ResidentialBusiness

We Googled “Labubus.” We searched for “beaded sardine bags,” and recipes like “cabbage boil” and “hot honey cottage cheese sweet potato beef bowl.” We wanted information about Charlie Kirk and Zohran Mamdani, about Sinners, Weapons, and KPop Demon Hunters. We desperately needed to know why kids kept saying “6-7.” Together, these queries defined 2025. The 24th edition of Google’s Year in Search, the company’s annual top 10 lists of users’ most-searched items, debuted today. These hundreds of lists both validate our own obsessions and take us out of our own bubbles and echo chambers, offering insights into what our fellow humans are interested in. Year in Search is the flagship project from Google Trends, a relatively small global department within the company. Simon Rogers, a data journalist who helped build out The Guardian’s data visualization team in his native London before becoming Twitter’s data editor, has led the Trends team since 2015. In May, he will release a book, What We Ask Google, “an epic snapshot, two decades long and counting, of our collective brain.” Rogers spoke with me about the human effort behind Google Trends, what consistently surprises him about the data, and why it can be a source for hope in a dark time. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. What is the role of the Google Trends division at Google? We are responsible for Year in Search. We also create content that shows up on the Trends site—we’ve got some curated pages there, in addition to all our exploration tools. We work with NGOs [nongovernmental organizations] and directly with newsrooms to get them data when they need it, often around big events. We do our own data visualization storytelling as well. We’re not a big team. We’ve got people in the U.S., we’ve got some people in Europe, a couple of people in South America, and we have somebody in Australia. We are a mixture of analysts and people with data journalism backgrounds, like myself. I don’t think of us as a typical tech company analytics team. That’s not our job at all. We’re there to find the stories in the data, and the humanity. It’s an enormous dataset, and it’s ever-changing. It’s not static; it’s not like GDP [gross domestic product] figures or something that’s fixed at a certain point. It’s constantly evolving and reacting to the world, as humans react to the world. You were on the cutting edge of data journalism at The Guardian, and in those early days, you said that “data journalism is the new punk.” Do you still think so? Part of the appeal for me was that it lowered the barriers for entry to creating content. Anybody could access data and data visualization tools, and make visuals. It had that in common with punk, which was about anybody picking up a guitar and setting up a band. One of the things that I love about Trends data is that it is publicly available; anybody can use it and make anything with it. It’s probably the world’s biggest publicly available dataset. We don’t tell people what to do with it, which is why I think Google Trends has such a wide following. It’s not just journalists who use the site. It’s content creators. People working in NGOs. Marketers. We’ve seen the UN use it in Afghanistan when the U.S. withdrew, and in Ukraine when the war started, to look at how refugees searched in certain areas. The Pew Trust did a report based on Trends data from Flint, Michigan, and how people searched around the water issues there. It’s incredibly versatile as a dataset, but it’s publicly available and it’s transparent. And that’s one of the things I feel really good about every day. The Guardian As technology advances, are people changing the way they engage with the data? Definitely. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development did an experiment where they would use Trends plus AI to generate weekly GDP figures, which are [usually] quarterly, and they wrote a paper on it. People are more data literate now than at any time in history, because of the amount of stuff that’s out there. But there’s a recognition that this data will tell you something about the world that you’re not going to get anywhere else. Because if you want to keep your finger on the pulse, this is literally the pulse. Is this thing you’ve built essentially just working in the background all the time? How much human work is involved? We can’t tell the data what to say. It’s a truly independent source. Trends is basically a sample of all searches—about a fifth of all searches—and it’s a random sample. [The data] is anonymized and aggregated. What that means is that you can see a global level, country level, regional level, and city level—which is a town in Google geography. But no lower than that. We don’t have demographics. We just know when something happened, and how big it was as a proportion of all searches. Even on the site, you don’t see raw numbers of searches, because that wouldn’t tell you anything. It does give the ability to compare a small place to a big place, in the way that people search for stuff. Or you can compare San Francisco to New York. You’ve written about how the data can show a lot of spikes in real time, but that those signals may not be as important as relative interest over time? Imagine an F1 race. The winners will be the top searches. But the “acceleration” would define whether something has trended or not. If something’s a breakout, it means it’s trended—it’s increased by 5,000% over time. [We] just launched a Trending Now section on the Google Trends site, and you can see what’s trending every day on there, whether it’s a soccer match or the government shutdown. Those things will just automatically show up there. With Year in Search, we use trending as opposed to top search. Because if you look at the top searches on Google, they’re always the same. It’s the weather. It’s people typing “YouTube” into their search bar. But with things like KPop Demon Hunters, that’s come from nowhere, spiked up, and it reflects the moment we were in. What does Google Trends tell us about how our attention spans have changed over the past few years? I don’t know that it reflects changes in attention spans, because we’re pretty ephemeral as humans. Part of the reason I did this book is because my mother died, and I found myself searching for a lot of things around dealing with grief. I could see that I was not alone. A lot of these things are constant, because they’re constants in our lives. We have kids, we have pets. We eat food. We want to help people. You [also] get these rhythmic searches. There are waves where, say, “how to learn piano” spikes ahead of Christmas, because people want to learn how to play piano for their holiday celebrations. Or certain health conditions, like [during] flu season. Hal Varian, who was the former chief economist at Google, wrote a paper on how there are a lot of economic factors that you can see spike in search before they show up in the official statistics. People searching for job seekers’ benefits will show up before jobless figures increase. But then there are things that just come and go. This year it’s Labubus or KPop Demon Hunters. Or the movie Weapons. If you were looking at Trends a few years ago, you would have seen a spike for searches in the “Cups” song [from] Pitch Perfect 2. Every teenager learned how to do the “Cups” song. It’s kind of a snapshot of history, in a way. Google Trends When you compile these lists, do you see a big difference between what’s trending in the U.S. and the rest of the world? Obviously, you get regional variations—if you’re looking for baseball, the U.S. is going to be tops. Some things are constant, like donations or helping or love. And then some things really vary, because of the conditions. For instance, I wrote in my book that you see spikes in searches for “food” from war-torn regions like Somalia or Ukraine. “Refugees” is more searched in countries where refugees go than in the countries where they originate from. I’m often curious about why something’s spiking in a certain place. Liverpool Football Club is more searched for in a town in Uganda than in Liverpool itself. There’s [also] a reflection of the spread of global culture. When you and I were growing up in England, “promposals” were not a thing, right? It was very much an American search, [where] you’d see a spike before prom every year. Now it’s a global phenomenon. It shows up everywhere . . . in Sweden, Germany, Australia. You sent me some of the 2025 lists, and I’ve got to be honest—I don’t know what half of these things are. There’s something on the Viral Products list that I had to look up: “beaded sardine bag”?! Do things surprise you, too? Luckily for us, my team is all younger, so everybody can explain stuff to me. This year in Year in Search, we’re planning to integrate AI mode explanations, so people click on a button and get caught up on what the trends are. You previously said that we’d never seen a year in search like 2020. Is that still true? 2020 was unique in a lot of ways. You saw these massive spikes as the economy reeled from COVID—things like “unemployment” and “food banks” were at a high. It was an election year. There was a lot of news. All these things were just spiking much higher than they would have done a normal year. Things like vinyl LPs went up, and they stayed higher. Tequila, as well. We also saw a spike in “loneliness,” but also people searching for “how to help.” Those have kept increasing. We tend to think everything is terrible, people are terrible. But that’s not what you see in the way people search. Often, people are looking for how to help other people, or even how to improve the way they interact with other people. Do you have any expectations for search trends in 2026? There’s a revolution happening in the way we search stuff right now, in terms of the way AI is being used. You can see search changing through the data: queries are getting longer [and] much more specific. We’re almost doing a cognitive offload to AI; we’re asking quite complex things to get answers for. This year is the 24th Year in Search. It goes back to 2001, when it was called Google Zeitgeist. It was just a list. Now 74 countries around the world will have their own Year in Search. Tell me more about your book. It’s not a book about technology, but it’s about how we use it, and what that says about us. It’s about everyday searches. We talk about the “sandwich generation,” which is my age group where you’re looking after your parents but also looking after kids—you see that in search. Originally, I was going to call it something like “Life Is Hard” because it also reflects that we don’t know how to do a lot of things. One of the top food searches is “how to boil an egg.” It’s a repeated search, which suggests that we’re repeatedly searching how to boil an egg. We need to be reminded of some of these things. When I was searching personally [about] grief, I felt quite alone. I could see from the data that I wasn’t, that there are loads of people doing the same thing. We worry about [a sense of] community and being part of a community. I think maybe we are part of communities; we just don’t always realize it. Whether it’s people who don’t know how to boil eggs, or people like me who search for weird Beatles recordings, or whatever it is. The boiled egg thing is real. Every time I boil an egg I’m, like, how many minutes again for hard-boiled? Yeah, and I must have boiled 500,000 in my life or something. It’s kind of nuts. I’m just thinking now, if you were an alien who landed on Earth and you were only given Trends information, you could probably follow a story of humanity. I actually used that in my book! If everybody had gone away, you could tell who we were from the way we searched. View the full article

Learn how Rfp rfi and rfq streamline procurement, improve vendor selection, and help teams make informed purchasing decisions. The post RFI, RFP or RFQ: What’s the Difference and When to Use Each? appeared first on project-management.com. View the full article

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence and cloud services has led to a massive demand for computing power. The surge has strained data infrastructure, which requires lots of electricity to operate. A single, midsize data center here on Earth can consume enough electricity to power about 16,500 homes, with even larger facilities using as much as a small city. Over the past few years, tech leaders have increasingly advocated for space-based AI infrastructure as a way to address the power requirements of data centers. In space, sunshine—which solar panels can convert into electricity—is abundant and reliable. On November 4, 2025, Google unveiled Project Suncatcher, a bold proposal to launch an 81-satellite constellation into low Earth orbit. It plans to use the constellation to harvest sunlight to power the next generation of AI data centers in space. So instead of beaming power back to Earth, the constellation would beam data back to Earth. For example, if you asked a chatbot how to bake sourdough bread, instead of firing up a data center in Virginia to craft a response, your query would be beamed up to the constellation in space, processed by chips running purely on solar energy, and the recipe sent back down to your device. Doing so would mean leaving the substantial heat generated behind in the cold vacuum of space. As a technology entrepreneur, I applaud Google’s ambitious plan. But as a space scientist, I predict that the company will soon have to reckon with a growing problem: space debris. The mathematics of disaster Space debris—the collection of defunct human-made objects in Earth’s orbit—is already affecting space agencies, companies, and astronauts. This debris includes large pieces, such as spent rocket stages and dead satellites, as well as tiny flecks of paint and other fragments from discontinued satellites. Space debris travels at hypersonic speeds of approximately 17,500 mph in low Earth orbit. At this speed, colliding with a piece of debris the size of a blueberry would feel like being hit by a falling anvil. Satellite breakups and anti-satellite tests have created an alarming amount of debris, a crisis now exacerbated by the rapid expansion of commercial constellations such as SpaceX’s Starlink. The Starlink network has more than 7,500 satellites providing global high-speed internet. The U.S. Space Force actively tracks more than 40,000 objects larger than a softball using ground-based radar and optical telescopes. However, this number represents less than 1% of the lethal objects in orbit. The majority are too small for these telescopes to identify and track reliably. In November 2025, three Chinese astronauts aboard the Tiangong space station were forced to delay their return to Earth because their capsule had been struck by a piece of space debris. Back in 2018, a similar incident on the International Space Station challenged relations between the U.S. and Russia, as Russian media speculated that a NASA astronaut may have deliberately sabotaged the station. The orbital shell Google’s project targets—a sun-synchronous orbit approximately 400 miles above Earth—is a prime location for uninterrupted solar energy. At this orbit, the spacecraft’s solar arrays will always be in direct sunshine, where they can generate electricity to power the onboard AI payload. But for this reason, sun-synchronous orbit is also the single most congested highway in low Earth orbit, and objects in this orbit are the most likely to collide with other satellites or debris. As new objects arrive and existing objects break apart, low Earth orbit could approach Kessler syndrome. In this theory, once the number of objects in low Earth orbit exceeds a critical threshold, collisions between objects generate a cascade of new debris. Eventually, this cascade of collisions could render certain orbits entirely unusable. Implications for Project Suncatcher Project Suncatcher proposes a cluster of satellites carrying large solar panels. They would fly with a radius of just 1 kilometer, each node spaced less than 200 meters apart. To put that in perspective, imagine a racetrack roughly the size of the Daytona International Speedway, where 81 cars race at 17,500 mph while separated by gaps about the distance you need to safely brake on the highway. This ultradense formation is necessary for the satellites to transmit data to each other. The constellation splits complex AI workloads across all its 81 units, enabling them to “think” and process data simultaneously as a single, massive, distributed brain. Google is partnering with a space company to launch two prototype satellites by early 2027 to validate the hardware. But in the vacuum of space, flying in formation is a constant battle against physics. While the atmosphere in low Earth orbit is incredibly thin, it is not empty. Sparse air particles create orbital drag on satellites; this force pushes against the spacecraft, slowing it down and forcing it to drop in altitude. Satellites with large surface areas have more issues with drag, as they can act like a sail catching the wind. To add to this complexity, streams of particles and magnetic fields from the sun—known as space weather—can cause the density of air particles in low Earth orbit to fluctuate in unpredictable ways. These fluctuations directly affect orbital drag. When satellites are spaced less than 200 meters apart, the margin for error evaporates. A single impact could not only destroy one satellite but also send it blasting into its neighbors, triggering a cascade that could wipe out the entire cluster and randomly scatter millions of new pieces of debris into an orbit that is already a minefield. The importance of active avoidance To prevent crashes and cascades, satellite companies could adopt a leave no trace standard, which means designing satellites that do not fragment, release debris, or endanger their neighbors, and that can be safely removed from orbit. For a constellation as dense and intricate as Suncatcher, meeting this standard might require equipping the satellites with “reflexes” that autonomously detect and dance through a debris field. Suncatcher’s current design doesn’t include these active avoidance capabilities. In the first six months of 2025 alone, SpaceX’s Starlink constellation performed a staggering 144,404 collision-avoidance maneuvers to dodge debris and other spacecraft. Similarly, Suncatcher would likely encounter debris larger than a grain of sand every five seconds. Today’s object-tracking infrastructure is generally limited to debris larger than a softball, leaving millions of smaller debris pieces effectively invisible to satellite operators. Future constellations will need an onboard detection system that can actively spot these smaller threats and maneuver the satellite autonomously in real time. Equipping Suncatcher with active collision-avoidance capabilities would be an engineering feat. Because of the tight spacing, the constellation would need to respond as a single entity. Satellites would need to reposition in concert, similar to a synchronized flock of birds. Each satellite would need to react to the slightest shift of its neighbor. Paying rent for the orbit Technological solutions, however, can go only so far. In September 2022, the Federal Communications Commission created a rule requiring satellite operators to remove their spacecraft from orbit within five years of the mission’s completion. This typically involves a controlled de-orbit maneuver. Operators must now reserve enough fuel to fire the thrusters at the end of the mission to lower the satellite’s altitude, until atmospheric drag takes over and the spacecraft burns up in the atmosphere. However, the rule does not address the debris already in space, nor any future debris, from accidents or mishaps. To tackle these issues, some policymakers have proposed a use tax for space debris removal. A use tax or orbital-use fee would charge satellite operators a levy based on the orbital stress their constellation imposes, much like larger or heavier vehicles paying greater fees to use public roads. These funds would finance active debris-removal missions, which capture and remove the most dangerous pieces of junk. Avoiding collisions is a temporary technical fix, not a long-term solution to the space debris problem. As some companies look to space as a new home for data centers, and others continue to send satellite constellations into orbit, new policies and active debris-removal programs can help keep low Earth orbit open for business. Mojtaba Akhavan-Tafti is an associate research scientist at the University of Michigan. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

Amid an uncertain economy—the growth of AI, tariffs, rising costs—companies are pulling back on hiring. As layoffs increase, the labor market cools, and unemployment ticks up, we’re seeing fewer people quitting their jobs. The implication: Many workers will be “job hugging” and sitting tight in their roles through 2026. Put more pessimistically: Employees are going to feel stuck where they are for the foreseeable future. In many cases, that means staying in unsatisfying jobs. Gallup’s 2025 State of the Global Workforce report shows that employee engagement has fallen to 21%. And a March 2025 study of 1,000 U.S. workers by advisory and consulting firm Fractional Insights showed that 44% of employees reported feeling workplace angst, despite often showing intent to stay. So if these employees are “hugging” their current roles, it’s not an act of affection. It’s often in desperation. “Being a job hugger means you’re feeling anxious, insecure, more likely to stay but also more likely to want to leave,” says Erin Eatough, chief science officer and principal adviser at Fractional Insights, which applies organizational psychology insights to the workplace. “You often see a self-protective response: ‘Nothing to see here, I’m doing a good job, I’m not leaving.’” This performative behavior can be psychologically damaging, especially in a culture of layoffs. “If I was scared of losing my job I’d try everything to keep it: complimenting my boss, staying late, going to optional meetings, being a good organizational citizen,” says Anthony Klotz, professor of organizational behavior at the UCL School of Management in London. “But we know that when people aren’t loving their jobs but are still going above and beyond, that it’s a one-way trip to burnout.” The tight squeeze In cases where jobs aren’t immediately under threat, the effects of hugging are more likely to be slow burning. When an employee’s only motivation is to collect a consistent paycheck, discretionary effort drops. They’re less productive. Engagement takes a huge hit. Over time, that gradually chips away at their well-being. “Humans want to feel useful, that they care about the work they’re doing, and that they’re investing their time well,” Eatough says. “When efforts are low, that can impact a person’s sense of value.” The effects stretch beyond the workplace, too. Frustrated and reluctant stayers can quickly end up in a vicious cycle, Klotz says, noting, “When you’re in a situation that feels like it’s sucking life out of you, you end up ruminating about how depleting it is, then end up so tired that you don’t have energy for restorative activities outside of work. So it’s this downward spiral—you begin your workday even more depleted.” Longer term, job hugging stunts growth. “When you’re looking out for yourself, rather than the team or organization, your investment in working relationships begins to break down,” Eatough says. “Over time, staying in that situation means you’re more likely to become deeply cynical, which hurts the individual and their career trajectory.” When hugging becomes clinging Feeling stuck is nothing new. At some point in their careers, most workers will be in a situation where if they could leave for a better role, they would, says Klotz, who predicted the Great Resignation. But what distinguishes job hugging is that it’s anxiously clinging to a role during unfavorable labor markets. It’s not that employees don’t want to quit—it’s that they can’t. “It’s human nature that when there’s a threat of any sort that we move away from it and towards stability,” Klotz says. “Your job represents that stability. And currently, it’s not a great time to switch jobs.” There are few options for job huggers. The first is speaking up and working with a manager to improve the situation. But this might be unlikely for employees who feel trapped or lack motivation in the first place. Klotz says cognitive reframing can help—focusing purely on the positive aspects of a draining role, such as a friendly team, and tuning out the rest. Finally, slowly backing away from extra tasks—in other words, quiet quitting—could mean workers can redraw work-life boundaries in the interim at least. Otherwise, beyond Stoic philosophy or a benevolent boss, there is little choice but to wait it out. In some cases, a job hugger may eventually turn it around, ease their grip, and become quietly content in their role. But more often, wanting to quit usually leads to actually quitting. In effect, job hugging is damage control: hanging on until the situation changes. “I think we’ll see some people be resilient, wait it out, and find another role,” Klotz says. “But there’ll be others in the quagmire of struggling with exhaustion of spending eight hours a day in a job they don’t like.” View the full article

Charge on cash in stocks-and-shares Isas ‘essentially a tax’, Michael Summersgill says View the full article

Endings are tricky: You want closure and to go out with a bang—which is a hard balance. It’s natural to want the end of the year to be meaningful. Even the moon appears to agree with this sentiment, and it’s about to prove it. The final full moon of 2025, which is also called the cold moon, will be a bright supermoon occurring on December 4. Before we get into how best to moon-gaze, let’s break down what that all means, and do a year-end moon review. Why is December’s full moon called the ‘cold moon’? Human beings assign names even to celestial happenings. The Old Farmer’s Almanac compiled the most commonly used monikers, based on Old English and Native American sources. December’s moon is called the cold moon because of the chilly winter temperatures. According to EarthSky, it is also known as Moon Before Yule or the Long Night Moon. What is a supermoon? The moon orbits Earth in an elliptical pattern, which means the orb has differing proximity to the planet. When the full moon lines up with the closer approach to Earth, known as perigee, a supermoon occurs. The moon appears brighter and fuller because it is physically closer to Earth. What makes this supermoon special? December’s supermoon offering is the finale of three consecutive supermoons, which also occurred in October and November this year. Because the orb will mirror the sun, December’s supermoon will also be the highest-hanging full moon of 2025. What is the moon’s 2025 recap? There were 12 full moons in 2025. (Sometimes, because of the lunar year length, there are 13, such as in 2023.) 2025’s dozen included three supermoons, two total lunar eclipses—and a partridge in a pear tree. (Well, the scientific nature of the latter is questionable . . . but ’tis the season.) How best to view the December supermoon The most dramatic time to view the supermoon is just after moonrise, because of the “moon illusion.” This phenomenon, which is when the moon appears larger when near the horizon, can’t be fully explained by science. This optical illusion of sorts, combined with the fact that the supermoon appears brighter and bigger, makes for one spectacular nighttime view. Since viewing times vary by location, use this moonrise tool to best plan your moon-gazing experience. If you miss tonight, never fear. The moon will reach its peak on December 4 at 6:14 p.m. ET, but it will appear full for a couple of days, so you have wiggle room that allows for more moon-gazing opportunities. View the full article

Unlike millennials who embraced hustle culture and burned out, Gen Zers have a new concept of what ‘making it’ looks like in today’s workplace—and it doesn’t involve a fancy title. View the full article

Just last month, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman revealed that more than 800 million people use the platform each week. But what does it take to get mentioned and cited in its responses? Our latest research into top-of-the-funnel queries shows that…Read more ›View the full article

Nigel Farage’s party attracts far more funding than both Labour and the ConservativesView the full article

Google's Year in Search shows AI tools led trending queries globally. Gemini ranked first worldwide, with DeepSeek appearing in both US and global lists. The post Google Year In Search 2025: Gemini, DeepSeek Top Trending Lists appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Google today released its 2025 Year in Search list, but don’t mistake it for a ranking of the “top searches” or the “most searched” terms. This year’s recap focused on trending queries – the topics that grew the fastest compared with 2024. That shift reveals a lot about where Google Search is heading, and how it’s been evolving for years. Why we care. Google chose to spotlight fast-rising, emerging queries. Freshness has long mattered in search, but the 2025 top trending queries list underscores an accelerating shift: the biggest AI search and SEO opportunities will come from new, developing topics – not evergreen informational ones. Your strongest wins may hinge on queries no SEO tool or LLM visibility platform can surface yet. What people searched. Here are the top 10 trending Google Search queries of 2025 in the U.S.: Charlie Kirk KPop Demon Hunters Labubu iPhone 17 One Big Beautiful Bill Act Zohran Mamdani DeepSeek Government shutdown FIFA Club World Cup Tariffs Globally, these were the top 10 trending Google Search queries of 2025: Gemini India vs England Charlie Kirk Club World Cup India vs Australia DeepSeek Asia Cup Iran iPhone 17 Pakistan and India Global and U.S. trends. Here are some of the top trending queries by category, both globally and in the U.S. If a category lists only one name, it ranked the same in both regions. News: Charlie Kirk assassination / One Big Beautiful Bill Act Passings: Charlie Kirk Actors: Mikey Madison / Pedro Pascal People: d4vd / Zohran Mamdani Athletes: Terence Crawford / Shedeur Sanders Games: Arc Raiders / Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 Lyrics: Dtmf – Bad Bunny / Wood – Taylor Swift Movies: Anora / KPop Demon Hunters Sports teams: Paris Saint-Germain F.C. / Seattle Mariners TV shows: Monster: The Ed Gein Story / The Hunting Wives Hum to search: Golden – HUNTR/X Podcasts: The Charlie Kirk Show / New Heights Google Maps – Bookstores: Livraria Lello, Porto District, Portugal / Powell’s City of Books Google Maps – Transit station: Kyoto Station, Kyoto, Japan / Grand Central Terminal More U.S. trends. Google also shared a few additional U.S.-only trending queries from 2025: Trends: AI action figure Viral dishes: Hot honey cottage cheese sweet potato beef bowl Travel itinerary: Boston Why do kids say: 67 Bottom line. You want to win on emerging queries before they peak. Spot new trends early and publish before a topic peaks to capture visibility while competition is low. Evergreen content still matters, but the breakout wins come from what’s new – not what’s already known. View the full article

It’s a tale as old as the modern workplace: In the 1960s, women entered the workforce en masse, ready to compete with their male counterparts for promotions, pay, and opportunity—only to find the system wasn’t built for them. Today, women comprise almost half of the U.S. labor force. The playing field looks different now, but the fight for equal access hasn’t gone away. It just moved into subtler territory. Companies make quiet calculations about who’s worth “investing in,” says Corinne Low, gender economist and associate business professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business. Women often face career penalties in anticipation of motherhood as employers presume they’re more likely to take leave or step back. Once in their 40s, “past” childbearing, this bias fades. But not before it’s done damage. The cost of inaction is huge: 4 out of 10 mothers in the first five years after childbirth resign. In 2025, around 400,000 mothers with young children resigned from the U.S. workforce—the sharpest decline in more than 40 years. Mothers face a training penalty that hinders their career advancement On average, data shows women working full-time only earn 83% of a man’s median annual salary. Mothers face even worse odds—their pay is often reduced by 3% for every child they have. A new study from the University of Connecticut finds that, one to three years after childbirth, women are 17% to 22% less likely to receive on-the-job training opportunities, such as seminars, workshops, and development programs, compared with a 3% to 8% decline for men who became fathers. The result is a hidden skills and promotion gap that may explain nearly a third of the motherhood wage penalty. When women have children, they’re viewed as less committed or competent, research shows—a bias that leads employers to assume mothers are too busy, distracted, or disinterested to participate in training opportunities. This is called “benevolent prescriptive stereotyping,” and it doesn’t do mothers any favors, says Joan C. Williams, distinguished professor of law emerita and founding director of the Equality Action Center at UC Law San Francisco. As Williams points out: “If you don’t get work, you eventually either get laid off because you’re not progressing, or you leave because you’re disgusted that you don’t get good work. Or you just stall out.” If a mother turns down an opportunity for training or advancement, it’s important to circle back—not to assume it’s a permanent no, says Williams. She also recommends employers keep track of who receives opportunities in their workplace—and who doesn’t. Supporting mothers isn’t a charity case Another opportunity mothers are often left out of is informal networking, like happy hours, dinners, or travel, says Kate Westlund Tovsen, founder of Society of Working Moms, a supportive community for and by working mothers. Even if a mother can’t attend, “It’s nice to be invited,” Tovsen adds, who suggests teams try daytime coffee hours as a caregiver-friendly option. Mothers are forced to be proactive, as many companies lack frameworks to support leave or reintegration, Williams cautions. She advises scheduling meetings with superiors before and after taking family leave to make a plan. And though being a new mother is a relatively short blip on a woman’s career, companies often make “permanent decisions in terms of who they’re investing in based on this kind of temporary period when women are most squeezed,” says Low. Supporting mothers is not a charity case, she argues, but a competitive edge that lets them retain talent long term. “Caregiver strategies and investments, including benefits and return-to-work programs, deliver measurable business returns,” states Jess Ringgenberg, professional certified coach and CEO of Elxir, an advisory firm focusing on caregivers in the workplace. “Companies see three to six times ROI through higher retention, productivity, and lower absenteeism” with such programs, Ringgenberg says. Replacing a mid-level caregiver comes with backfill, training, and ramp-up expenses that can reach $200,000, says Ringgenberg, or totaling twice the employee’s annual salary. But some companies are already working hard to help mothers succeed—and it’s paying off. Small and large companies finding solutions Frontier Co-op, an Iowa-based wholesaler of natural and organic products with around 580 employees, created the Breaking Down Barriers to Employment initiative, which includes an on-site childcare center, subsidized to $120 per week per child. Their childcare program enables parents to participate in training programs and developmental opportunities that might otherwise be missed, explains Megan Schulte, vice president of human resources. She says 100% of new parents returned to work after their parental leave. While Frontier Co-op eases the logistical strains of childcare, Brigade Events, a woman-owned and operated event strategy and management company in Dallas with 10 full-time employees, tackles rebuilding confidence and access for women who stepped out. The company views its mentorship and project-based work model as a form of retraining, recognizing women’s existing expertise, rather than resetting them to zero. Senior employees work on a hybrid schedule—three days from home, two in-office—to preserve collaboration while creating space for caregiving. Brigade doesn’t bat an eye at blocked calendars for a child’s doctor appointment or school event. “Our whole culture is giving grace to each other,” says April Zorsky, partner and chief creative officer. One of their policies is that mothers returning from their 16-week maternity leave take a “transition month” working at 50% capacity. This can mean working from home, setting their own schedules, and easing back in without penalty. “As moms, we feel it’s crucial to have flexibility,” says Zorksy. Larger companies can learn to be more flexible and collaborative, too, says Marissa Andrade, a veteran HR executive and former chief people officer at Chipotle. She recalls when one of her field managers chose to take a six-month maternity leave during a period of company-wide turnaround. Before she left, she requested an interim hire from the Mom Project, a digital platform that helps companies to hire skilled mothers, to support her leave. It went so smoothly that the field manager was able to reenter without missing a beat. Andrada recommends establishing employee–business resource groups. At Chipotle, one employee-created group, “The Hustle” (Humans United to Support the Ladies Experience), formed a maternity program to keep employees in the loop while on leave, and reoriented them on compliance and training updates on their return. “Don’t overlook the power of your employees as your consumer,” says Andrada. When companies invite access for mothers—to training, to support, to opportunities that just don’t reacclimate them to their roles, but get them to thrive in them—everyone wins. Mothers aren’t just reentering the workforce with confidence. Employers are retaining their talent, too. View the full article

In today’s job market, many employees are feeling the pressure. Layoffs continue to make headlines, hiring pipelines have slowed, budgets have tightened, and job seekers are facing fierce competition. For those already employed, this environment raises a tricky question: What’s reasonable to ask for at work right now—and what isn’t? There’s always the standard wish list: promotions, raises, more flexibility, and better benefits. But in a strained economy, some of these asks may be harder to land—and for many employees, even harder to ask for. Zety, a career platform designed to make job searching easier with expert-backed tools and advice, found in its latest Pay on Pause Report three in five workers are willing to forgo or accept smaller raises this year due to fears of layoffs and job instability, and 66% avoided asking for a raise altogether, citing economic pressures and uncertainty. In a job market this unpredictable, where many employees are job hugging out of fear—one question remains: should employees hold off on asking, or should conversations still be happening? There’s fear in asking According to career expert Jasmine Escalera, many employees are hesitant to ask for anything right now. The thought process is: “I should just be grateful to have a job,” or, “I don’t want to ask for more and rock the boat, especially if AI is coming in,” she explains. Maybe even, “I don’t want to disrupt what I already have, because I don’t want to then be out in that job market and not even know when’s the next time I’m potentially going to get a position,” Escalera says. In today’s job market, employees are often hesitant to speak up, hoping staying quiet will help them maintain their positions—especially since certain requests, like pay raises, are harder to secure. Pay increases and promotions may be harder to secure It is true. Certain requests are more difficult in today’s job market, Escalera explains, and pay raises are one of them. “If layoffs and budget cuts are happening, one of the first things that are going to go is pay increases,” she says. This also includes bonuses, or any other type of financial component. “Anything that goes into the budget could potentially go wrong, which is not good for individuals who are in positions where they need to be upskilling. Or they need to be learning more to complement AI, or even potentially just for specific career growth opportunities,” she says. Promotions also face limitations. As Escalera explains, “Promotions typically come with raises and professional development [or] upskilling opportunities—those are going to be things that potentially go away. Still, it doesn’t mean employees should shy away from asking, or from putting their requests on their managers radar. Open the conversation A company may not be able to provide pay raises or promotions during a downturn, but that doesn’t mean the conversation can’t happen. “Even if your company comes out and says, ‘we don’t have the financial capacity to give pay raises right now’, or ‘we don’t have the financial capacity to give bonuses right now’—that does not mean you do not have the conversation,” Escalera says. The key is approaching the discussion thoughtfully, focusing on your contributions and the value you bring. You might say, “I understand that the organization is in financial hardship, or may not be giving bonuses or pay raises at this moment, but I really want to open up the conversation around my work’” Escalera suggests. Carolyn Troyan, CEO of Leadership360, an HR consulting and leadership coaching firm, agrees it’s important to be thoughtful with your approach. “It’s doing it in an emotionally intelligent way,” she says. “After half your team has been laid off, demanding a raise is probably not such a good idea.” But after the dust has settled and the company is back on steady footing, it’s reasonable to bring it up—or even during your next performance review, if the timing feels right. When having that conversation, acknowledge the environment and what the team has been through—but don’t let that stop you from discussing your growth with your manager. “Just because a company is struggling doesn’t mean you don’t have a career plan,” Troyan says. To your manager, you might say, “Here’s what I want to do over the next two to three years, I’d love to kind of talk about that with you. What opportunities do you see available, even in this environment, for me to learn some of these new skills?” Commonly, you’re going to hear one of two responses, Troyan explains: “We really love you, but we can’t do it right now,” which comes up a lot. Or, you may receive feedback highlighting what you need to work on to reach a promotion or raise in the future. Either way, you’re still having the conversation. Support and flexibility Even if a company can’t provide a promotion or raise due to financial hardship, there are other things to ask for. One of the biggest asks right now is support—support that isn’t monetary, Escalera says, pointing to the same report: Mental health support tops the list. “What that really shows is that individuals are incredibly burnt out and stressed out,” she said. As a result, we’re seeing more requests for mental health days and other forms of support. If a company isn’t meeting requests for pay, flexibility, or other forms of support, it may be a signal for employees to reassess their options. Even in uncertain times, understanding your value, approaching conversations thoughtfully, and asking for the support you need are all things you don’t have to shy away from. View the full article

Companies are increasingly using AI to conduct job interviews, and, according to experts in the field, the technology is leading to some impressive results. However, giving candidates the choice between an AI interviewer or a human can create bias that makes landing a job tougher for some people, according to a new report. AI is now a common part of the job application process. According to the World Economic Forum, around 88% of employers use some form of AI for initial candidate screening such as filtering or ranking job applications. But AI is also being used to conduct interviews. Currently, around 21% of U.S. companies use the technology for initial interviews. AI interviewers can give companies an edge when during the hiring process. One study found that candidates who were interviewed by an AI were more likely to land a job than candidates who were sourced by humans screening résumés: 54% of candidates interviewed by AI got the job, compared to about 29% of candidates sourced by a traditional résumé screening. Still, there is a lot to learn about how utilizing AI interviews impacts both people and firms. Brian Jabarian, a researcher at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business with doctorates in economics and philosophy, recently examined what happens to candidates when they are offered a choice between an AI interviewer and a human interviewer, which he detailed in his paper, Choice as Signal: Designing AI Adoption in Labor Market Screening. The research, which has not been peer reviewed, finds giving candidates a choice between a human and AI interview could also create a new hurdle for low-ability candidates—applicants whose skills are below the firm’s hiring threshold. Jabarian tells Fast Company that different applicants will automatically be drawn to either AI interviewers or human interviewers based on their strengths. For example, “applicants with strong language skills prefer human interviewers to highlight their English proficiency,” he says. “In contrast, applicants with strong analytical skills choose the AI interviewer to showcase their quantitative strengths.” But the choice isn’t neutral, like a candidate may expect it to be. “An applicant’s decision to be interviewed by a human or an AI agent can reveal private information about their strengths, weaknesses, or expectations for relative performance,” Jabarian writes in his paper, also pointing out that employees with high abilities benefit because companies can identify them more easily “using both the signal and the selection decision, increasing their probability of being hired.” However, it also means firms are able to more easily identify low-ability workers. Jabarian writes: “Consequently, low-skilled workers succeed less often in obtaining a job and therefore experience a welfare loss.” Essentially, by interpreting both the choice itself as well as the information from the interview, an employer’s precision increases, which doesn’t serve lower-ability candidates. Jabarian says if firms had no insight into the candidate’s choice, then all workers would have the advantage of choosing which interviewer best shows their skill set, but companies would lose out on the advantages of using AI interviewers. While on the surface giving job candidates choices about how they are interviewed seems like a solid idea, Jabarian says that in practice, it’s not quite so simple. “Before this new paper, I was really rooting for giving this choice to people because I was confused about why everyone was assuming it was just okay to impose a new technology on people in a high-stakes environment when they maybe didn’t want it,” he explains. However, now he believes it’s clear that the choice alone hurts the weakest candidates, and therefore it shouldn’t be one that is routinely offered but rather “on a case-by-case basis.” Jabarian says he expects AI interviewing to increase, particularly because it’s good for firms. Still, that doesn’t mean humans as interviewers are a thing of the past or irrelevant. AI interviewers and humans have different strengths: Human recruiters can improvise and are able to vary their interviews, while AI creates a consistent experience and is excellent at garnering information from candidates. That means adopting hybrid techniques—where humans and AI run interviews with opposing purposes—might really be the smartest and fairest way to hire. View the full article

And the prospects for a Hassett-led FedView the full article

Learn how to track visibility with Google AIO using easy-to-follow steps for improved online presence and site performance. The post Google AI Overviews: How To Measure Impressions & Track Visibility appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Two leaders stress need for multilateralism amid rising trade tensionsView the full article

I’m on vacation. Here are some past letters that I’m making new again, rather than leaving them to wilt in the archives. 1. My boss told me to write the same sentence 500 times as punishment for a mistake I’m a currently an office manager, and I recently messed up and did not submit some health insurance forms that were required and cost my boss $1,000. I have been here for four years and never made a mistake, but for some reason my boss wants me to write 500 sentences stating, “I will not screw up another insurance case.” Is this even something she can do? She can, but it would be really, really weird — and overstepping and degrading — to require an adult to do that. (I think it’s also really weird and degrading to require a kid to do that, but at least there’s some cultural context for that being A Thing that some parents and teachers used to do.) Any chance she’s not being serious and was instead just making a bad joke about wanting you to understand the seriousness of the mistake? If she’s serious, it’s ridiculous — condescending, insulting, and really poorly thought out. She also shouldn’t ground you, wash your mouth out with soap, or send you to your room for a time-out. I’d take a broader look at how she treats you in general. It’s hard for me to imagine someone who thinks this is reasonable treating you respectfully in other ways. – 2015 2. Our intern wants us all to give a coworker a “World’s Greatest Dad” mug A birthday came up for a person in the department named Bob. He is the oldest in the department and has been with the company for over 20 years. He is loved by many and is seen as a welcoming person to the department. He has a particularly jovial relationship with one of the interns I supervise, and they jokingly refer to each other as “dad and son.” The intern showed me the birthday gift he bought for Bob and it was a “World’s Greatest Dad” mug. He said he wanted the entire department to write loving messages to Bob that would go into the mug and be presented to Bob at a later date. I recognize the intern bought the mug with his own money, but I feel uncomfortable promoting the “Bob is the department Dad” mentality to the entire department. I do not know why exactly, but I do not think it sends the right message. (Also, we already celebrate Bob’s birthday with a happy birthday banner signed by people in the department) I have no doubt that many in the department will love the intern’s initiative, so I have been thinking about letting it go. However, I am curious if it is more appropriate to redirect the intern to make his gift a personal one for Bob and leave the rest of the department out of it. Yeah, the “dad” thing is a pretty weird and problematic message to promote as any kind of official department gift. It’s asking people to buy into a label for the relationship that probably won’t resonate with some/most of them, and it’s age-focused in a way you don’t want any even quasi-formal gifts at work to be. If Bob and the intern want to jokingly refer to each other as dad and son, that’s their own (odd) thing, not everyone else’s. I’d say this to your intern: “That’s your private joke with Bob, so the mug should be your own gift to him. Ultimately, though, these are professional relationships, warm and friendly as they may be, and I don’t want to promote the ‘dad’ thing more broadly.” Frankly, that’s not a bad message for your intern to hear anyway. (This episode of the AAM podcast takes on a different version of this — an admin who positions herself as everyone’s mom and literally calls them “my kids.” Not everyone is thrilled.) – 2018 3. My husband says he can’t call the daycare run by my employer We’re enrolling our children at the daycare that is run by the hospital where I work. We had a question about the kids’ physicals for the enrollment, and I suggested that my husband call the daycare since he had some free time. He said that he didn’t want to do that because the daycare is a benefit provided by my employer, and it would be comparable to me trying to set up health insurance through his employer. He went on to say that they would wonder why I wasn’t the one calling and that it could get back to my manager and reflect poorly on me. I thought this was crazy, and no one would think any more than that this is a dad with a question about his kids’ daycare. It wasn’t like he would be asking about payroll deduction or anything related to my job. Which one of us is right? You are. This would be like if your kids were insured through your husband’s work plan and you thought you couldn’t talk to their doctors or take them to medical appointments because the insurance was through his employer. This is a daycare. It would be really strange if they were only supposed to talk to one of the parents of the kids in their care. It’s 100% fine for him to contact them. If it somehow got back to your manager (which would be odd to begin with, because why would anyone take up your manager’s time reporting to her on the minutia of her employees’ daycare arrangement?), she would care precisely zero amount. Tell him to make the call. – 2018 4. My student employee lied on his resume and said he was a director I managed a student employee, Benjen, for about six months. Those were a tumultuous six months where we had a lot going on, absent directors, etc. I got a new job and Benjen, a part-time grad student, had to step into my old role more than he should have had to. I was happy to stay in contact with him and help him where I could after I left. Benjen was in way over his head and it wasn’t his fault. When he left a few months later, I was happy to help with his resume. He was a great employee! Well, after a few revisions he sent me his final resume … and he claimed he was the director of the department for the ENTIRE job duration. He was never even full-time, and I wasn’t even a director. That was two levels above me. I dropped the ball in responding to his last resume, which was months ago. I was so mad at his self-promotion that I just didn’t respond. Now I’ve been contacted by someone for a reference on him and it turns out I’m still angry and I’m not sure how to give a reference. HE WASN’T A DIRECTOR! Tell the truth. This is the whole point of references — as a way to verify the information candidates are self-reporting and to learn more about them. Talk to the reference checker and be very clear that he was a student employee, not a director. (And if you can only speak to the six months where you overlapped, be clear about what those dates were. If there’s any chance he was actually given the director title after you left — which sounds very unlikely — you want to be clear about that and careful to say that you’re only speaking to the time period you were there.) Frankly, it also makes sense to write back to Benjen now and say, “I’m wondering about the title you’ve listed. You were a part-time student employee while you worked with me, not a director. You definitely can’t send it out with this on it.” – 2018 The post boss told me to write the same sentence 500 times as punishment, student employee lied on his resume, and more appeared first on Ask a Manager. View the full article

Proposal marks a last-ditch attempt to keep Ukraine solvent using Moscow’s immobilised wealth View the full article

Ryanair, Wizz Air and EasyJet predict a boom in travel including ‘catastrophe tourism’ once a peace deal is signedView the full article

Brussels expected to announce investigation in coming days in its latest challenge to Big TechView the full article

At least nine higher education institutions have stopped applications due to tougher Home Office rules and concerns over visa abuseView the full article

Isolated since 2021, the Islamist group is now rebuilding ties with many countries, despite a fierce dispute with former patron PakistanView the full article

Elon Musk’s $1tn incentive plan supercharges a long history of rewards driving up executive payView the full article

Your Guide to Tax Technology Meets Transformation Planning, Research, and the Rise of Intelligent Automation Artificial intelligence is moving beyond the testing phase. It’s now powering the everyday workflows of tax professionals. Tech providers are racing to integrate AI. And new … Continued Go PRO for members-only access to more CPA Trendlines Research. View the full article