ResidentialBusiness

As the holiday season approaches, small business owners need to harness new tools and methods to capture consumer attention and maximize sales. According to PayPal’s recent 2025 Holiday Shopping Survey, shoppers are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence (AI) and flexible payment options like Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) to enhance their shopping experiences. The findings present both opportunities and challenges for small businesses aiming to thrive this holiday season. PayPal’s survey reveals that 40% of American consumers have utilized AI for shopping within the past year, with 77% intending to use AI tools again this holiday season. This trend has significant implications for merchants who want to optimize their visibility across AI platforms. “Shoppers are moving fluidly across channels, discovering products through AI, returning to stores, and choosing flexible payment options like Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) to maximize this holiday season,” stated Michelle Gill, General Manager of Small Business and Financial Services at PayPal. Small business owners can capitalize on this momentum by ensuring their products are optimally presented across AI-driven platforms. In doing so, they can connect with consumers who are increasingly seeking guidance on deals and gift ideas. Notably, 34% of respondents plan to use AI to find the best deals, while 30% will rely on it for product comparisons, making visibility critical for success. Equally important is the increasing prevalence of BNPL options, which have shifted from being a novelty to a mainstream expectation among consumers. Half of those surveyed intend to use BNPL over the holiday season, citing affordability and budget control as their primary motivations. This payment method can be particularly potent; the survey found that 52% of consumers are more likely to make a purchase when BNPL is available. Gill emphasized the advantages of offering BNPL, stating, “When shoppers know they can pay over time, they’re more likely to complete their purchase,” adding that PayPal data indicates a significant increase in average order value—91% for enterprises and 62% for small businesses. While embracing these tools offers considerable benefits, small business owners should consider the practical applications and challenges that come with them. To effectively implement AI, businesses must invest time and resources into optimizing their online presence. This includes product listings that resonate with AI algorithms, ensuring digital channels are well-maintained and easy to navigate. Moreover, adopting BNPL options comes with its own set of considerations. Integrating this payment method might necessitate a partnership with a financial service provider, thus creating a potential barrier for smaller businesses with limited budgets. Ensuring that this payment choice is visible throughout the customer journey can also require thoughtful marketing strategies. Another notable trend from the survey is the revival of omnichannel retailing. About 64% of shoppers plan to shop in physical stores this holiday season, highlighting the importance of a multi-channel strategy. Businesses must ensure a seamless shopping experience across online and in-store platforms, which can enhance customer loyalty and sales. The survey results show that 74% of consumers are more inclined to shop with merchants offering cash back or rewards, making rewards programs an essential aspect of customer attraction. As the holiday season approaches, small business owners will need to adapt rapidly to these evolving consumer behaviors. Those who can unify their online and physical experiences, while also delivering meaningful rewards, are likely to foster deeper customer connections. This strategy serves not just for the holiday rush, but for long-term growth as well. In light of these findings, leveraging AI and offering BNPL could be key differentiators for small businesses. By embracing technology and the evolving retail landscape, even the smallest of businesses can compete effectively during this bustling season. For more information on this survey and its implications, you can visit the original release from PayPal at PayPal Newsroom. This article, "AI and Buy Now, Pay Later Transform Holiday Shopping for Merchants" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

A momentous week in the technology sector made it clear there is no sign the boom in building artificial intelligence infrastructure is slowing — despite the bubble talk. Nvidia, whose processors are the AI revolution’s backbone, became the first company to surpass $5 trillion in market value. Microsoft and OpenAI inked a deal enhancing the ChatGPT maker’s fundraising ability and OpenAI promptly started laying groundwork for an initial public offering that could value the company at $1 trillion. Amazon said it would cut 14,000 corporate jobs, just days before its cloud unit posted its strongest growth in nearly three years. These developments, along with numerous earnings calls and interviews with executives, make clear that AI has cemented itself as the single biggest catalyst for global corporate investment and the engine of the market rally, even as some question the sustainability of both. Spending without ending Soaring revenue at Microsoft, Alphabet, and other technology giants was expected. But more than 100 non-tech global companies noted data centers on quarterly calls this week, including Honeywell, turbine maker GE Vernova, and heavy equipment maker Caterpillar. Sales in Caterpillar’s division that supplies data centers jumped 31% in its most recent quarter. “We’re definitely really excited about the prime power opportunity with data centers,” CEO Joseph Creed said this week. “The AI supply chain now spans power, industrials and cooling technology, and investors are looking at the entire ecosystem rather than just core tech,” said Ayako Yoshioka, portfolio manager at Wealth Enhancement Group. Goldman Sachs estimates global AI-related infrastructure spending could reach $3 trillion to $4 trillion by 2030. Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Alphabet are expected to spend roughly $350 billion combined this year. AI investment is propping up global trade, with about 60% of U.S. data-center capex spent on imported IT equipment, according to Oxford Economics, much of it semiconductors from Taiwan, South Korea and Vietnam. At least two dozen companies representing more than $21 trillion in combined market value reported quarterly earnings or spoke with Reuters about AI in recent days. Many, including Procter & Gamble and Boliden, noted that the hoped-for productivity gains, though uneven, are beginning to show. “We strongly believe the future contribution of artificial intelligence within R&D, within developing innovation, will steadily increase,” Schindler CEO Paolo Compagna told Reuters, though he said AI’s impact is yet to be seen. The Swiss lift and escalator maker raised its annual margin forecast last week. Year-over-year revenue growth in the U.S. tech sector is up more than 15%, outpacing all other sectors, according to LSEG data. Apple said it was significantly increasing AI investment and Amazon projected capital spending of $125 billion in 2025. Worries about overvaluation Since ChatGPT’s debut in 2022, global equity values have climbed 46%, or $46 trillion. One-third of that gain has come from AI-linked companies, according to Bespoke Investment Group. Analysts warn of a quickening replacement cycle for servers, accelerators and chips as each new generation delivers exponential performance gains. The useful life of AI chips is shrinking to five years or less, forcing companies to “write down assets faster and replace them sooner,” said UBS semiconductor analyst Tim Arcuri. The surge in AI-related spending has widened the gap between investment and returns, with a Reuters analysis showing that sales-to-capex ratios at major tech firms have fallen sharply as outlays on chips and data centers grow faster than revenue. Capital expenditures represent a larger chunk of cash generated by operating activities for some companies, causing some investor concern. “If progress hasn’t been made toward monetization within three years, the market will start asking hard questions,” said Sumali Sanyal, senior portfolio manager at investment firm Xponance. Microsoft reported a record $35 billion in capex in its most recent quarter and projected higher spending, prompting Bernstein analyst Mark Moerdler to ask whether the company was spending into a bubble. Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Amy Hood responded that AI-related demand still outpaces Microsoft’s spending. “I thought we were going to catch up. We are not,” she said. Some companies are financing AI projects with debt. Oracle’s $18 billion bond sale last month was one of the largest ever for a tech company, and it looks set to be surpassed by an up to $30 billion bond sale from Meta Platforms. News of its largest ever bond sale knocked Meta’s shares down 11% on Thursday. Still, many economists say the AI cycle is far from exhausted. Goldman estimates AI investment is currently less than 1% of U.S. GDP, far below peaks of 2% to 5% seen during the electricity and dot-com booms. “We are in the early innings … and the pace of AI innovation is the fastest we have seen in decades,” said Nick Evans, portfolio manager at Polar Capital Technology Trust. —Akash Sriram, Sriparna Roy, Sneha SK, Puyaan Singh, Jessica DiNapoli, and Bernadette Hogg View the full article

Do this instead. By Hitendra Patil Client Accounting Services: The Definitive Success Guide Go PRO for members-only access to more Hitendra Patil. View the full article

Do this instead. By Hitendra Patil Client Accounting Services: The Definitive Success Guide Go PRO for members-only access to more Hitendra Patil. View the full article

US Treasury secretary says US will protect itself from supply shocks in 12-24 monthsView the full article

Sora, OpenAI's short-form AI video generator, has been out for just about a month now, and already, it's helping to spread disinformation on social media. Accounts share Sora generations without any transparency, sometimes with the Sora watermark removed, and while shrewd observers see through the AI, many people scrolling by don't think twice and believe things happened that didn't. That could be as innocuous as Jake Paul putting on makeup, or as dangerous as a fake interview meant to manipulate viewers towards a political bias. It's getting scary out there. So far, for the free model, Sora has capped video generations at 30 per day. If you pay for the Pro model, you get 100 generations a day. But if you're using Sora free of charge, once you produce your 30th video, you aren't able to make any more. I see that as a good thing, myself: 30 hyper-realistic AI videos a day per user is already way too high. OpenAI, unfortunately, isn't consulting me—and Sora now allows users to pay for extra generations once they've reached the free limit. Bill Peebles, head of Sora, announced the change in a Thursday post on X. Peebles said the company has been "amazed" by the demand from "power users," but, as it stands, "the economics are currently completely unsustainable." According to Peebles, the Sora team thought 30 free generations per day would suffice, but that hasn't been the case. By offering users the chance to pay for additional generations, OpenAI plans to start pulling in extra revenue from its popular short-form AI video generator. Peebles also believes that the company will generate future funds from a "new Sora economy." That would include two parts: rights holders charging users a fee to cameo their characters or real-life people, as well as creators earning money from the videos they post. If you don't plan on paying for Sora generations, though, there's some "bad" news: Peebles says the company will bring the number of free generations down as the platforms grows, as the company doesn't have enough GPUs to manage the demand. As reported by The Verge, you'll be able to purchase 10 additional video generations for $4 a pop—though the actual credits each video takes may depend on many different factors. When you reach your limit, the app will let you buy more through the App Store (Sora is currently iOS-only). Those credits will expire after 12 months, which I imagine will be plenty of time for someone making Sora videos. You can also transfer them to use on Codex, OpenAI's coding platform. I personally see Sora's exponential growth as a bad thing. I get the finances: OpenAI is now operating like a for-profit company, and needs to pull in revenue. But OpenAI, along with other AI companies, is blatantly ignoring the deepfake disinformation machine these products have become. The more the company pushes users to generate with Sora, the more realistic AI slop we'll encounter in our feeds. View the full article

Jumbo debt sales to fund huge artificial intelligence capex threaten to store up new risks for investorsView the full article

Here is a selection of Posts from October 2025 that you will want to check out: Why are difficult conversations still so… well, difficult? (And what to do about it) by @suzimcalpine The Power of the Ask by @KevinPaulScott Design for Different by @KevinPaulScott The Real Secret to Powerful Public Speaking by @DrNickMorgan 14 Thoughts about Building a Great Culture by @JonGordon11 Video (2:50): Moral Failure by @samchand The Crowding-Out Effect via Chasing Excellence The crowding-out principle can change how you think about building the life you want Serve To Lead Podcast: @jamesstrock interviews Philip K Howard Saving Can-Do: How to Revive the Spirit of America Lawyers Were Central to USA Founding--Can They Help Guide System Update? Think Like The Person You're "Speaking" To by @HBergeronCFNE Your message is only as good as your ability to think like the person you’re “speaking” to 9 Simple but Effective Strategies to Get Through a Bad Day by @cnieuwhof Meet People Where They Are Without Lowering the Standard via @TheDaily_Coach Depth Is the New Luxury by Giuseppe Fioretti In the end, what endures isn’t how much we’ve made, but how deeply it connects A Meretricious Meritocracy 4 of 5 by @jamesstrock Corruption of the Professions A Meretricious Meritocracy 5 of 5 by @jamesstrock Reserve Army of the Over-Credentialed 5 Signs It Is Time To Leave Your Organization by @JosephLalonde Are You Rewarding Performance Theater Over Real Performance? via @AdmiredLeaders How Anxiety Traps People And How You Can Break Free by @LaRaeQuy If You Get the Chance by Ted Lamade @collabfund Leaders, It’s Time to Stop Being Cozy by @SanjayKhoslaFBB via @KelloggSchool Redefining leadership: The soul-centered approach of executive coach, Mirko Chardin by @jonstojan via @digitaljournal How to Deal with Energy Vampires by @JonGordon11 Will Mideast Progress Break Legacy Party Monomania on The President? by @jamesstrock See more on Twitter. * * * Follow us on Instagram and X for additional leadership and personal development ideas. View the full article

The day after the jewelry heist at the Louvre in Paris, officials from across Washington’s world-famous museums were already talking, assessing and planning how to bolster their own security. “We went over a review of the incident,” said Doug Beaver, security specialist at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, who said he participated in Zoom talks with nearby institutions including the Smithsonian and the National Gallery of Art. “Then we developed a game plan on that second day out, and started putting things in place on Days 3, 4 and 5.” Similar conversations are happening at museums across the globe, as those tasked with securing art ask: “Could that happen here?” One California museum knows the answer is yes—police are investigating the theft of more than 1,000 items just before the Louvre heist. At the same time, many were acknowledging the inherent, even painful tension in their task: Museums are meant to help people engage with art—not to distance them from it. “The biggest thing in museums is the visitor experience,” Beaver said. “We want visitors to come back. We don’t want them to feel as though they’re in a fortress or a restrictive environment.” It’s an issue many are grappling with—most of all, of course, the Louvre, whose director, Laurence des Cars, has acknowledged “a terrible failure” of security measures. It was crystallized in a letter of support for the Louvre and its beleaguered leader, from 57 museums across the globe. “Museums are places of transmission and wonder,” said the letter, which appeared in Le Monde. “Museums are not strongholds nor are they secret vaults.” It said the very essence of museums “lies in their openness and accessibility.” Aging security systems A number of museums declined to comment on the Louvre heist when contacted by The Associated Press, to avoid not only discussing security but also criticizing the Louvre at a sensitive time. French police have acknowledged major security gaps: Paris Police Chief Patrice Faure told Senate lawmakers Wednesday that aging systems had left the museum weakened. François Chatillon, France’s chief architect of historical monuments, noted nonetheless that many museums, especially in Europe, are in historic buildings that were not constructed with the goal of securing art. The Louvre, after all, was a royal palace—a medieval one at that. “Faced with the intrusion of criminals, we must find solutions, but not in a hasty manner,” Chatillon told Le Monde. “We’re not going to put armored doors and windows everywhere because there was this burglary.” The architect added that demands on museums come from many places. “Security, conservation, adaptation to climate change—they are all legitimate.” Prioritizing protection Even within security, there are competing priorities, noted attorney Nicholas O’Donnell, an expert in global art law and editor of the Art Law Report, a blog on legal issues in the museum and arts communities. “You’re always fighting the last war in security,” said O’Donnell. For example, he noted museums have lately been focusing security measures on “the very frequent and regrettable trend of people attacking the art itself to draw attention to themselves.” O’Donnell also noted that the initial response of Louvre security guards was to protect visitors from possible violence. “That’s an appropriate first priority, because you don’t know who these people are.” But perhaps the greatest battle, O’Donnell said, is to find a balance between security and enjoyment. “You want people interacting with the art,” he said. “Look at the ‘Mona Lisa’ right around the corner (from the jewels). It’s not a terribly satisfying experience anymore. You can’t get very close to it, the glass . . . reflects back at you, and you can barely see it.” O’Donnell says he’s certain that museums everywhere are reevaluating security, fearing copycat crimes. Indeed, the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which oversees Berlin’s state museums and was hit hard by a brazen robbery in 2017, said it was using the Louvre heist “as an opportunity to review the security architecture of our institutions.” It called for international cooperation, and investments in technology and personnel. Creating a balance Beaver, in Washington, predicts the Paris heist will spur museums to implement new measures. One area that he’s focused on, and has discussed with other museums, is managing the access of construction teams, which he says has often been loose. The Louvre thieves dressed as workers, in bright yellow vests. It’s all about creating a “necessary balance” between security and accessibility, Beaver says. “Our goal isn’t to eliminate risk, it’s to really manage it intelligently.” Soon after he took the security post in 2014, Beaver said that he refashioned the museum’s security and notably added a weapons detection system. He also limited what visitors could carry in, banning bottles of liquid. He said, though, that the reaction from visitors had been mixed—some wanting more security, and others feeling it was too restrictive. Robert Carotenuto, who worked in security for about 15 years at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art running the command center, says museums have become increasingly diligent at screening visitors, as they try to thwart protesters. But that approach alone doesn’t resolve risks on the perimeter—the Paris thieves were able to park their truck right outside the museum. “If you’re just going to focus on one risk, like protesters . . . your security system is going to have a lapse somewhere,” he said. “You can stop the protesters . . . but then you’re not going to pay attention to people who are phony workers breaking into the side of your building.” The magic of museums Patrick Bringley also worked at the Met, as a security guard from 2008 to 2019 — an experience that led to a book and an off-Broadway show, “All the Beauty in the World.” “Museums are wonderful because they are accessible,” he said. “They’re these places that will put things that are thousands of years old and incomprehensibly beautiful in front of visitors—sometimes even without a pane of glass. That’s really special.” The tragedy of the Louvre heist, Bringley said, is that such events make it harder for museums to display all their beauty in a welcoming way. “Art should be inviting,” Bringley said. “But when people break that public trust, the Louvre is going to have to step up their procedures, and it will just become a little less magical in the museum.” —R.J. Rico and Jocelyn Noveck, Associated Press View the full article

It’s the Friday open thread! The comment section on this post is open for discussion with other readers on any work-related questions that you want to talk about (that includes school). If you want an answer from me, emailing me is still your best bet*, but this is a chance to take your questions to other readers. * If you submitted a question to me recently, please do not repost it here, as it may be in my queue to answer. The post open thread – October 31, 2025 appeared first on Ask a Manager. View the full article

Predistribution, not redistribution, is needed to close the inequality gap View the full article

The behavioral health sector is at a crossroads. The landscape is shifting rapidly, and for many, it feels harder than ever to plan. The One Big Beautiful Bill is a sweeping piece of legislation that redefines Medicaid eligibility and coincides with a broader restructuring of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the The President administration. Combined, these changes have introduced new questions about sustainability, staffing, and service delivery. While some details are still in flux, the direction is crystal clear: Providers will need to adapt. To help make sense of what’s changing, I recently joined a discussion with Chuck Ingoglia, CEO of the National Council for Mental Wellbeing, and Monica Oss, CEO of OPEN MINDS. We looked at where the policy is headed and how agencies can prepare. Here are three key takeaways for leaders preparing for the road ahead. 1. Medicaid work requirements will create operational challenges Some states have previously tested work requirements—most notably in 2018-2019, Arkansas implemented work requirements, which led to widespread disenrollments. However, recent changes mark the first time such mandates are being implemented program-wide in Medicaid expansion states for “able-bodied” adults without dependents. Individuals with serious mental illness or substance use disorders are expected to be exempt, but the definitions and enforcement mechanisms are still being developed. That ambiguity is already affecting planning. Behavioral health agencies are asking: How will we know which clients are exempt? What documentation will be required? Who’s responsible for tracking compliance, and what happens if a claim is denied? From a technology standpoint, these changes raise important infrastructure questions. Intake processes may need to capture new data points. Eligibility logic may need to be updated more frequently. Payer rules could vary by state or change mid-year. To paraphrase Monica Oss: “We’ve seen versions of this before. And what history tells us is that these requirements often reduce coverage without improving outcomes. So, now’s the time to figure out how you’ll track compliance, support clients who might be affected, and safeguard your revenue cycle from gaps in eligibility.” 2. Federal funding streams are changing but not vanishing The legislation coincides with administrative proposals to restructure the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and consolidate federal public health agencies. There are changes HHS introduced in the proposed budget that still require Congressional approval. At the same time, the bill eliminates several behavioral health-specific grants that many safety net providers have long relied on to fund crisis response, peer support, housing navigation, and early intervention programs. As Chuck Ingoglia noted during our discussion, “Behavioral health wasn’t targeted in this legislation. But we weren’t protected either. We got caught in the middle.” While new funding channels like the Rural Health Fund will become available, they will largely flow through the states, introducing more variation in program design, oversight, and eligibility. Behavioral health providers will need to align their operations and reporting practices with new criteria faster than ever before. To avoid being squeezed, agencies must be both grant-ready and advocacy-ready. That means tracking state-level implementation plans, understanding how policy changes affect your population, and demonstrating the value and outcomes of your services, often on short timelines. 3. Compliance and outcomes reporting are under the microscope In today’s funding environment, outcomes reporting has become a compliance imperative. As grant criteria evolve and value-based payment models accelerate, behavioral health providers are being asked to deliver not just care, but proof of impact. Funding decisions, whether from public sources, private payers, or foundations, are increasingly tied to demonstrable outcomes. But “outcomes” can mean different things to different stakeholders. To stay competitive, behavioral health organizations need to clearly report clinical progress, service utilization, payer mix, and program effectiveness—often in real time. Health plans want data tied to value-based payment models. Grantmakers want evidence of community impact. State agencies want metrics aligned with the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set)and/or Medicaid Section 1115 waiver goals. The ability to pull this data quickly and reliably often depends on whether core systems, like your electronic health records, are structured to support it. That includes things such as: built-in outcomes tracking at the point of care, integration with financial and billing systems, and custom reporting dashboards that reflect funder-specific metrics. Organizations that rely on manual reporting or siloed systems will likely struggle to meet new requirements. In a tight funding environment, that can be the difference between receiving a grant or being ineligible. WHAT’S NEXT The days of treating technology as an optional line item are over. Leaders are recognizing that their ability to stay flexible—financially, clinically, and operationally— often hinges on the strength of their systems. At a minimum, organizations need tools that can adapt to policy changes, support mobile and hybrid teams, and simplify administrative work for already stretched staff. That includes: Automating documentation to reduce clinician burnout, streamlining workflows as billing rules shift. Equipping leadership with real-time dashboards for decision-making., Improving client communication through reminders, forms, and follow-ups. When work requirements roll out, systems will need to flag at-risk clients, adjust claims logic, and document exemption statuses. When state rules change, workflows may need to flex without requiring a system overhaul. When staffing is tight, onboarding and training must be faster and more intuitive. What we’re seeing from agencies that are weathering this moment well is that they’ve invested in infrastructure designed for change, not just compliance. There’s no question that the next few years will bring significant changes. But behavioral health remains a bipartisan priority, and there is still room to plan, adjust, and advocate. That means having the right systems, the right partnerships, and the right information to make decisions in real time. Josh Schoeller is the CEO of Qualifacts. View the full article

You hired two L2 agents. Built better training documentation. Restructured your escalation tiers. Six months later, you’re staring at the same dashboard number: 28% escalation rate. Your manager wants to know why engineering is still underwater with tickets. You’ve tried everything the ITSM (IT Service Management) playbooks recommend (more people, better processes, clearer criteria) and the number hasn’t moved. Here’s what’s actually happening: You’re measuring volume and speed. You’re missing what shows where things break. Traditional escalation metrics track outcomes (how many tickets escalated, how fast they moved). But escalations fail at structural breakpoints: handoff delays between teams, context lost in transitions, priority downgraded when crossing tools. These problems are invisible to standard dashboards. Your 28% rate isn’t high because of poor training. It’s unchanged because you’ve been measuring symptoms, not causes. You need different measurements. Not more volume metrics. Breakpoint diagnostics. Why traditional escalation metrics miss the real problems Your dashboard probably tracks escalation rate and average resolution time. You love these numbers (they’re clean, comparable, easy to trend). But you’re measuring what happened, not why it happened. Traditional metrics hide structural failures. You see that 500 tickets escalated last month. You don’t see that 200 sat for four hours between “escalated” and “engineering started work.” You track time-to-resolution at 18 hours on average. You don’t see that six of those hours were tickets bouncing back for missing information. Volume and speed improvements mask deeper problems. You reduce the escalation rate from 30% to 25% by tightening criteria (sounds good until your L1 agents start escalating the same issue three times because the first two attempts vanished into different queues). You cut resolution time by 20% through automation (sounds better until you realize automation only works for tickets with complete context, and 40% of your escalations are missing critical fields). Tools improve when you measure the right things. Organizations using Atlassian’s Jira Service Management see 30% improvement in ticket-handling efficiency by the third year, but that improvement comes from automation and AI capabilities working on clean data with clear handoffs. Your efficiency gains require measuring where handoffs break, not just how many tickets move. The insight: Your escalation problems are structural, not performance-based. You need metrics that expose breakpoints (the moments when information gets lost, when priority gets mistranslated, when updates don’t reach the other system). Metrics that reveal handoff breakpoints Your escalations break between teams. A ticket moves from the service desk to engineering, but something fails in the transition. Each handoff adds delay, loses context, or changes priority. Traditional metrics don’t capture this. You need measurements that show where transitions fail. Time to escalate and handoff delay time Time to escalate measures how long your L1 agents work a ticket before escalating it. This reveals your triage accuracy. If average time-to-escalate is 15 minutes, your agents recognize escalation quickly. If it’s 4 hours, they’re spinning wheels trying to solve issues beyond their scope. But time-to-escalate misses the bigger problem: the gap between “escalated” and “engineering starts work.” This is handoff delay time (the period when your ticket sits in limbo). You escalated at 9 AM; engineering picks it up at 2 PM. That’s 5 hours of invisible delay. You should track both separately: your time-to-escalate data shows your L1 team’s decision-making, while handoff delays expose system friction (routing failures, queue confusion, notification gaps). One logistics company found their handoff delays averaged 3 hours because escalated tickets landed in a generic queue that engineering checked twice daily. They weren’t slow. Your system was routing blindly. Aim for handoff delays under 30 minutes for high-priority tickets. If you’re seeing 2+ hours consistently, you’ve got a routing problem or a notification problem, not a workload problem. Context loss incidents Context loss happens when critical information doesn’t make the journey. Your L1 agent documents troubleshooting steps in ServiceNow; engineering opens the escalated ticket in Jira. The notes field is blank. This isn’t just inconvenient. It’s invisible rework. Engineering re-asks the customer for information you already collected, the customer gets frustrated, resolution time doubles. And your metrics show nothing wrong because “ticket was assigned immediately.” Track context loss as incidents per 100 escalations. What percentage of your escalated tickets require engineers to request information that L1 already gathered? Anything above 10% means your handoff process is hemorrhaging information. Common context loss patterns: Notes don’t transfer between tools (ServiceNow → Jira mapping gaps) Attachments stay in the source system (screenshots, logs, error reports) Custom fields go blank (environment details, reproduction steps, customer tier) Priority rationale gets lost (why this was escalated as urgent) This metric requires manual tracking initially (your engineers reporting “I had to ask for X again”) but it reveals where your structured escalation workflows are breaking. Escalation bounceback rate Bounceback means engineering returns a ticket to L1 for clarification. Track bouncebacks as percentage of escalated tickets. If 30% of your escalations bounce back, you’re not just losing time, you’re revealing that your L1 team doesn’t know what engineering needs, or your escalation form doesn’t capture it. Good bounceback rate: 5-10%. This accounts for legitimately unclear situations. Warning signs: 20%+ bounceback rate. This means fixing broken escalation processes should be your priority, not hiring more engineers. Why your tickets bounce back: missing reproduction steps, unclear environment details, no error logs attached, priority doesn’t match severity, ticket routed to the wrong team entirely. Measure bounce reasons separately. If 50% of bouncebacks are “missing logs,” create a mandatory attachment field in your escalation form. If 30% are “wrong team,” your routing logic needs rework. Priority mistranslation rate Priority breaks when crossing tools. You set P1 in Jira (critical production issue). ServiceNow receives it as Medium priority because your integration mapped P1 to “Impact: Medium, Urgency: High” instead of “Impact: High, Urgency: High.” The ticket sits in the wrong queue. Engineering doesn’t see it for 6 hours. Your customer escalates to their account manager. Track priority mistranslation as a percentage of cross-tool escalations where priority changes unexpectedly. Anything above 5% means your field mapping is broken. This is invisible to most dashboards because both systems show a priority value. They just show different values. You need to compare priority at escalation moment versus priority when engineering receives it. Test manually: Escalate 20 tickets with known priorities. Check what priority your receiving system shows. If they don’t match, you’ve found a structural problem that no amount of training will fix. Metrics that expose system sync failures Handoff breakpoints happen once (at the transition moment). System sync failures happen continuously throughout the ticket lifecycle, forcing you to check both systems manually, copy updates between tools, and spend hours on administrative work that should be automatic. Cross-tool status sync lag Status updates should flow instantly. Your engineer marks a ticket “In Progress” in Jira; ServiceNow should update within seconds. If it takes 15 minutes (or requires manual copying) you’ve got sync lag. Sync lag is the time gap between a status change in one system and that change appearing in the other. Measure this in seconds for integrated tools, minutes for manual processes. Why sync lag matters: It creates confusion. Your service desk checks ServiceNow, sees “New.” Customer calls asking for an update. Engineering already started work 30 minutes ago. It just hasn’t synced yet. Now you’re apologizing for a communication failure that’s actually a technical failure. Target: Under 10 seconds for bidirectional integrations. Under 5 minutes for polling-based tools. Track this by timestamp comparison: When did status change in Tool A? When did it appear in Tool B? If you’re seeing 30+ minute lags consistently, your integration is failing or doesn’t exist. Manual update hours per week This is invisible work. Your team spends hours copying information between systems, but it doesn’t show up in any dashboard because the work happens outside ticket resolution. Manual update hours measures time spent on administrative synchronization (copying status updates, re-entering notes, updating assignees across tools, checking both systems for current state). Track this through time audits: Ask your team to log one week of manual update work. Typical answers: 3-6 hours per person per week. Scale that across your team. If 10 people each spend 4 hours weekly on manual updates, that’s 40 hours (a full-time role doing work that integrated systems handle automatically). Organizations using Microsoft Unified Support eliminate up to 35% of product-related support tickets annually through better information flow. That’s deflection through automation, not headcount. Aim for under 2 hours per person per week. Anything higher means integration gaps are eating your productivity. Repeat escalation rate Repeat escalations happen when the same issue gets escalated multiple times by different agents, or when your same agent escalates it again after the first attempt goes nowhere. Track repeat rate as percentage of escalations that reference a previous ticket number. If 15% of your escalations include “related to TICKET-1234,” you’re seeing structural problems that cause tickets to resurface. Why your tickets escalate repeatedly: first escalation went to wrong team and closed without resolution, fix was incomplete and issue recurs within days, context was lost so problem wasn’t understood fully, customer lost confidence in L1 and now escalates everything immediately. Good repeat rate: Under 5%. Warning signs: 20%+ repeat rate reveals that your escalation outcomes aren’t actually resolving problems. They’re creating ticket churn. Measure time between repeat escalations. If your customers escalate the same issue twice within 24 hours, your initial response was ineffective. If they escalate twice within 30 days, you might have incomplete fixes or monitoring gaps. SLA breach rate on escalated tickets SLA (Service Level Agreement) tracking is standard, but most dashboards track overall breach rate across all tickets. That hides a critical insight: escalated tickets breach SLAs at different rates than regular tickets. Track SLA breach rate separately for escalated tickets. If your overall breach rate is 8% but escalated tickets breach at 22%, escalations are your SLA problem, not general workload. Why your escalated tickets breach more often: handoff delays add time not accounted for in SLA clocks, priority mistranslation means urgent tickets sit in medium-priority queues, context loss forces engineers to restart investigation, cross-tool sync failures mean SLA clocks aren’t paused when they should be. Aim for escalated ticket breach rate within 5 percentage points of your overall breach rate. If it’s 10+ points higher, your escalation process is undermining SLA performance. Customer-facing metrics that show downstream impact Internal metrics show operational problems. Customer-facing metrics show business impact. Your VP doesn’t care that handoff delay averages 3 hours. They care that customers are calling twice for the same issue. Customer re-contact rate measures how often customers follow up on escalated tickets. If you escalate a ticket and your customer calls back within 24 hours asking for an update, you’ve got a communication failure. Track re-contact rate as a percentage of escalated tickets where the customer initiates follow-up contact. Target: Under 15%. Resolution time by escalation path reveals which routes work. Compare resolution time for L1→L2 escalations versus L1→Engineering direct escalations. If L1→Engineering is 40% faster, your L2 tier is adding delay without adding value. This doesn’t mean eliminate L2. It means examine what your L2 team does. Are they triaging effectively? Are they documenting context that speeds engineering work? Or are they just another handoff point? Track average resolution time for L1→L2→L3 path, L1→Engineering direct path, and L1→Specialist team path. If one path consistently outperforms others, route more tickets there. If one path consistently underperforms, diagnose why. You might discover L2→L3 escalations take 60% longer because L2 uses a different system than L3, requiring complete context re-entry. The two foundational metrics you should track first You can’t track 12 metrics tomorrow. Start with two that give maximum diagnostic value. Escalation rate as your baseline Escalation rate (percentage of tickets escalated) is your foundation metric. Not because it tells you what’s wrong, but because it establishes your baseline and trends. Calculate: (Escalated tickets / Total tickets) × 100 Industry baseline: 15-20% for mature service desks. If you’re at 35%, you’ve got solvable problems. If you’re at 8%, you might be under-escalating. Track escalation rate by priority level, category (password resets should be near zero), agent (does one agent escalate 40% while others average 18?), and time of day (do escalations spike during night shifts when senior help isn’t available?). Escalation rate alone doesn’t show you what to fix. It shows you whether your fixes are working. You implement better documentation, escalation rate drops from 28% to 24% over three months. You’re moving in the right direction. Handoff delay time as your diagnostic Handoff delay time shows where your escalations get stuck (the gap between “ticket escalated” and “ticket assigned to engineer”). Why this metric matters more than most: Handoff delay is pure waste. It’s not investigation time or customer communication time. It’s time your ticket sits in limbo because systems don’t talk or routing is broken. Track handoff delay by priority (P1 tickets should have near-zero handoff delay), escalation path (which path has longer handoffs?), time of day (do night-shift escalations sit until morning because on-call isn’t notified?), and source tool. Target: Under 30 minutes for high-priority escalations. Under 2 hours for medium priority. If you only track two metrics initially, track these: escalation rate shows volume trends, and handoff delay shows where volume gets stuck. How integration tools make these metrics trackable Most of these metrics are invisible without integration. Your service desk tool knows when tickets escalate. Your engineering tool knows when work starts. But the gap between those moments? That requires comparing timestamps across systems (manually, in spreadsheets, with custom queries). Why manual tracking fails for structural metrics You can track escalation rates manually. Export tickets from your service desk, count how many have “escalated” status, and calculate the percentage. Takes 20 minutes weekly. You can’t track handoff delay time manually. That requires a timestamp when the ticket marked “escalated” in Tool A, a timestamp when a ticket is assigned to an engineer in Tool B, calculation of the gap between those moments, aggregation across hundreds of tickets, and filtering by priority. This takes hours; by the time you’ve compiled last week’s handoff delays, this week’s delays are piling up untracked. Manual tracking captures outcomes, not patterns. You can see that 30% of your escalations had 2+ hour handoff delays last week, but you can’t see that all of them escalated between 5-7 PM when on-call rotation changes, or that all of them came from the same source tool where field mapping breaks priority values. Context loss incidents are nearly impossible for you to track manually because the evidence is absence (missing notes, blank fields, lost attachments). You’d need your engineers to report every time they say, “Wait, where are the logs?” What integration enables Integrated tools create audit trails that expose structural metrics automatically. When ServiceNow syncs with Jira bidirectionally, every status change, field update, and note added gets timestamped in both systems. This makes invisible work visible: handoff delay (compare “escalated” timestamp in ServiceNow with “assigned” timestamp in Jira), context loss (check which fields had values in ServiceNow versus which populated in Jira), priority mistranslation (log original priority value versus received priority value), sync lag (measure time between update in Tool A and appearance in Tool B). Integration doesn’t just move data. It creates the measurement layer that ITSM best practices require for continuous improvement. You need a bidirectional sync specifically for escalation metrics. A one-way sync (ServiceNow → Jira) lets your engineering team work in their tool, but status updates don’t flow back. Your service desk still checks both systems, still manually copies resolution notes. You’re measuring half the handoff. Bidirectional sync means updates flow both directions within seconds. Your engineer changes status in Jira, ServiceNow updates automatically, your service desk sees current state without switching tools. This removes manual update time, eliminates sync lag, and captures context preservation automatically. Start with three metrics tomorrow Don’t try to track all 12 metrics immediately. Pick three based on your biggest pain: If your pain is “escalated tickets sit too long”: Handoff delay time (where’s the gap?) Cross-tool status sync lag (is it a routing problem or a visibility problem?) SLA breach rate on escalated tickets (how much does delay cost?) If your pain is “engineering constantly asks for information already collected”: Context loss incidents (how often does this happen?) Escalation bounceback rate (how often do tickets return for clarification?) Manual update hours per week (how much time does re-gathering information consume?) If your pain is “customers call twice about the same issue”: Customer re-contact rate (how often are they following up?) Repeat escalation rate (are you actually resolving things?) Resolution time by escalation path (which routes work?) Track your three metrics for 30 days. Establish baselines. Identify patterns. Then add metrics that help diagnose what you discovered. What to look for in a ticket escalation integration You now understand the difference between outcome metrics (volume, speed) and breakpoint metrics (handoff delay, context loss, sync lag). Before evaluating solutions, establish your criteria: Real-time bidirectional sync: Updates flow both directions within seconds, not hours. Your service desk sees engineering progress without switching tools. Context preservation: Notes, attachments, custom fields transfer completely during handoffs. No information loss between systems. No-code configuration: Your team can set up field mappings and routing rules without developer support or system changes. Multi-platform support: Works across your actual tool stack (ServiceNow, Jira, Zendesk, or whatever combination you’re running). Track what matters with Unito Remember that sinking feeling when you discovered the critical escalation buried in the wrong queue? You’ve now got the framework to prevent it (12 metrics that expose where your escalations actually break). Unito delivers on these criteria through two-way sync that keeps your data consistent across platforms. Your engineers work in Jira, your service desk stays in ServiceNow, and handoff delays become visible instead of invisible. Context transfers automatically (notes, attachments, priority mappings) so your team stops asking customers for information twice. You’ll track handoff delays through timestamp comparisons, measure context preservation through field-level sync verification, and eliminate manual update hours by staying in your tool while data flows bidirectionally. Want to see what Unito can do? Meet with Unito product experts to see Unito's impact on your ticket escalation workflow. Talk with sales View the full article

Silicon Valley chipmaker Nvidia plans to supply hundreds of thousands of its graphics processing units for projects with South Korean businesses and the government to advance the country’s artificial intelligence infrastructure and technologies. The plan was announced Friday by the government, Nvidia, and some of South Korea’s biggest companies, including chipmakers Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and auto giant Hyundai Motor, after President Lee Jae Myung met with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang. At a news conference, Huang said he hopes to export Nvidia’s most advanced AI chips to China, following U.S. President Donald The President’s talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping on loosening U.S. chip restrictions as the two leaders pledged to reduce trade tensions. However, he acknowledged that it was up to The President to decide, and said there were no current plans to sell the next generation Blackwell chips to China. Huang has gotten rockstar treatment reminiscent of Apple’s Steve Jobs since arriving in South Korea on Thursday to attend meetings of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Gyeongju. As APEC host, South Korea is using the gathering of world leaders to showcase its ambitions in AI. According to Lee’s office and the companies, Nvidia will supply around 260,000 GPUs to support South Korea’s AI computing and manufacturing capabilities. About 50,000 of the GPUs will be used to support a government project to build a national cloud computing center for AI and Nvidia will provide the same number of GPUs each to Samsung and SK to help them enhance their manufacturing processes through AI and accelerate the development of advanced semiconductors. Hyundai and Nvidia said they plan to collaborate on developing technologies related to self-driving cars, smart factories and robotics, a process that will be powered by 50,000 of Nvidia’s advanced Blackwell GPUs. Speaking to business leaders, Huang highlighted how AI and advanced computing are driving a profound transformation across industries, adding to the need for more infrastructure and capacity. South Korea’s strengths in software, technical expertise and manufacturing give it an edge, he said. “When you combine software, AI technology, and manufacturing, you have the opportunity to really take advantage of robotics,” which is the future of AI, Huang said. Nvidia featured in The President-Xi talks Santa Clara-based Nvidia, whose GPU chips power much of the global AI industry, featured in talks Thursday between The President and Xi in the South Korean city of Busan, where the leaders agreed to take steps to ease their escalating trade war. Following the meeting, The President said he discussed sales of computer chips to China. The President and former President Joe Biden have imposed restrictions on China’s access to the most advanced chips, including those used for AI. The President said China will speak with Nvidia about purchasing their chips, but not the company’s latest Blackwell AI chips. Nvidia has argued that U.S. export controls hinder American competitiveness in one of the world’s largest technology markets and warned that such limits could push other countries toward China’s AI technology. Talking to reporters in South Korea, Huang said he hopes to eventually sell Blackwell chips to China, “but that’s a decision for the president to make.” “We’re always hoping to return to China,” Huang said. “It’s in the best interest of the United States, it’s in the best interests of China. And so I’m hopeful that both governments will arrive at a conclusion someday where Nvidia’s technology could be exported to China.” Huang acknowledged U.S. security concerns about Nvidia technology being used by China’s military but argued that China already has ample AI capabilities, making the use of Nvidia chips for military purposes largely unnecessary. In August, The President announced a deal with Nvidia and AMD, another chipmaker, to lift export controls on sales of advanced chips to China in exchange for a 15% cut of the revenue, despite concerns among national security experts that such chips will end up in the hands of Chinese military and intelligence services. Nvidia earlier this week confirmed that it has become the first $5 trillion company, just three months after the company broke through the $4 trillion mark. The milestone underscores the upheaval driven by the AI craze, widely seen as the biggest technological shift since Apple co-founder Jobs unveiled the first iPhone 18 years ago. But there are also concerns over a potential AI bubble. Officials at the Bank of England warned earlier this month that tech stock prices fueled by the AI boom could collapse, and the head of the International Monetary Fund has issued a similar warning. Huang joins Samsung, Hyundai chiefs for fried chicken and beer Hundreds of people, including reporters, gathered at a restaurant in southern Seoul on Thursday as Huang, dressed casually in a black T-shirt just hours after arriving in South Korea, shared fried chicken and beer with Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Jae-yong and Hyundai Motor Executive Chair Euisun Chung. The tech executives clinked glasses, took bomb shots, and at one point, Huang stepped outside to hand baskets of chicken and fried cheese to the crowd waiting outside. The three later took the stage before hundreds of cheering fans at a nearby gaming festival, where Huang said Korea’s gaming scene aided Nvidia’s early success back when it mainly made graphics cards for gamers. —Kim Tong-Hyung, Associated Press View the full article

AI may be reshaping search, but ads aren’t going away, according to Google VP of Product, Search Robbie Stein. What he’s saying. Asked by Marina Mogilko of Silicon Valley Girl whether Google Ads will go away in the future, Stein replied: “Don’t see them going away.” He added that user behavior is “really expanding” with AI, not shifting away from search. Google is already experimenting with ads inside AI experiences: “And so we started some experiments on ads within AI Mode and within Google AI experiences.” “We’ve been really focused on building great consumer products first and foremost… but I think users are starting to see some ads experiments there, too.” Organic first. AI recommendations aren’t driven by ads inputs, Stein said: “It doesn’t use ads information. This is done entirely with what’s on the web and what’s within Google’s information system.” What’s next. Expect “new and novel ad formats,” but it’s still “early days” and Google is figuring out “how ads might appear in these systems,” Stein said: “We don’t think that there should be any barrier to people finding information. So, if there’s information out there, it should be found. But I think what you’ll find is that there could be new and novel ad formats that if you’re, let’s say, shopping or … doing a house remodel. There’s all kinds of interesting services that could be helpful for you that if we had more information and you could articulate more what you needed. “Hey, I have this kind of wood. These are the kind of contractors I have. This is my constraints. These are the price range. You could give even more fine-tuned recommendations or potential other services that you could consider, or deals that could be more useful to you. Those are all things we’re thinking about. I’d say it’s early days and finalizing kind of how ads might appear in these systems.” Dig deeper: Google briefs brands on AI Mode ads ahead of Q4 rollout Why we care. I doubt most people think Google Ads is going away anytime soon. But it is interesting to know that “new and novel ad formats” are coming – so this will be an area of extreme interest for brands that want to be visible in conversational or multimodal queries. The interview. Google’s AI Search Expert: How to Get Ahead Before AI Changes Everything View the full article

Lyft is shifting its focus to reward the loyalty of its long-term riders, introducing a new initiative called Lyft Cash Rewards, aimed at enhancing the driving experience and creating additional value for its most frequent users. The program comes as Lyft highlights that its riders with over ten years of tenure are more engaged, taking twice as many rides and tipping drivers 20% more often than less seasoned customers. In a push to capitalize on this loyalty, Lyft’s latest program offers a structured rewards system that will provide cash back for rides taken when riders opt for the auto-refill payment method. With percentages ranging from 2% to 5% back on each ride depending on the refill amount, small business owners who frequently utilize rideshare services may find the financial benefits compelling. Taking advantage of Lyft Cash Rewards becomes a straightforward process. By enabling the Lyft Cash auto-refill, riders can set “Lyft Cash” as their default payment method. For every ride paid for with this method, users earn cash back ranging from 2% to 5%, plus additional benefits such as up to $10 in monthly credits for canceled rides and two free upgrades to the more comfortable “Extra Comfort” service. Key Benefits: Financial Incentives: Small businesses that may rely on rides for client meetings or other business engagements can yield significant savings. For instance, a rider opting for a $25 refill level at 2% can potentially earn up to $100 back annually if they take up to 20 rides per month. Enhanced Services: The inclusion of complimentary upgrades and cancellation credits enhances convenience. Business owners would appreciate the added flexibility, allowing for last-minute changes without incurring tight schedules or additional costs. Accessibility and Ease of Use: With the operational details remaining simple, small business owners can integrate this into their routine. They can effortlessly set up the auto-refill and start accruing benefits without a learning curve. However, while the potential for cost savings and improved service is significant, there are considerations for small business owners: Opt-in Limitations: Initially, Lyft Cash Rewards will only be available to 50% of its riders, along with one thousand of its most tenured customers, and all users in the Bay Area. This restrictiveness could mean many potential users might miss out during the pilot launch phase. Impact of Usage Patterns: The value of the rewards is contingent upon how frequently the rider utilizes the service. For small businesses that do not employ rideshare services regularly, it may not yield substantial benefits. Payment Flexibility: Small business owners must evaluate whether committing to Lyft Cash as a primary payment method aligns with their operational cash flow. The expectation to refill regularly may not suit all budget cycles. Lyft’s decision to introduce this program emerges from clear data reflecting the spending patterns of loyal riders. Riders who have been with the service for over a decade are much likelier to dive into the full suite of Lyft’s offerings, from bikeshare programs to charity contributions through their rides. This indicates to small business owners the importance of fostering loyalty and how customer engagement strategies can lead to increased profitability. “Loyal riders are more likely to sign up for the full range of Lyft perks, programs, and features,” said Lyft officials, accentuating how loyalty pays off. They are counting on the new initiative to encourage riders to remain within the Lyft ecosystem. As small business owners assess their transportation needs, they would do well to consider the possible benefits of Lyft Cash Rewards. This initiative not only rewards frequent use but also may influence overall transportation strategy, potentially steering small businesses towards Lyft in favor of alternative rideshare options due to the tangible financial rewards. Interested parties can check their eligibility for the Lyft Cash Rewards program by visiting Lyft’s original announcement and setting up the auto-refill feature to maximize their riding experience with additional rewards. The opportunity for annual savings could strengthen the bottom line for businesses that are often on the go. This article, "Lyft Launches Cash Rewards Program to Benefit Loyal Riders" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Lyft is shifting its focus to reward the loyalty of its long-term riders, introducing a new initiative called Lyft Cash Rewards, aimed at enhancing the driving experience and creating additional value for its most frequent users. The program comes as Lyft highlights that its riders with over ten years of tenure are more engaged, taking twice as many rides and tipping drivers 20% more often than less seasoned customers. In a push to capitalize on this loyalty, Lyft’s latest program offers a structured rewards system that will provide cash back for rides taken when riders opt for the auto-refill payment method. With percentages ranging from 2% to 5% back on each ride depending on the refill amount, small business owners who frequently utilize rideshare services may find the financial benefits compelling. Taking advantage of Lyft Cash Rewards becomes a straightforward process. By enabling the Lyft Cash auto-refill, riders can set “Lyft Cash” as their default payment method. For every ride paid for with this method, users earn cash back ranging from 2% to 5%, plus additional benefits such as up to $10 in monthly credits for canceled rides and two free upgrades to the more comfortable “Extra Comfort” service. Key Benefits: Financial Incentives: Small businesses that may rely on rides for client meetings or other business engagements can yield significant savings. For instance, a rider opting for a $25 refill level at 2% can potentially earn up to $100 back annually if they take up to 20 rides per month. Enhanced Services: The inclusion of complimentary upgrades and cancellation credits enhances convenience. Business owners would appreciate the added flexibility, allowing for last-minute changes without incurring tight schedules or additional costs. Accessibility and Ease of Use: With the operational details remaining simple, small business owners can integrate this into their routine. They can effortlessly set up the auto-refill and start accruing benefits without a learning curve. However, while the potential for cost savings and improved service is significant, there are considerations for small business owners: Opt-in Limitations: Initially, Lyft Cash Rewards will only be available to 50% of its riders, along with one thousand of its most tenured customers, and all users in the Bay Area. This restrictiveness could mean many potential users might miss out during the pilot launch phase. Impact of Usage Patterns: The value of the rewards is contingent upon how frequently the rider utilizes the service. For small businesses that do not employ rideshare services regularly, it may not yield substantial benefits. Payment Flexibility: Small business owners must evaluate whether committing to Lyft Cash as a primary payment method aligns with their operational cash flow. The expectation to refill regularly may not suit all budget cycles. Lyft’s decision to introduce this program emerges from clear data reflecting the spending patterns of loyal riders. Riders who have been with the service for over a decade are much likelier to dive into the full suite of Lyft’s offerings, from bikeshare programs to charity contributions through their rides. This indicates to small business owners the importance of fostering loyalty and how customer engagement strategies can lead to increased profitability. “Loyal riders are more likely to sign up for the full range of Lyft perks, programs, and features,” said Lyft officials, accentuating how loyalty pays off. They are counting on the new initiative to encourage riders to remain within the Lyft ecosystem. As small business owners assess their transportation needs, they would do well to consider the possible benefits of Lyft Cash Rewards. This initiative not only rewards frequent use but also may influence overall transportation strategy, potentially steering small businesses towards Lyft in favor of alternative rideshare options due to the tangible financial rewards. Interested parties can check their eligibility for the Lyft Cash Rewards program by visiting Lyft’s original announcement and setting up the auto-refill feature to maximize their riding experience with additional rewards. The opportunity for annual savings could strengthen the bottom line for businesses that are often on the go. This article, "Lyft Launches Cash Rewards Program to Benefit Loyal Riders" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Firms that want to stay independent must transform how they operate, lead, and plan for succession. Gear Up for Growth With Jean Caragher For CPA Trendlines Go PRO for members-only access to more Jean Marie Caragher. View the full article

Firms that want to stay independent must transform how they operate, lead, and plan for succession. Gear Up for Growth With Jean Caragher For CPA Trendlines Go PRO for members-only access to more Jean Marie Caragher. View the full article

Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web. Google says Google Ads is not going away...View the full article

Apple delivered financial results during its summertime quarter that exceeded analyst projections, despite being caught in the crosshairs of a global trade war at the same time the trendsetting company is scrambling to catch up to its Big Tech peers in the artificial intelligence race. The performance announced Thursday was driven largely by strong initial demand for its iPhone 17 lineup that went on sale last month. Although the iPhone 17 lacks the AI wizardry featured in rival devices recently introduced by Samsung and Google, Apple spruced up its latest models with a redesign highlighted by a sleek “liquid glass” appearance on the display screens. Apple also largely maintained its pricing on its latest iPhones, despite being squeezed by the tariffs that President Donald The President has imposed on the U.S. devices that the company mostly makes in India and China. The tariffs cost Apple $1.1 billion during the past quarter and are expected to cost another $1.4 billion during the final three months of the year. The formula apparently was enough to win over consumers, particularly in the United States and Europe, helping to produce iPhone sales totaling $49 billion during the July-September period, a 6% increase from the same time last year. That was slightly below the 8% jump in iPhone sales that had been anticipated by analysts, and less than the 13% bump in sales during the April-June period. IDC estimates that 58.6 million iPhones were sold worldwide in the July-September quarter, putting Apple second behind Samsung at 61.4 million of their Android-powered phones sold worldwide in the quarter. Buoyed by the iPhone results, Apple earned $27.5 billion, or $1.85 per share, nearly doubling its profit from a year ago. Revenue climbed 8% from a year ago to $102.5 billion. Both the earnings and revenue eclipsed the analyst forecasts that steer the stock market. Apple shares surged 3% in extended trading after the numbers came out. In a conference call with analysts, Apple CEO Tim Cook indicated his belief that the iPhone 17 lineup will continue to do well, predicting even more of the devices will be sold during the final three months of the year. “As we head into the holiday season with our most powerful lineup ever, I couldn’t be more excited for what’s to come,” Cook said. He cited the iPhone 17’s popularity in most parts of the world except China, where sales of the device dipped by 4% from a year ago. The Cupertino, California, company expects its iPhone sales to increase at least 10% from last year’s holiday season, according to projections provided by Apple’s chief financial officer, Kevan Parekh. Total revenue is expected to rise at a similar rate. Apple’s stock has been on a tear since a report earlier this month from the research firm International Data Corp. telegraphed the quarterly results with a preliminary analysis that concluded the company had set a new July-September record for iPhone sales. The rally catapulted Apple’s market value above $4 trillion for the first time earlier this week and now the stage is set for the shares to hit another new high during Friday’s regular trading session. But Apple has been widely seen as a laggard in the AI craze, one of the reasons that Nvidia — a chipmaker whose processors power the technology — became the first company to be valued at $5 trillion earlier this week. Apple had promised a wide array of AI features would be rolling out on last year’s iPhone models, but was only able to deliver a few of them. The missing upgrades included a smarter and more versatile version of its frequently flummoxed Siri virtual assistant – a makeover that Apple now doesn’t expect to complete until next year. But Apple has a long history of late starts when technology starts to head in another direction before it finally catches up and emerges as a front-runner. If Apple can pull it off again by eventually implanting more AI features on the iPhone, Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives believes those breakthroughs could boost the company’s market share by another $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion, translating into $75 to $100 per share. —Michael Liedtke, AP Technology Writer View the full article

Who saw this coming? Bettors, apparently. Coinbase Global, one of the largest crypto exchanges on the market, announced its third-quarter 2025 earnings on Thursday—a relatively benign event by most measures. But it wasn’t the revenue or profit numbers that caught many people’s attention. It was some specific comments and words spoken by CEO and cofounder Brian Armstrong. Armstrong, near the end of Coinbase’s earnings call, squeezed in a last-second barrage of keywords. “I was a little distracted because I was tracking the prediction market about what Coinbase will say on their next earnings call, and I just want to add here the words Bitcoin, Ethereum, blockchain, staking, and Web3 to make sure we get those in before the end of the call.” While that may not have meant a lot to most listeners, Armstrong was actually saying specific words that bettors on prediction markets had wagered he would say. Prediction market bettors on platforms such as Kalshi had made bets that Armstrong or other Coinbase executives would say certain keywords during the call, and up until that point, they had not. So by saying those words at the end of the call, Armstrong handed some bettors a win. That also meant that he handed others a loss. Unorthodox? You bet, but it’s all part of a burgeoning new world where sports betting is legal in many states, and American adults can make online bets on almost anything they’d like—from the outcomes of presidential elections to, in this case, what executives of publicly traded companies will say during an earnings call. While it seems clear that there are going to be a lot of opportunities to rig or manipulate wagers such as these, this is likely the first time that the CEO of a large, public company has gone out of their way to decide the outcome of a wager in such a way. Fast Company has reached out to Coinbase for further comment, but has yet to receive a response. After the call, Armstrong replied via X to say, “lol this was fun—happened spontaneously when someone on our team dropped a link in the chat.” One X user called out exactly what appeared to have happened: “At the end of the Coinbase earnings call today, Brian Armstrong pulled up the mention market and rattled off all the words that weren’t said yet,” summing it up as, “What a wild time to be alive.” Shares of Coinbase (Nasdaq: COIN) were up around 3.5% in early trading on Friday, with the stock up more than 27% year to date. View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication. The JBL Charge 6 is currently available for $169.95 at Walmart, down from its original $199.95. That small drop might not look dramatic on paper, but considering this model only came out recently, it’s one of the better deals you’ll find on a premium portable outdoor speaker. JBL Charge 6 $169.95 at Walmart $199.95 Save $30.00 Get Deal Get Deal $169.95 at Walmart $199.95 Save $30.00 The Charge 6 keeps the same rugged, travel-friendly design JBL’s known for while improving on what made the Charge 5 such a crowd favorite. It’s built for the outdoors—durable enough to survive a few bumps and rated IP68, meaning it’s both dustproof and waterproof. You can drop it in a pool or take it to the beach without worrying about damage. JBL also added a looped handle, which makes it easier to carry from one spot to another. Sound-wise, it’s a noticeable step up from the previous generation. Inside are a 2.1-by-3.7-inch woofer and a 0.8-inch tweeter that combine for 45 watts of power, backed by passive radiators on each end for extra low-end punch. The audio has weight and clarity, and while you won’t get chest-rattling bass, it’s more than enough for a backyard gathering or a long afternoon by the pool, notes this PCMag review. If you want more control, JBL’s seven-band EQ in the companion app gives you plenty of room to tweak the sound to your liking. As for its battery life, the Charge 6 is said to last up to 24 hours on a full charge (depending on usage) and can even double as a power bank for your phone through the USB-C port, which also supports lossless audio when plugged in. Connectivity and features are strong for this size and price. The Charge 6 runs on Bluetooth 5.4 for stable connections and now supports Auracast, a newer broadcast feature that lets you tune into compatible audio streams or sync multiple speakers for group listening. Codec support is limited to AAC and SBC, which may disappoint anyone wanting higher-end audio over Bluetooth, but the wired option partly makes up for that. JBL skipped including a charging brick or cable, which is a letdown for something in this price range. Still, if you’re after a speaker that’s loud, portable, and can handle real-world abuse while sounding great, the Charge 6 fits the bill, and this price makes it even more appealing. Our Best Editor-Vetted Tech Deals Right Now Apple AirPods Pro 2 Noise Cancelling Wireless Earbuds — $169.99 (List Price $249.00) Apple iPad 11" 128GB A16 WiFi Tablet (Blue, 2025) — $299.00 (List Price $349.00) Amazon Fire TV Stick 4K Plus — $29.99 (List Price $49.99) Ring Pan-Tilt Indoor Cam, White with Ring Indoor Cam (2nd Gen), White — $59.99 (List Price $99.99) Blink Video Doorbell Wireless (Newest Model) + Sync Module Core — $29.99 (List Price $69.99) Blink Mini 2 1080p Indoor Security Camera (2-Pack, White) — $27.99 (List Price $69.99) Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 with Ring Chime Pro — $149.99 (List Price $259.99) Introducing Amazon Fire TV 55" Omni Mini-LED Series, QLED 4K UHD smart TV, Dolby Vision IQ, 144hz gaming mode, Ambient Experience, hands-free with Alexa, 2024 release — $699.99 (List Price $819.99) Blink Outdoor 4 1080p 2-Camera Kit With Sync Module Core — $51.99 (List Price $129.99) Deals are selected by our commerce team View the full article

Amazon posted higher fiscal third quarter profit and sales compared with a year ago, fueled by accelerating growth in its cloud computing business and strong spending by its customers looking for low prices at a time when inflation is resurging. The results, announced Thursday, beat Wall Street expectations. The company’s prominent cloud computing arm also surpassed analysts’ expectations, rising 20%. But Amazon issued a cautious sales outlook for the fiscal fourth quarter. Shares, however, soared nearly 13% in after-hours trading. Analysts are analyzing Amazon’s results, along with other retailers’ earnings performances, to get insight into how shoppers are spending heading into the holiday season and how the online behemoth is managing cost increases from President Donald The President’s tariffs. But Amazon, based in Seattle, is also under pressure to shore up confidence among investors that its computing arm Amazon Web Services is just as powerful as Microsoft’s Azure and Google’s Google Cloud platform. Amazon delivered better-than-expected 20% growth for AWS, following a 17.5% growth in the fiscal second quarter. Andy Jassy, president and CEO of Amazon, noted in a statement that AWS is growing at a pace it hasn’t seen since 2022. Last week Amazon grappled with a massive outage of AWS after a problem disrupted internet use around the world for most of the day, taking down a broad range of online services, including social media, gaming, food delivery, streaming and financial platforms. Jassy also noted Amazon is seeing strong momentum and growth across Amazon as artificial intelligence drives “meaningful improvements in every corner of our business.” Jassy also pointed out that in stores, Amazon continues to realize the benefits of innovating in its fulfillment network, and it’s on track to deliver to Prime members at the fastest speeds ever again this year, expand same-day delivery of perishable groceries to over 2,300 communities by end of year, and double the number of rural communities with access to Amazon’s same-day and next-day delivery. Amazon is rapidly automating its warehouses, raising big questions on how many workers it will need in the future. In fact, Amazon announced on Tuesday that it’s cutting about 14,000 corporate jobs as it ramps up spending on artificial intelligence and cuts costs elsewhere. Teams and individuals impacted by the job cuts were notified Tuesday. Amazon has about 350,000 corporate employees and a total workforce of about 1.56 million. The cuts amount to about a 4% reduction in its corporate workforce. Jassy told analysts that the announcement on job cuts wasn’t “really financially driven and it’s not even really AI driven.” “It’s culture,” he said. “And if you grow as fast as we did for several years, the size of businesses, the number of people, the number of locations, the types of businesses you’re in, you end up with a lot more people than what you had before, and you end up with a lot more layers.” Late last month, Amazon unveiled a new robotics system — being tested in South Carolina — for its warehouses that coordinates multiple arms to perform picking, stowing, and consolidating tasks simultaneously. This technology effectively collapses three assembly lines into one, the company said. Amazon is also testing an AI agent that helps human managers deploy workers and avoid bottlenecks. The system allows operators to spend less time analyzing dashboards and more time coaching teams, creating safer work environments, the company said. Amazon’s strategies seem to be powering its latest results. Amazon posted net income of $21.12 billion, or $1.95 per share, for the quarter ended Sept. 30. That’s up from $15.33 billion, or $1.43 per share, a year ago. Analysts had expected $1.57 per share for the quarter, according to FactSet. Amazon’s sales rose to $180.2 billion, up from $158.88 billion in the year ago period. Analysts had expected $177.91 billion, according to FactSet. The number of items that Amazon sold in the latest period increased 11%, the company said. In late July, Jassy touted its more than 2 million sellers in its third-party marketplace, all with different strategies of whether to pass on higher costs to shoppers. He also told analysts that it hadn’t seen “diminishing demand nor prices meaningful appreciating.” Amazon said it expects sales for the fiscal fourth quarter to be in the range of $206 billion to $213 billion. —Anne D’Innocenzio, AP Business Writer View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Prioritizing your to-do list is key to getting everything done. You need to make sure you’re allocating enough time to the difficult and important tasks but saving space for the little ones, too, all while not designating too much time, either. Try the ABC method for categorizing your responsibilities for the day. It's simple to implement and will help you make sense of your to-do lists. What is the ABC method?Categorizing your tasks by need, timeline, and time necessary for completion is important, which is why some people use the Eisenhower matrix and others overload their Google Calendars. These are great methods, but you need to find the right one for you and the work you do. One of the simplest methods you can try was devised by Alan Lakein, an author known for his classic time management books, like How to Get Control of Your Time and Your Life. He suggested assigning priority status in terms of “A,” “B,” and “C” to everything you have to do, with those letters reflecting a hierarchy of importance: “A” items are “must-do” tasks that are important or critical and have close deadlines. “B” tasks are “should-do,” meaning they have a medium level of priority, will be important over time, but don’t have a looming deadline. You should still prioritize them to an extent, since they can evolve into "A" tasks if left unchecked. “C” is for anything that is currently low priority, either because it has few immediate consequences or no near deadline. Determining what is important to do right now and what can wait will help you feel less overwhelmed and figure out what to get cracking on, so you waste less time deliberating about where to even start. How to incorporate this method into your work dayGo through your entire to-do list and start ranking every task as A-, B-, or C-level. Then figure out what you’re going to do with them. I recommend a method like the 3-3-3 technique, which involves three hours of deep work on a big project (one of your A tasks), the completion of three mid-level projects (there are your Bs), and some time left over for the little tasks (your C items). You can also designate full days to certain tasks, especially if your A duties are really demanding. Theming your days helps you stay on-task for hours without worrying about other, less important responsibilities, so consider devoting an entire workday to your A work, the next day to B, and the day after that to C. Just remember to re-evaluate your lettering system every morning or so, since even C-level projects can suddenly turn into ones with A-level urgency. View the full article