to unlock their full potential. Coaching is a skill that needs to be intentionally developed. Executives are starting to grasp this opportunity. Nearly 80% of global CHROs agree their managers in the future will spend less time managing tasks and more time coaching teams. Leading companies are doubling down on this already. For instance, IBM supports first‑ and second‑line managers to grow through targeted programs, assessments, and skill-aligned badges. Manager Impact, for example, is an interactive learning experience that coaches new managers on how to lead with confidence, create meaningful employee experiences, and navigate real-world leadership challenges. Managers who complete these programs achieve significantly higher employee engagement scores, says IBM.  Coca-Cola is taking similar steps to grow managers into coaches by implementing rigorous leadership assessments to select the right people for leadership roles, and then providing cohort-base development to set those people managers up for success as coaches. They’ve seen notable upticks in how employees are rating their managers, as well as a boost in overall employee satisfaction. Taking the time to develop your managers into coaches is key to helping employees get “unstuck” and supercharging growth across the business. Plus, providing managers with the tools and support they need to excel in their roles improves their own retention and engagement, creating a virtuous cycle that benefits the entire organization. Consider making professional 1:1 coaching an employee benefit It’s important to recognize your teams are operating through a moment of historic work change. By 2030, we expect 70% of the skills used in most jobs will change, with AI emerging as a catalyst. To keep pace, your people need more support. Training managers to coach is essential, but they can’t do it alone. That’s why more companies are bringing in independent career coaches who offer specialized guidance on complex workplace challenges, like navigating difficult workplace relationships, managing career transitions, or developing crucial interpersonal skills that AI can’t replicate. Kearney, a business consulting firm and LinkedIn Top Company for 2025, has taken this approach by offering a six-month individualized coaching program and practice rotations designed to accelerate consultant growth. And at LinkedIn, we recently made the decision to offer every single employee, regardless of their job function or seniority level, an opportunity to work directly with an independent career coach. This investment in personalized development is already showing promising results, with 97% of our employee participants saying they feel more confident in their ability to navigate their careers after coaching. Scale personalized coaching in new ways with the help of AI There is no replacement for one-on-one coaching from a trusted adviser, but that person can’t be there for you 24/7, which is where AI tools can round out your strategy. While many leaders are focused on AI’s impact on productivity, AI for coaching is emerging as the next frontier, with more companies experimenting and seeing early gains. We’re seeing firsthand how more organizations are tapping into our AI-powered coaching features in LinkedIn Learning, with companies like Gates Foundation and Thomson Reuters actively using our new coaching tool to help their managers practice new skills. Companies are already saying this is helping their employees better prepare for that difficult conversation or high stakes presentation. Building a strong culture of coaching will always be rooted in human expertise, but it can be complemented and scaled to new heights with the help of technology. The most valuable skill we can cultivate today isn’t technical—it’s teaching our people how to learn continuously in a rapidly changing world, building resilience that no economic shift or technological disruption can shake. By investing in coaching, you’re not just developing skills—you’re unleashing the uniquely human potential that will define success in the AI era and beyond. View the full article

Aiman al-Mudaifer was appointed last year following increasing scrutiny of futuristic planView the full article

In the lower Manhattan neighborhood of NoHo, the crowded area around Lafayette Street was once called Gasoline Alley because of the many auto shops and gas stations housed there. While New York is still crowded with cars, gas stations in Manhattan are now more rare (there are none today in Gasoline Alley, only one left in all of lower Manhattan.) But off of Lafayette, there’s a new kind of space-inspired gas station that reveals the future of fuel—a future in which we power vehicles across land, air, and sea with CO2 instead of fossil fuels. The Fuel Store is an immersive concept store by AirCo, a Brooklyn-based startup that turns captured CO2 and hydrogen into synthetic fuels. Most people don’t think about their fuel all that much, or don’t know that there are options other than fossil-fuel derived gas. The Fuel Store is meant to introduce people to AirCo’s technology, and paint a possible future where CO2 powers everything from motocross bikes to jets to spaceships. Previously called Air Company, AirCo has turned captured CO2 into all sorts of consumer products, including vodka, hand sanitizer, and perfume, since it was founded in 2017. In 2024, AirCo raised $69 million in a Series B round, and the company also has a $65 million contract with the Department of Defense; its raised over $100 million in total, according to Pitchbook. With just under 120 employees, it’s lab and R&D operations are located in Brooklyn. Recently its been focusing on fuel, because that’s an industry where it can have substantial impact. “It’s one of the hardest industries traditionally to decarbonize,” says cofounder and CEO Gregory Constantine. Transportation is the largest contributor to the U.S.’s greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for 28% of all direct emissions. Globally, aviation alone counts for 2% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. AirCo instead uses CO2—a greenhouse gas—as a feedstock. It combines that CO2 with hydrogen to create fuels through a process that runs on renewable energy. Though AirCo declined to share how much CO2-derived fuel it currently produces, it does have partnerships with multiple companies for the use of its sustainable aviation fuel, called Airmade. In 2022, JetBlue signed an intent to purchase 25 million gallons of Airmade over five years, and Virgin Atlantic signed an intent to purchase up to 100 million gallons over 10 years. The company has also has partnerships with Boom Supersonic, and the U.S. Department of Defense. For the government, AirCo has worked on projects for land, air, and sea transportation. The Fuel Store showcases these different developments. When you first walk in, you see a shiny chrome gas station in the center of the room—an AirCo branded awning over sleek, futuristic pumps. A motocross bike is attached to one pump, meant to represent the freedom to “roam,” just like how AirCo’s fuels can be made either in remote locations or in cities. Along the walls are a series of products designed to tell different aspects of AirCo’s story, and the future of fuel the company envisions. On one shelf are hard-shell suitcases decorated with modern travel stickers, one of which reads, “My plane is on an air-based diet.” The climate impact of transportation has led to some “travel shaming,” Constantine says, but he adds that travel is a part of life. Through its work making sustainable aviation, AirCo is making travel less objectionable, he says. Next to the suitcases are vintage Air Force bomber jackets, adorned with new AirCo patches. In April, AirCo fuel partnered with the Air Force for the first-ever unmanned flight powered by CO2-derived jet fuel. AirCo’s synthetic fuels are 100% compatible with current aircrafts, unlike hydrogen, which requires new engine designs. On the other side of the store are life vests made of recycled signal flags, a nod to the company’s successful tests with the Navy to use Airmade for marine vessels. (These tests powered boats while also emitting less visible smoke in the exhaust.) The signal flags themselves mean “urgent” and “full speed,” echoing the company’s perspective on its mission to decarbonize fuel. Above the life vests are dry bags made from upcycled sails, an ode to how sailboats, powered by air, were once the dominant form of sea travel—and how air, through AirCo’s CO2 fuel, could power future marine vessels. Objects like the motocross bike, a mini toy AirCo fuel truck, and vintage Army T-shirts screen-printed with an image of a Polaris MRZR tactical vehicle—which AirCo successfully powered with its CO2-derived fuel through tests at West Point—showcase AirCo’s fuel use on land. And finally, the Fuel Store also hints at AirCo going into space. One wall features a conceptual Mars helmet and workwear suit. These imagine a future where the red planet’s atmosphere—which is 95% CO2—could be harvested to power spacecrafts, rovers, and habitats. AirCo also has a long-running partnership with NASA. “A lot of the work that we do with groups like NASA is to try to prove out that we can produce a fuel not only here on Earth made from CO2 but potentially, in the long-term future, up on Mars, so that we can bring astronauts back,” Constantine says. AirCo also created bacon, egg, and cheese space food, a nod to the classic New York City sandwich and the company’s home base. Each of these products has tags that explain their connection to AirCo’s larger story. Though these items won’t be for sale at the Fuel Store, they will be available via auction online after the concept store’s run is over. That auction will help fund AirCo’s research and development. Visitors will be able to purchase AirCo merch like T-shirts, socks, and some of the stickers that appear on the luggage (including ones that read “honk if you love unlimited feedstocks” and “Make love, not CO2”). The Fuel Store will be open to the public from April 30th to May 3rd at 55 Great Jones Street, New York. Constantine hopes the concept store is able to shed light on AirCo’s technology, and the hopeful future it envisions. “Educating people about the future is a tricky challenge, but it can be an inspirational one,” he says. The origins of fuel, and these new technologies like fuel made of CO2, can be foreign to people, but the store puts them in an immersive world full of that technology’s use cases. “What we’ve tried to do here,” Constantine adds, “ is to show what the future can look like in a way that others haven’t been able to do.” View the full article

In 2017, Uber’s executive team reached a critical turning point. The world saw headlines about leadership changes, valuation drops, and cultural upheavals. Beneath the noise, however, lay a deeper issue. It wasn’t rogue culture or aggressive expansion. It was misalignment at the very top. An all-too-familiar scenario had taken root: Executives were operating in silos. They weren’t facing challenges to key decisions, and they overlooked red flags. The result? A $20 billion valuation adjustment and a leadership overhaul that forced Uber to rethink how alignment works at the highest levels. And that’s where the real story begins. Instead of crumbling, Uber recalibrated. The company realigned its leadership, rebuilt trust, and restructured cultural processes. The company turned misalignment into an opportunity for transformation. Today, it stands as a case study in how great organizations use misalignment as a catalyst for growth. These challenges aren’t unique to Uber. Misalignment is present in companies of all stages and sizes. Unfortunately, many teams don’t realize it until it’s too late. What leads to misalignment Most executive teams think they’re aligned. But the data says otherwise. Only 18% strongly agree their teams consistently demonstrate the behaviors that define true alignment—like communication, integrity, accountability, and follow-through. This gap between perception and reality is where organizations lose their edge. You can’t build alignment out of assumptions or beliefs. It requires discipline. If leaders aren’t actively testing for alignment, they simply hope it exists. Misalignment doesn’t happen loudly. It doesn’t announce itself from the center stage. Instead, it creeps in during everyday interactions. A CFO notices a financial red flag but assumes someone else will address it. A CMO defends their budget so fiercely it hinders collaboration. Or a CEO shares a vision for the future, unaware their team is nodding in agreement while quietly disengaging. These moments don’t feel like failures. But that’s what makes them dangerous. The cost of misalignment Misalignment is more than an internal struggle, it’s an existential threat. In our work with executives across industries like healthcare, technology, government, and finance, the following patterns typically lead to misalignment: Conflict avoidance: Leaders sidestep difficult conversations, allowing minor issues to grow into major problems. Transactional meetings: Discussions lack depth and critical debate, reducing meetings to routine updates instead of platforms for innovation. Superficial trust: Leaders hesitate to ask for help, fearing it signals weakness, while their teams avoid raising strategic concerns out of distrust or fear. Team disengagement: When trust diminishes, team members stop challenging one another and wait for top-down directives, turning from proactive problem-solvers into task-oriented executors. These issues are not failures of leadership competency. They are symptoms of false alignment, which is the consequence of overlooking the need for deliberate cohesion. Signs your executive team is out of sync Think your team is aligned? Consider the following questions: Does alignment depend entirely on your CEO? If your team waits for top-down answers, it isn’t aligned. Are your meetings mostly informational updates? If real collaboration happens only in smaller groups, trust is lacking. Are silos the norm? If asking for help feels risky, your leaders are functioning as individuals, not as a team. Is constructive conflict avoided or punished? If problem-solving debates feel unsafe, innovation is stalling. If any of these scenarios resonate, your team isn’t just underperforming—it’s likely holding itself back, forfeiting innovation and strategic agility. What great executive teams do differently You can’t build alignment in the boardrooms. It’s built-in moments—the way leaders interact, debate, and trust each other. Aligned teams outperform their peers, not because alignment is easy but because it is deliberate. In our experience, companies need to take a two-step approach to fix misalignment: Step 1: Work on internal issues Elevate trust. Companies need to treat trust as a mission-critical value. Facilitate open discussions where executives can address challenges without fear of retaliation. Establish feedback loops and accountability. Integrate structured feedback mechanisms to foster a culture of continuous improvement. Embed professional development. Prioritize coaching and mentorship to make learning and growth central to your team’s strategy. Path 2: Bring in outside experts Executive coaches act as mirrors, revealing blind spots, building trust, and uniting teams before fractures lead to failure. They provide the safe space needed for honest discussions and alignment. A CEO’s Final Test: Are You Aligned? Finally, great leaders don’t assume alignment, they test it. If you want to know whether your team is truly aligned, ask your executives—privately and anonymously—to rate your team’s trust, collaboration, engagement, and alignment on a scale from 1 to 10. Compare the results. If the scores vary wildly or skew low, your team isn’t aligned, it’s merely coexisting. Start to think about how you can fix it. Remember, misalignment isn’t just an operational challenge, it’s a threat to your organization’s survival. View the full article

I am hearing reports that the Google Search Console API and tools that use the API, including Big Query exports, bulk exports and third party tools, are stuck with data from April 22nd but nothing sooner. It seems like there is something stuck in the data pipes within the API.View the full article

Every hour, the McDonald’s in Hong Kong’s crowded Admiralty Station sees more than 1,200 people bustle through its golden arches to grab a coffee or a burger. That’s one customer every three seconds. It’s the second-busiest McDonald’s in the world and the most-frequented restaurant in Asia—and now, it’s getting a makeover. To celebrate 50 years of McDonald’s in Hong Kong, the Admiralty Station has been renovated for the first time in 10 years. The design takes inspiration from the subway station itself, using a clever new installation to set a mood, evoke the excitement of travel, and, crucially, keep foot traffic moving through the bustling restaurant. It also takes a tentative step away from the millennial gray branding that’s dominated new McDonald’s locations over the past several years, embracing a slightly more nostalgia-powered look. The Millennial gray-ification of McDonald’sThe new Admiralty Station McDonald’s design was led by the Sydney-based design agency Landini Associates. Back in 2015, Landini Associates also spearheaded “Project Ray,” an all-encompassing McDonald’s rebrand named for Ray Kroc, the businessman widely credited with turning McDonald’s from a small hamburger stand into a fast-food corporation. Project Ray included rethinking the chain’s interiors, modernizing its graphic design, and even changing employees’ uniforms, all in a bid to “make McDonald’s cool again” and re-attract millennials to the brand. The first Project Ray redesign originally debuted at Admiralty Station, introducing a sleeker, more minimalist McDonald’s model accented with concrete, glass, and stainless steel—quite the contrast to the bright red-and-yellow stores customers might remember from the ’80s and ’90s. Landini Associates’ idea of a modern McDonald’s quickly caught on at other locations in Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Beijing, and more. “The energetic environments that have been the signature for McDonald’s are now replaced with a simpler, calmer, and more classic feel,” Mark Landini, creative director of Landini Associates, told Architectural Products of Project Ray in 2023. Ten years on, Project Ray is still expanding to new McDonald’s restaurants. Still, the concept’s millennial gray-ification of McDonald’s has perhaps become a bit of a relic of the mid-2010s, when many fast-food restaurants began stepping back from expressive design for a more standardized fast-casual look. In contrast, over the past several months, McDonald’s has been more broadly embracing its fans’ nostalgia for its ’80s and ’90s marketing, bringing back brand characters like Grimace, CosMc, and Uncle O’Grimacey. Landini Associates’ updated Admiralty Station, which it’s calling a “Ray-Naissance,” seems to lean into this new tack by incorporating a bit more color, energy, and a few classic callbacks into its design. McDonald’s of the futureWhen visitors enter the new Admiralty Station McDonald’s, they’ll first be greeted with a gigantic, modernized version of the original golden arches, complete with a few subtle nods to the iconic branding of the very first McDonald’s restaurants. “As customers rise from the station below, they’re welcomed by a reflective double-canopy entrance—a contemporary homage to McDonald’s original roofline and a nod to Ray Kroc’s classic design,” a press release on the redesign reads. “Now framed by glowing feature walls in McDonald’s signature yellow, aimed at creating an unmissable beacon—just like the earliest restaurants once were.” Past this bright yellow entryway is the new restaurant’s defining feature: a 70-foot-long curving digital screen called the “Mood Engine.” Shape-wise, it’s a bit reminiscent of the subway trains themselves, and its moving images also build on the idea that it’s a fantastical continuation of the station’s transit. According to the press release, it “pulses with curated animations, dynamic color transitions, and playful bursts of McDonaldland characters,” bringing in a bit of the classic McDonald’s character that might’ve been missing in the previous design. To be clear, the new Admiralty Station McDonald’s is a far cry from the fast-food restaurants of the ’80s, when McDonaldland characters abounded. The concept is clearly intended for customers of the future, including a fast-service lobby filled with digital kiosks that can serve those 1,200 customers per hour; a first-of-its-kind McCafé Bar space made entirely from recycled plastic; tabletops made with 100% recycled laminate pulp and coffee grounds; and a fully LED lighting system intended for energy efficiency (that includes the Mood Engine wall.) Still, the design provides a sneak peek into what McDonald’s might look like several years from now: slightly brighter, more personalized, and tied to the company’s roots. “Our original design for Ray has proven its intent, to be a classically neutral and long-lasting space,” Landini said in the press release. “This ‘Ray-Naissance’ can now shift from calm to energetic, playfully branded to locally nuanced. . . . Like a chameleon, it responds to its environment.” View the full article

Efficiency standards for home appliances were once the conversational equivalent of beige—neutral, but aggressively uninteresting. But as political polarization has deepened, dishwashers, laundry machines, showerheads, and other household staples have begun to take on a new charge. With Republicans now in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, rules that quietly save Americans money on utility bills while conserving energy and water are suddenly at risk. Earlier this month, President Donald The President doubled down on his long-standing complaint about low-flow showerheads taking too long to clean his “beautiful hair.” He ordered his administration to repeal a rule, revived by the Biden administration, that aimed to save water by restricting flow from the fixtures. A White House fact sheet promised the order would undo “the left’s war on water pressure” and “make America’s showers great again.” It’s part of a growing movement targeting efficiency standards—last year, House Republicans passed bills including the “Refrigerator Freedom Act” and “Liberty in Laundry Act,” though neither succeeded in the Democratic-led Senate. Now in charge of both houses of Congress, Republicans have already passed a resolution to repeal a recent energy-efficiency standard for gas-powered tankless water heaters, which awaits The President’s signature. Efficiency standards used to have bipartisan support. But today, many Republican politicians see restrictions on gas stoves, refrigerators, and laundry machines as symbols of Democratic interference with people’s self-determination. That’s the idea The President advanced when he signed an executive order targeting efficiency standards for home goods and appliances “to safeguard the American people’s freedom to choose.” The message echoes talking points from industry groups that have an interest in keeping homes hooked up to natural gas for stoves and water heaters. “This isn’t the first time that we’ve seen efficiency standards thrust into the culture wars,” said Andrew deLaski, the executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, which advocates for stricter energy-efficiency legislation. “But President The President has put that into overdrive.” The push for more efficient appliances began in response to the fuel shortages sparked by the 1973 oil crisis. Republican President Gerald Ford signed the bipartisan Energy Policy and Conservation Act in 1975, laying the groundwork for the government to set standards on household appliances. But state laws for more efficient appliances came first, forcing manufacturers to navigate a patchwork of rules. So Congress set nationwide efficiency standards for water heaters, air conditioners, dishwashers, and many other household appliances with the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act in 1987, signed by another Republican president—Ronald Reagan. Congress continued to expand those standards with bipartisan support in 1992, 2005, and 2007. In total, the Department of Energy now oversees standards for about 60 categories of appliances and other equipment in homes and businesses, spanning toilets to commercial refrigerators. In January, the pre-The President Department of Energy estimated that these rules, taken together, saved the average U.S. household about $576 a year on their bills. They also cut national energy use by 6.5% and water consumption by 12%, making them a key tool for addressing climate change and drought. Voters are broadly supportive of energy-saving policies, with 87% of Americans polled by Consumer Reports in March agreeing that new home appliances should be required to meet a minimum level of efficiency—including 82% of Republicans. “People aren’t clamoring for products that needlessly waste energy and money,” deLaski said. Despite broad popularity, there have been flare-ups of pushback and public outrage against efficient appliances dating back to the 1980s. Reagan actually vetoed the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, saying it restricted “the freedom of choice available to consumers who would be denied the opportunity to purchase low-cost appliances,” the year before he signed it. In a 1996 episode of Seinfeld, Jerry, Kramer, and Newman were so fed up with the new low-flow showerheads in their building, they resorted to buying black-market Yugoslavian models from the back of a truck. Another culture war brewed over energy-efficient LED light bulbs in the 2010s as older, incandescent models began to be phased out, with Tea Party Republicans declaring that light bulb choice was a matter of personal liberty. Matthew Burgess, an environmental economist at the University of Wyoming, said that efficiency rules are most likely to become a cultural flashpoint when people see them directly affecting their lives. “People do notice the flow of their showerheads,” he said. “People do notice whether their stove is gas or electric.” Some of the political tension over appliances resulted from ambitious changes, he said, such as when Berkeley, California, tried to ban gas connections in new buildings in 2019. “I think that there’s an impression on parts of the right, that’s not totally wrong, that elements in the climate community, and on the left, and in certain segments of the Democratic Party want to tell them what to do and what not to do in their households,” Burgess said. Yet the fossil fuel industry has also influenced the conversation: There’s been a coordinated campaign to highlight the narrative of “consumer choice” for gas appliances in particular, according to Emilia Piziak, a senior analyst at InfluenceMap, a climate think tank. Last year, for instance, the American Gas Association filed a court brief challenging Biden-era Department of Energy efficiency rules on furnaces and water heaters, arguing that Congress “wanted consumers to have the freedom to choose the energy type they prefer.” “These industry groups and gas utilities, they are working together,” Piziak said. “They’re very effective at showing up and driving that messaging home.” The “freedom to choose” narrative has also been echoed by The President officials. One of the top priorities of The President’s energy secretary, Chris Wright, is to “promote affordability and consumer choice in home appliances.” The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers told Grist that while it supports the efficiency standards process, it wants changes. “The rulemaking process and analysis should focus more on consumer impact, specifically regarding affordability and product choice,” the association said in a statement. “Any standard that is developed should have real, measurable benefits for the consumer.” Though high-efficiency appliances tend to be more expensive upfront, they can save households thousands of dollars on bills over the long term. And deLaski argued that efficiency standards also deliver other benefits to consumers. “Today’s high-efficiency products, whether we’re talking about light bulbs or clothes washers or showerheads, perform as well and in many cases better than the inefficient products that they’ve replaced,” he said. While the Energy Policy and Conservation Act prevents the government from weakening efficiency standards for appliances that have already been set, deLaski said he’s concerned that the The President administration is looking for a way around that. “I think all the standards are at risk of being undercut, circumvented, not enforced,” he said. Recently, Republicans have been targeting the efficiency rules set in place at the end of the Biden administration. Because of the Congressional Review Act, Congress can review and repeal a regulation issued in the last 60 legislative days—a period that extends back into last summer—with a simple majority vote. So far, Republicans have not only voted to repeal efficiency standards for gas water heaters under this rule, but also commercial refrigeration equipment and walk-in coolers for restaurants, convenience stores, and grocery stores. The efficiency rules passed under the Biden administration alone would save households $107 each year over the next two decades, according to an estimate from the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, and collectively save business owners $2 billion each year. These recent moves by Republicans show that what started as a battle over “consumer choice” has expanded into a larger attack on efficiency as an objective. “I don’t think walk-in coolers are in the culture war,” deLaski said. “The attempt to push to eliminate these commonsense standards is really broad, not just about showerheads or refrigerators or dishwashers.” This article originally appeared in Grist, a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Sign up for its newsletter here. View the full article

To most visitors, Hoboken’s ResilienCity Park might look like a normal (if rather upscale) park, complete with a large lawn for lounging, a playground, a basketball court, and an athletic field. But hidden in plain sight, the park has another purpose: keeping two million gallons of rainwater off of Hoboken’s streets by storing them in a giant underground tank. The park—and others like it—is one of the main ways that Hoboken has transformed from a city devastated by Hurricane Sandy to one that, today, tends to recover from major rain within a matter of hours. Now, experts think New York City could use parks to follow Hoboken’s lead as extreme weather continues to worsen the city’s flood risk. According to a study published today by Rebuild by Design, an organization dedicated to using design solutions to solve complex urban problems, 70% of NYC parks will be flooded by 2100. The report comes on top of another recent study from the Regional Plan Association (RPA), which found that, by 2070, as many as 82,000 housing units in and around NYC could be lost due to flooding by 2040, and the number could double to 160,000 by 2070. Amy Chester, director of Rebuild by Design, believes that Hoboken’s example could help NYC protect both its parks and its housing by turning green spaces into a form of storm management. How Hoboken’s parks keep its streets dry In 2012, Hurricane Sandy flooded 80% of Hoboken, took out its power grid for two weeks, and cost the city $110 million in damages. In a recent talk shared to Rebuild by Design’s YouTube, Caleb Stratton, the city’s chief resilience officer, said that it was “a wake-up call for the city of Hoboken.” The following year, Rebuild by Design was started as a design competition to promote resilience in regions that had been affected by Sandy. At the time, Chester says, cities were blindsided by both Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sandy: “We didn’t really understand resilient infrastructure as we do now,” she says. That was especially true for Hoboken—which, despite its coastal location and long history of flooding, had almost no flooding mitigation infrastructure in place, Chester says. Hoboken’s proposed rain resilience project was one of Rebuild by Design’s six winning submissions, and over the last decade or so, the city has used more than $660 million from various sources including the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the state of New Jersey, and FEMA to implement new flooding protection measures. Hoboken’s flooding resilience project includes several different levers. To keep floodwaters out, it’s building a 9,000-foot-long series of preventative seawalls, gates, and levies. It’s also updating its sewer system with more flood pumps to move water out of storage quicker during heavy rain. And, it’s keeping streets dry by increasing above and below ground water storage. That’s where resiliency parks come in. So far, Hoboken has completed construction of three resiliency parks and a series of waterfront parks, with several more parks currently under construction. Each of these parks uses green infrastructure on its surfaces—like pervious pavers and rain gardens—which funnel water underground into holding tanks, keeping it out of the crowded sewer system and preventing overflows. The ResilinCity Park, the largest of the existing parks, can hold two million gallons of water, enough to collect runoff from 20 surrounding blocks during a notable rain event (typically defined as more than a half inch of water falling in a 24-hour period), Chester says. A large chunk of that water is kept in the park’s underground tank, while some is held in other clever ways—like a sunken basketball court with a capacity to hold more than 100,000 gallons. In all, the existing parks can hold a total of 4.2 million gallons of water. “It’s different from green infrastructure, because green infrastructure is on top of the park, and that stops the park from flooding. This is pumps and storage that stops the entire neighborhood from flooding,” Chester says. “We’re really interested in doing this all over New York City and in any urban areas where there are neighborhood parks, because if you’re a couple blocks away from a park, that park could be the storage option for your community and keep the floodwaters out of your basements and out of your streets.” Rebuild by Design’s data shows that, in 2022 and 2023, Hoboken’s new rain resilient infrastructure led to an 88% reduction in flooding events. In practice, that meant that across 121 storms, noticeable flooding only occurred 14 times. In September 2023, when Hurricane Ophelia led to thigh-deep water in Brooklyn and flooded subway cars in NYC, Hoboken was noticeably dry. Projects like these—which plan not just for seawater flooding, but also for excessive rainfall—are increasingly important as climate change ushers in rising sea levels, and as record-warm ocean temperatures lead to more intense annual storm seasons. According to the RAP’s recent analysis, NYC’s existing infrastructure is not prepared to account for the coming decades of flooding damage, which is expected to impact as many as 1.6 million New Yorkers by 2040. Chester thinks resiliency parks could be the first step toward preparing the city for what’s ahead. Why NYC’s parks could help keep residents safe from flooding Rebuild by Design’s new NYC park analysis maps all of the city’s 2,385 parks based on their current and future flood risk. Users can search the interactive map to view the parks in their own neighborhood, or filter for today’s flood risk and flood risk by 2100. The map is also color-coded based on FEMA’s social vulnerability index (or the susceptibility of social groups to the adverse impacts of natural hazards) and the heat vulnerability index, as parks provide the added benefit of reducing urban heat. The tool shows that 38% of parks are currently in flood zones—a number that’s expected to surge to 70% by 2100. While these statistics may seem alarming, Chester sees them as an opportunity. “We’ve mapped all of the floodplain in New York City and parks to see where [resiliency parks] could potentially be a solution,” Chester says. “We were able to show that 38% or 900 parks in New York City are currently on top of a flood plain. Interesting. Then if you look to the 2100 flood plain, it’s 70% of parks. That’s when we were like, ‘Oh my goodness. This could be really incredible to be thinking about this on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis.’” Of all of NYC’s parks, Chester’s team has identified 177 sites that would benefit the most from a resilient makeover, based on both their flood risk and heat vulnerability. To make this happen, Chester says, the parks would have to be fully rebuilt to construct underground tanks that would pump water off of nearby streets, like the ResilienCity example—which “is why we need to start now,” she adds. “If every time the parks department upgraded a park, they rebuilt it this way, we could have a major headstart in addressing flooding across NYC neighborhoods,” Chester wrote in a follow-up email to Fast Company. “All of Hoboken’s flood infrastructure was built in the past decade (after Sandy.)” These parks are, admittedly, a major investment. ResilienCity, for example, cost $80 million, while the smaller Southwest Resiliency Park (which can hold about 200,000 gallons of water in its cistern) cost $12 million. However, Chester explains, pitching resiliency parks as flood protection can help to draw in new streams of federal and state funding. “Parks manage 14% of the City’s land, but only about 0.6% of the City budget over the past 40 years, far below the national standard of 1–2% allocation of a municipality’s budget,” the Rebuild by Design interactive map page reads. “Parks offer immense potential to draw down federal and state funds, including programs from FEMA, HUD, and state funding. If the City were to recognize parks as vital infrastructure—as it does highways—and properly invest in upgrading and maintaining its parks, these public spaces could protect and save lives and save billions of dollars.” For now, Rebuild by Design’s NYC proposal is just that. But Chester believes that, if Hoboken could implement successful resilient infrastructure in just a decade, there’s no reason that other cities can’t do it themselves. “We’ve been working on this for a little while now, but like, it’s such an incredible model for urban areas nationally, because a majority of urban areas have neighborhood parks, and they’re these smaller areas that can be doing a lot more things,” Chester says. “None of these parks existed in Hoboken before, and Hoboken is not a city with a lot of money.” View the full article

Google's updated guidance clarifies that Google-Extended does not affect search inclusion, nor is it a ranking signal The post Google Updates Gemini/Vertex AI User Agent Documentation appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Once upon a time, back in 1995, BYD was a little-known battery maker. Today, it is the world’s largest electric vehicle producer after surpassing Tesla in global sales in 2024. This rise reflects a relentless focus on automation and vertical integration. It controls every part of its supply chain. It makes its own batteries, with features unmatched in the industry, even mining raw materials like lithium. Its factories are robotic wonders that run about 97% on their own, building a never-ending stream of cars better than Western equivalents at lower price points. And it also transports its own cars across the world with its own fleet of ships specially designed to carry automobiles. The latest is also the biggest ship of its kind on the planet: The BYD Shenzhen, which just sailed to Brazil on its first assignment. This colossal ship was designed to carry just wheeled cargo, what is technically called a roll-on/roll-off (Ro-Ro) vessel. Unlike typical container ships, where vehicles are packed into boxes and containers, Ro-Ro ships allow cars to be driven directly onto decks via ramps, making loading and unloading faster. They are way more efficient to operate than regular transport ships because each minute shaved from loading and unloading translates into big financial savings for the company. As BYD’s general manager, Wang Junbao, pointed out at the Shenzhen’s delivery ceremony, “Its efficient loading system and advanced protective technologies for stable and low-carbon logistics will be pivotal to [the company’s] globalization strategy.” What’s so special about BYD’s ship? At 721-feet long—nearly twice the length of a soccer field—the Shenzhen is the largest car carrier by capacity, holding 9,200 vehicles across 16 decks. According to the company, the ship’s design prioritizes efficiency and sustainability. It uses liquefied natural gas (LNG) dual-fuel engines, which burn LNG, a cleaner alternative to traditional marine diesel. LNG cuts sulfur oxide emissions by 99% and nitrogen oxides by 85%, aligning with stricter environmental regulations in markets like Europe. The Shenzhen also features anti-fouling paint, a coating that reduces drag by preventing marine organisms from sticking to the hull, improving fuel efficiency by up to 8%. It also employs shaft generators, devices that convert excess engine power into electricity, reducing reliance on polluting diesel generators. While BYD hasn’t fully detailed its proprietary box-type battery packs onboard, their inclusion hints at efforts to electrify auxiliary systems, further lowering emissions. Hefei Why BYD built this giant BYD’s decision to invest in ships stems from its explosive growth. The company sold about 455,000 vehicles in 2019, surging to approximately 740,000 units in 2021 and more than doubling in 2022 to 1.9 million. This growth strained existing logistics networks. Knowing where it’s heading, BYD announced it would invest $687 million to build its own seven-ship Ro-Ro fleet. Third-party shipping costs were skyrocketing, with daily charter rates hitting $150,000 per vessel in 2024. For context, leasing a single ship for a month could cost $4.5 million. The company estimates that per-vehicle shipping expenses drop 30% to 40% with its own fleet, saving up to $1.4 billion annually. “BYD plans to deploy seven car carriers over the next two years to address the shortage of shipping capacity for automobile exports,” Wang Chuanfu, the company’s founder and chairman, said last year. It has three more to go, including Shenzhen‘s twin, the BYD Changsha, which will be launched soon. No doubt the company will need it. Overseas shipments surged 124% year over year to 133,361 vehicles in Q1 2025, and the company is set to export 800,000 vehicles across the world this year. Such exponential growth—which analysts believe will continue in the double digits for years to come—is why the company plans to make even more vessels. By 2026, BYD’s seven-ship fleet aims to move more than one million vehicles yearly (or 83,300 per month, equivalent to nine Shenzhen trips). That’s one car shipped every 30 seconds, if you want an even more impressive figure. BYD is not the only company that does this, even while it has the biggest ship for now. Its strategy mirrors a broader shift among Chinese automakers. SAIC Motor, China’s second-largest automaker, operates 31 ships through its logistics arm, Anji Logistics, including the 7,600-vehicle SAIC Anji Sincerity. Unlike BYD, SAIC transports cars for multiple brands, including its rivals. But BYD’s fleet will be reserved mainly for its own vehicles, out of pure necessity. Globally, Hyundai Glovis—Hyundai’s logistics subsidiary—manages 60 ships and has just ordered a dozen 10,800-vehicle LNG-powered carriers. While larger, Glovis serves third parties like Toyota and Volkswagen. Legacy automakers rely on partnerships with shipping firms, a model BYD avoids, seeking instead to control every aspect of the production chain (the technology, the level of automation, the quality, and the price) to crush the competition. It’s hard to imagine the beleaguered Tesla or any other Western manufacturer matching this kind of vertical integration. The massive BYD Shenzhen is yet another reminder that the race for EV supremacy may already have a winner. View the full article

Chancellor-in-waiting unveils CDU cabinet picks a week before taking officeView the full article

If you’re not on TikTok, you may not have heard of Aaron Parnas. But for many young people across the U.S., he’s a prominent political news source, with over 3.5 million followers on TikTok and just under one million on Instagram. Parnas isn’t the only TikToker Gen Z and Gen Alpha turn to for news. Between 2020 and 2024, the share of adults regularly getting news from TikTok nearly quintupled—with adults under 30 leading the surge. Who is Aaron Parnas? After starting college at 14, Aaron Parnas completed his degree at 18 and graduated from George Washington University Law School at 21 in 2020. That same year, Parnas transitioned from Republican to Democrat. He is the son of Lev Parnas and detailed both his family’s political experiences and his personal journey in the memoir The President First. Outside of TikTok, Parnas has worked as a securities litigation attorney and a Democratic digital strategist. He first gained traction online by posting legal content during the pandemic. In 2022, he pivoted to covering the Russian invasion of Ukraine, sharing pro-Ukrainian stories from his relatives living there. His account quickly blew up, gaining 1.2 million followers in just a few weeks. TikTok as a News Platform TikTok is increasingly becoming a news platform, where users watch influencers summarize news stories and topics—“giving you the TL;DR in a way,” Parnas said. Parnas and others are often able to post as soon as news breaks. “I’ll post 20 times a day if I have to,” he told the Daily Voice. For example, Parnas was among the first to report on President Zelenskyy’s March 5, 2022, call with U.S. lawmakers, during which Zelenskyy requested more resources and suggested it could be the last time they saw him alive. Gen Z and Gen Alpha’s Shift in Media Habits According to the Pew Research Center, 39% of adults under 30 regularly get news from TikTok. However, less than 1% of the accounts users follow are journalists or traditional news outlets. Instead, young people are turning to social media influencers like Parnas. “A lot of [his followers] say they don’t go to CNN, FOX or MSNBC,” he said. Parnas believes Gen Z and Gen Alpha are “disenchanted” with legacy news media. He argues that traditional journalism’s dedication to neutrality can be a turnoff, and that younger audiences are more open to editorializing and personal opinions from news sources. TikTok also makes space for diverse perspectives to be heard—such as those of Parnas’s Ukrainian relatives. Challenges of TikTok News Consumption Parnas credits his ability to post quickly to the fact that he operates solo and doesn’t need to go through multiple layers of approval. Still, his “goal is to spread accurate information.” “I would never consider myself an investigative journalist by any means,” Parnas said in an interview. Instead, he views himself as a news aggregator who shares information from verified sources with his followers. He acknowledges that legacy media remains important due to its superior sourcing and fact-checking. However, not all TikTok influencers prioritize accuracy. The platform lacks a system to prevent the spread of misinformation—whether it’s unverified claims, personal (and possibly uninformed) opinions, biased interpretations, or outright fabrications. Parnas describes the relationship between traditional journalists and TikTok creators as a “double-edged sword.” While creators help traditional reporting reach younger audiences by repackaging it for social platforms, the original journalists often don’t get the credit they deserve. As a result, many young users may struggle to recognize what trustworthy journalism actually looks like. View the full article

At around 8:40 a.m. on January 1, a disgruntled U.S. soldier blew up a rented Cybertruck in front of The President International Hotel in Las Vegas. Seven bystanders were injured in the blast, though nobody was killed except the driver, who died by self-inflicted gunshot wound. The charred rubble and twisted metal left behind invoked both the car’s creator, Tesla tycoon Elon Musk, and the hotel’s owner, returning president-elect Donald The President. It also telegraphed untold carnage on the horizon from the prospect of this dystopic duo running the government together. The year had just begun and 2025 already delivered its most prescient visual metaphor. Plenty of other striking images have since emerged during the first 100 days of The President’s second term, though, that perfectly capture how this sequel presidency has played out so far. Elon Musk elongates his armAlthough the sheer abundance of tech billionaires at The President’s inauguration raised some eyebrows, only one of those billionaires’ actions that day dropped jaws. During a speech about his then-gestating Department of Government Efficiency, Musk put his hand over his chest, said “My heart goes out to you,” and then, well, let’s just say he made a memorable gesture. Twice. What kind of gesture? Media outlets have dog-eared their thesauruses searching for a euphemism that won’t leave any legal exposure or get anyone fired. It was either a “stiff-arm,” “odd-looking,” or “Roman” salute, but it bore more than a passing resemblance to Sieg Heiling. Only Musk knows for sure whether he made the alarming gesture by mistake, on purpose in brazen earnestness, or on purpose but just to troll the left. Either way, he never apologized. Instead, he complained on X that all criticism of his gesture amounted to “dirty tricks.” No word yet on whether dirty tricks are why several people who mimicked Musk’s salute lost their jobs. Volodymyr Zelenskyy walks into a buzzsawThe President seems to delight in humiliating people he perceives as disloyal. Think of Mitt Romney looking medical-grade embarrassed to be photographed at dinner with The President after criticizing him throughout the 2016 election, or Robert Kennedy Jr. being force-fed a Big Mac last fall after badmouthing The President’s diet. Those incidents seem like a mere warmup, though, for the humiliation ritual The President put Volodymyr Zelenskyy through back in February. The Ukrainian president entered the Oval Office presumably expecting to reach an agreement about trading his country’s rare minerals in exchange for continued support from the U.S. Instead, Zelenskyy found himself ambushed. The President and VP JD Vance took turns berating him on live TV for not being sufficiently grateful for U.S. support throughout the Russian invasion. (Days earlier, The President falsely blamed Ukraine for starting the war.) Zelenskyy’s face during the disastrous meeting served as an apt avatar for leaders of other U.S. allies around the world, realizing in real time that a major geopolitical realignment may be currently underway. The President take eggJoe Biden’s entire presidency was haunted by the specter of grocery store sticker shock. Whether he could have actually done more to assuage it or not, pandemic-driven inflation and supply chain issues kept driving up prices. Consumers were furious. Many were also desperate for relief, which The President promised to deliver on day one of his second term. Instead, egg prices shot up further after The President took office, for a variety of reasons. (DOGE’s firing of the team assigned to study rampaging bird flu almost certainly didn’t help.) Grocery store signage about egg rationing quickly showed up all over social media, forcing even Fox News to acknowledge it. The egg crisis has since receded, but not entirely, and not before birthing a massive meme. Gretchen Whitmer can’t hideGretchen Whitmer temporarily shielded herself from the cameras when she was in The President’s Oval Office, per this photo from NYT’s @erjleehttps://t.co/TFDPPnci7Q pic.twitter.com/hnLnvuQvlX — bryan metzger (@metzgov) April 12, 2025After an election cycle spent warning Americans about the dire consequences of a second The President term, Democrats in power have had difficulty finding their footing with it underway. Opposition took the form of holding up tiny signs of resistance during a The President speech to congress, which GOP colleagues promptly snatched away. Although some Dems like Bernie Sanders, AOC, Cory Booker, and Chris Van Hollen have found meaningful forms of fighting back, the party’s initial awkwardness out of the gate is crystallized in an April photo of Gretchen Whitmer. When the Michigan governor went to speak with The President in the days after his “Liberation Day” tariff blitz, she had not been informed The President planned on making a photo op out of her visit. To avoid looking like she’d come crawling to The President’s bargaining table, Whitmer shielded her face with folders—which only made the resulting photo exponentially more embarrassing. It’s the image of a person who has been thoroughly outmaneuvered by someone who better understands the contours of visual manipulation. Heavy images tweeted lightlyThe White House’s X account has undergone a radical vibe shift under The President. Instead of serving up official dispatches from the government, most of its posts read like far-right shitposts from 4chan. Though many worthy contenders come to mind, the most egregious example is probably the photo of a woman crying while under arrest by ICE, which the White House social media manager then ran through an AI Studio Ghibli filter, rendering it paradoxically adorable. Regardless of her alleged past convictions, making fun of her pain on an official government channel is shameful behavior. It’s an image that announces to the rest of the world: America runs on casual cruelty. The Epstein files stunt was very [redacted]Although the White House has touted this administration as “the most transparent” in American history, that title hasn’t always proved out. When congressional Democrats tried to enter federal government offices in the midst of DOGE shredding their staff, for instance, they found police officers standing in their way. You know, somewhat non-transparently? The moment that best visually captured the opacity of history’s most transparent administration, though, was the release of the so-called Epstein files. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi invited 15 far-right influencers to the White House to receive binders supposedly filled with declassified information about deceased human trafficker Jeffrey Epstein—and his suspected ties to powerful people. The binders contained scant new information; nothing approaching the realm of revelatory. If anything, the photo stunt invited further questions about just what might be missing from those binders and why. Not exactly an ideal outcome for an event (and an administration) so vocally proud of its historic transparency. These babies are priced to moveConsidering Tesla stock is down 71% year-over-year this quarter, it seems as if quite a few people are not very happy with Musk’s gleeful chainsawing of the federal government. In an effort to help his embattled colleague stem the tide, The President put on a White House-set version of a seasonal car sale—Teslathon on the White House lawn. The President gushed to the assembled press about how sleek and cool he found the phalanx of Teslas on the South Lawn. (“Everything’s computer!” he crowed at one point.) The spectacle ultimately didn’t help Musk’s fading fortunes one iota, but it did bring to life an image long lurking in certain corners of the public imagination: The President as an overzealous used car salesman. A crimson tide washes over the stock mapFinvizInternet ArchiveThe President’s red-light-green-light approach to imposing tariffs on more or less every country—not all of which are even populated—has created a lot of compelling images. Most of them, however, are stock brokers with their faces in their hands on some of the recent days when the Dow dropped by 1,000 points or more. The most lasting image from the post-Liberation Day stock free fall, though, is probably a stock market heatmap turning nearly all red—almost as if America’s economic security had bled out. Just say NoemSecretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem is apparently a fan of cosplay. She’s donned tactical gear several times to tag along on ICE raids, seemingly with the sole purpose of making content. On one of these raids, she even brought along Chaya Raichik, the far-right influencer better known as LibsofTikTok. Noem’s largest contribution to the visual vocabulary of The President’s second term, though, was her late-March stunt at El Salvador’s Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT) prison, where Noem filmed herself standing in front of a crowded cell full of mostly shirtless inmates, and threatened all “criminal illegal aliens” in the U.S. that they could soon be there, too. Using these men as props is already in poor taste, inviting painful memories of Abu Ghraib. That the administration admitted, just days later, to sending a man to CECOT by mistake made it even worse. Of course, for many viewers, the hardest part of looking back at any of these images from the past 100 days may be the shocking realization that it has only been 100 days. View the full article

One crucial factor helped keep Tesla profitable last quarter, and it wasn’t direct car sales. In its latest earnings report, the company said that it earned $595 million from selling regulatory credits to other automakers. The credits are issued by governments, including California, that require car companies to hit certain emissions goals by selling cleaner vehicles. If they don’t, they have to make up the gap by buying credits from companies like Tesla that make zero-emissions cars. Tesla’s sales tanked in the first quarter as Elon Musk’s dive into politics pushed away customers, both in the U.S. and internationally. The company reported that it earned $409 million in the first quarter of 2025, down 71% from the same quarter a year ago. Without the revenue from selling credits, Tesla would have posted a $186 million loss. Now, President The President is actively trying to dismantle the system that makes the credits possible. Republicans in Congress are helping that effort. The House is set to vote this week on a bill that aims to take away California’s right to have strict air quality standards—and the market for zero-emissions vehicle credits that exists in the state. A long history of relying on credits The credits have been important since Tesla’s beginning. In the early years, “it’s really what kept them out of bankruptcy,” says David Sperling, founding director of the Institute for Transportation Studies at UC Davis. Sperling previously helped set up the zero-emissions vehicle credit system in California. Multiple other states that follow California’s air quality standards, from Colorado to Virginia, also issue the credits. While Tesla also earns money from a credit system in Europe and a small amount through a federal program, most of the credits it sells are in California and other states. At points in the company’s history when it particularly struggled, credits kept it going. “The company was structurally unprofitable for a long, long time,” says Ed Niedermeyer, author of Ludicrous: The Unvarnished Story of Tesla Motors. If the cushion of the credits hadn’t existed, the company might look very different now. Musk once considered a sale to Google at one of Tesla’s low points, for example. In theory, the company might not have even survived. The credits still matter Eventually, Tesla was selling enough cars that it became profitable without the credits (at least until now). But the credits continued playing an important role. “Especially given the economic uncertainty right now, it remains an important driver for a type of profit in pre-cash flows,” says Seth Goldstein, an equity analyst at Morningstar. Credits also helped it accrue around $37 billion in cash. “If we do have a long-term economic slowdown, Tesla should be able to withstand the slowdown because it does have such a strong balance sheet,” Goldstein says. “So I’ll attribute that to the credit allowing Tesla to put itself in a very strong position.” The credits weren’t designed to last forever, and Goldstein argues that Tesla is positioning itself not to need them. As more automakers make EVs, they’ll have to buy fewer credits from electric-first companies like Tesla. Eventually, if California can keep its plan in place, all new car sales in the state will be zero-emissions by 2035. But as the state ramps up its emissions requirements on the way to that goal, some brands may not be able to keep up the pace and credits will become more valuable. “The value of the credits is pretty low right now because the market is outpacing the regulatory requirements,” says Sperling. “But that’s going to change probably within a year or two. If the authority stays in place and the regulations stay in place, those credits are going to become more and more valuable.” As Tesla’s sales falter, the credits play a more important role. The drop in sales isn’t solely because of the damage that Musk has caused the brand. Other car companies now offer a suite of options for EVs that customers may find more appealing, especially as Tesla has been slow to roll out new models. Musk has touted Tesla’s work on robotics and automation, but neither are ready to immediately come to market. (Both may be the latest examples of Musk’s hype machine.) The company has promised a new, more affordable car, but it likely won’t be out until next year. The sales of its current lineup of cars are still critical, which means that credits are, too. No one knows what’s next The state credits are at risk in two ways. Right now they’re possible because of California’s long-standing right to regulate air pollution. When the Clean Air Act passed in 1970, California already had air quality laws, so it was given a waiver to continue setting its own strict emissions standards for cars. Other states also have the option to follow California. The President tried to eliminate that waiver in his first term, and California and other states sued. (Four automakers then agreed to voluntarily meet California’s standards.) When Biden took office, with the lawsuit still underway, he restored the waiver. But fuel producers and industry groups sued—saying the Environmental Protection Agency shouldn’t have put the waiver back in place—and the Supreme Court is now considering whether that lawsuit can proceed. Separately, Congressional Republicans are trying to reverse the EPA’s waivers for California’s plans to phase out new gas cars and trucks. The House will vote this week. In the Senate, the parliamentarian has said that Congress doesn’t have the authority to repeal the waivers. But Senate Republicans may try anyway. Whatever happens, more lawsuits will follow. That means that the regulatory credits won’t immediately disappear. And Tesla, for now, will be able to keep using them—even as Elon Musk continues to rant about government handouts. View the full article

Launched in September, Overdrive, has taken an unconventional approach to harm reduction. Founded by Brian Bordainick, who also started emergency contraception company Julie and acne patch company Starface, the company has used its playbook of taking a fun, edgier branding approach to drugstore products—in this case testing kits for fentanyl and for seeing if a drink has been spiked— to appeal to a newer generation of consumers. Unlike sterile, medical-looking drug testing kits, Overdrive’s are designed to stand out with industrial-themed packaging that resembles a cigarette carton. It’s all in the service of turning lifesaving testing into less of a buzzkill on a night out. The company’s branding helped make it one of Fast Company‘s 10 Most Innovative Companies in consumer goods this year. Beyond encouraging testing, Overdrive is also interested in demystifying just how fentanyl gets into drugs. This week, the company released The Plug, a YouTube documentary and collaboration with photographer and director Sam Hayes (a former opioid user himself), aimed at highlighting the dangers of fentanyl and the importance of testing drugs given the widespread use of fentanyl to augment them. Ryan Weaver, the company’s creative director and branding mastermind, talked to Most Innovative Companies host Yasmin Gagne about the documentary, the company’s messaging around drug safety, and his personal journey with drugs in his younger days. This interview has been edited and condensed. Before Overdrive, you had experience in working on creative and business development. What did you learn from working on digitally native brands and channels? After doing some independent production, I was at YouTube channels Full Send and Nelk Boys for a while and they were creator-driven channels that were doing banger numbers with prank stuff. These kids that were running it were supersmart and had no playbook for how YouTube channels are supposed to run. If somebody was trying to do a brand deal with them, they’d say, “Fuck off, we’re going to do our own product.” Everybody else in media, my whole life was like, well, there’s advertisers and there’s content creators. These guys did product development and put on a great show. They created this whole ecosystem where consumers could engage with both. In hindsight, it’s so obvious and smart. How did you connect with your cofounder, Brian Bordainick? I’ve been working with him for three years. He shared his vision for where content was heading that brands don’t need to do just advertisements, they can do storytelling with shared value sets around what the product stands for. Though that you can build an audience and fidelity. He also has really strong retail relationships and is really good at product development. You started working with Bordainick at his emergency contraception company Julie. What attracted you to the project? Julie was headed into launch and they wanted me to produce a hero asset. I came in to help produce their first commercial where two women were at a drugstore shelf shitting on their boyfriends and talking about how badly they needed the product. It did well and people were psyched about it. From there I got to understand how CPG worked. Why did you want to build a brand around testing recreational drugs? This inclination in the background to do something in the drug safety space had been percolating for Brian for some time and certain retailers had hit him up and said this is an important space. He has a grasp on how to tackle difficult topics. When he was ready to push play on this build, he brought me over from Julie to help spearhead the creative and design side of what the brand Overdrive would become. I wanted permission to be intense and gnarly; you have to be aggressive and you have to stand out. With Overdrive, the market didn’t really exist and social platforms aren’t especially stoked about us selling these products. So creatively you get to make different decisions because those platforms’ rules are so intense around what you’re doing. From a creative standpoint, you’re looking at a project that has real stakes. You’re selling an actually helpful product, and you’re also able to not really focus on the product and focus on ethos because the product is so policed. Then you get to be a bit of an instigator because the brand isn’t squeaky clean, you need a troublemaker attitude behind it. Why did you feel the need to approach the project with that kind of attitude? You’re appealing to people who might be in a situation where there is fentanyl. They’re trying to get into the mosh pit versus watching from the sidelines. I have an addictive personality. Previously, in my 20s, I did hard drugs, so for me there was a lived experience access point. I didn’t have to create a character to create the brand. I can speak to a version of myself and try to think of things I would have listened to or paid attention to from a safety perspective in my life. I wasn’t guessing or relying on a case study. Fentanyl wasn’t as much of a problem when you were doing drugs, right? No joke, I think about that all the time. I’m really lucky that in my 20s that wasn’t something I had to worry about because the reality is most people don’t when they’re trying to have a good time and get lit. It’s really scary. Tell me about the documentary Overdrive is releasing this month. It’s a YouTube video we made with this awesome guy, Sam Hayes. I had this interest in fentanyl being this kind of gray area and a bogeyman that you’re supposed to be scared of, but you don’t know what it is. So Sam meets with people in recovery centers, actual drug dealers, and actual users. It shows you where you get fentanyl and how the dark web comes into it. There’s this one shot of a drug dealer grinding stuff up in a Vitamix, and when you look at the Vitamix . . . it’s not clean. You get a look at the process of creating these unregulated things. Who is your target customer? I try to think more psychographic than demographic. What’s the psychographic of someone using hard drugs? We try to look at places where thrill and danger intersect. This can be gnarly or louder forms of music or extreme action sports like skating or motocross. And then the thing that happens if it doesn’t go is a life or death stakes. There’s a tendency for that to be more gender- or age- or location- specific, but for us, we felt pretty confident that if we just talk to that psychographic of people that are looking for an extreme release from a hostile world. How are you expanding your user base? We want to broaden so that we’re speaking to the people around the user as much as the user. Some current parts of the brand will go away and there will be an emphasis on education over the next year or so. I think it’s cool that the DNA of the brand is representative of the user, but we’re going to start broadening things out so that it will feel a little bit more classic CPG product shot or an Instagram ad. The ads will provide an access point to more white collar people or parents. We want to target people that are caretakers and live in certain parts of the country. How do you balance the edgier branding of Overdrive with a more education-first approach? Last year we indexed really high on the edgier branding. The logic was that if we can create something somebody’s comfortable carrying around in situations [where they might have access to drugs], we’re already winning because our competitors aren’t. They’re sterile and overly medical. An example of that could be the way our test strips come in packaging that looks like a pack of cigarettes. You’re not carrying a white box around. So you don’t look like a narc. Exactly, because then it’s like, get the fuck out of here. We don’t want to fuck with this person. I think we did a really good job at that. The education piece, it’s almost easier to do. It’s like, this is what the product looks like and here’s a stat about how many people this weekend will be exposed to fentanyl and a five-minute testing process can protect you or your loved ones. It’s taking a step back from the lifestyle aspect of the space and creating more of a billboard with a few key pieces of information. What inspired the design of the products? We looked at companies that behaved like media companies but that didn’t see themselves that way. Monster Energy is as much a media company as it is a product-driven company. When we were figuring out comps that made sense, a lot of it was power tools, action sports, cigarette companies, and beer ads. All of these companies have connective tissue to the partying and drug experience. Because the no-fly zones as fair as what they can claim and how they can advertise were kind of gnarly, those were the places we gravitated to really quickly. These are also areas that have higher fidelity. Some people’s favorite brand is Monster or Marlboro. We used a lot of higher contrast and bold designs. I think Ed Hardy’s cool. Minimal branding or this kind of flat design has been done. What was the messaging strategy behind your products? Something I would say to people was, someone about to go in a UFC fight knows they’re about to get the shit beat out of them. You don’t need to tell them, “This is dangerous.” Not only do they know that, but that’s the last thing they want going through their head before they go fight. What we can say is, “When you do this UFC fight, if you wear this mouth guard, you might not suffer serious brain damage.” My fundamental belief is that if you make the mouth guard look cool, like if it was chrome or had monster teeth or grills, that medical component can start to become aspirational and they might be excited to bring it with them. We can’t be a brand saying “Don’t do drugs.” You lose so many people out the gate telling them not to. We want Overdrive to feel like part of the experience—not a scary reminder of the things our customer is trying to escape, like mortality. View the full article

Because hiring staff is typically a time-consuming and costly process, many companies are now opting to interview multiple candidates at once. The Society for Human Resource Management reported that group interviews have become increasingly popular among employers. For applicants, this changes the interview experience significantly. Instead of fielding questions about your résumé in a one-on-one setting, you’ve now got to vie for a role alongside other applicants and take part in real-world workplace scenarios designed to showcase your leadership skills. Tech companies and brands such as Disney, Starbucks, and The Gap are choosing to adopt the trend. Not only can interviewers see how candidates work in high-pressure situations, but fewer interviewers need to be trained in the company. “By screening multiple candidates at once, this style of interview can save employers time, while also allowing them to observe candidates’ critical thinking and communication skills in action,” says Sarah Skelton, managing director of recruitment company Flourish. Skelton adds that this interview style can not only be a timesaver for companies, but it can also save applicants time, too. “For the candidates, this can give an opportunity to showcase their skills in one day.” But it can also be a stressful process, especially if you’re used to the traditional interview experience. The next time you’re asked to participate in a group interview, here’s what to keep in mind in order to make sure you stand out to the hiring managers: Practice your networking skills When taking part in a group interview, try networking to make you feel calm, grounded, and present. “It may be helpful to warm yourself up by having a couple of light touch questions you ask other interviewees before the interview starts, for example, ‘How was your journey?’” says leadership coach Keren Blackmore from Leap of Thought. Being interviewed alongside others might actually help reduce the amount of stress you feel, as you’re all in the same boat. You can also use the opportunity to increase your network. “The people you meet at the interview may be interesting contacts for the future, [so] why not, for example, connect on LinkedIn?” says Blackmore. Think about your body language While it may be more difficult to stand out in a group interview, you can still make your presence felt, even when you’re silent. Psychologist Albert Mehrabian said that 55% of our communication is through body language, rather than speaking. Beth Hope, an executive coach who specializes in resilience, says your body language in these group interview settings should reflect calm confidence. “Sit tall, ground your feet, keep your shoulders relaxed and open. This will help calm your nervous system and give you a boost of confidence,” says Hope. “Use purposeful gestures when speaking and avoid nervous habits like fidgeting or crossed arms. Confidence [is] about owning your space, staying grounded, and showing you’re comfortable being yourself.” Executive coach Joseph Ball adds that to “show engagement, you should nod, smile, [and] make eye contact with the speaker.” Know when not to talk Group interviews may be embraced by extroverts, but the key is knowing when not to talk. “The best way to stand out in any setting is not to be the loudest voice, but to be the clarifying voice,” says Mike Manoske, executive coach at The Wharton School. “The way to do that is through active listening and playback: replaying back what you’ve heard, followed by adding additional ideas to move things forward.” Make sure to keep your tone respectful. Leadership development trainer Andy Coley says you should avoid the word “but” when responding to someone else’s idea or perspective. “A ‘but’ can be seen as confrontational,” says Coley. “Instead say ‘yes, and this is my perspective.’ [This] implies you’ve acknowledged the other person’s point of view, whereas ‘but’ comes across as a disagreement, which can lead to egos getting hurt,” he says. You can also show support for others without affecting your chances, says Coley. “If someone shares a good idea, a simple comment like ‘That’s a great point,’ shows that you’re thoughtful and team-minded,” he says. “That kind of behavior stands out because it shows you care about the whole group, not just yourself—and that’s real leadership.” Treat other applicants as peers, not competition Another way to gain confidence in this group setting is to view the other people as peers, rather than competition, says Blackmore. “This helps frame them as equals rather than a threat. Don’t spend your time distracted by how the other candidates may or may not be a better fit. They are no better or worse, but they do have different skills and experiences. If you’re in the interview, you are there for a reason. How you show up in the group environment is likely to be just as important as your [credentials] and experience.” Work psychologist Dr. Marie-Hélène Pelletier says a group interview presents a good opportunity to work on your mental toughness. “Identify what may get you off track and prepare. If another candidate saying a [great] point puts you at risk of losing your confidence, prepare now to put this aside mentally.” If you don’t have the typical skills for the role, view this as a superpower. “A great way to stand out is to connect insights from your nontraditional background to help move the group forward,” says executive coach Kelly Ling. For example, if you are moving from a business development role into a product manager role, you can bring in your experience of understanding customer’s needs. Keep an eye on the time The whole idea of the group interview is to find someone who can do the job and even uncover a future leader. Skelton says that group interviews often include a timed component, so it’s important for candidates to demonstrate strong time management skills and help keep the group focused. “Successful participants will guide the team toward hitting key milestones throughout the session and ensure a clear conclusion is reached by the end,” says Skelton. View the full article