ResidentialBusiness

We’re often told to stand up for ourselves, have boundaries, “do you,” and often in the process, frequently encouraged to say “no.” In recent times, we’ve seen entire books and productivity philosophies built around the art of refusal. Saying “no” works well for establishing healthy workplace boundaries and for self-preservation, and many see it as the stamp of a mature professional. The ability to say “no” creates a respectful and safe workplace, helps avoid burnout, and importantly, elevates and empowers individuals. But there is such a thing as saying “no” too often. And as a result, you might miss out on promotions, learning opportunities, and being part of important projects. In the process, your career could stagnate. Identifying boundaries or barriers One of the ways we justify the “no” is by positioning it as a boundary. But not every “no” is a boundary. These false boundaries are obstructive barriers. Instead of protection, they can actually act as an obstruction to growth, quietly and assuredly dismantling opportunities from coming your way. Statements like “I don’t have time” or “I’m too busy,” without an offer of a solution, are hard stops. Using statements habitually can be problematic because it has the potential to send the wrong message to your boss and team. They stop being a reason and start becoming a reputation. We tend to decline specific projects when they appear too challenging or unfamiliar, or when they potentially expose weaknesses. Yet, research supports the idea that discomfort can be a catalyst for growth. Boundaries need to evolve with context. Static boundaries may provide short-term clarity, but dynamic boundaries—those that respond to workload, team goals, and personal value—create sustainability. How saying ‘no’ can impact growth and learning Saying “no” out of fear rather than necessity can cause you to miss out on developing skills, exploring new networks, and having experiences that test your resilience. Studies in developmental and organizational psychology show that growth occurs on the edge of competence, not in the comfort zone. When we say “no” to tasks that feel uncertain or emotionally risky, we shield ourselves from the very friction that sharpens our skills. Neuroscientific studies suggest that novelty and challenge stimulate learning centers in the brain. Research shows that exposure to novel environments can enhance memory consolidation and recall. Additional studies demonstrate that novelty tends to activate the dopamine system, which plays a central role in learning. That stretch project you’re tempted to decline? It may offer more return on investment for your brain than any formal training. Being aware of relational consequences The workplace is a social ecosystem with collaboration and trust built over time. Say “no” too often and you can weaken precious relationships. This can hamper teamwork and connection. To build psychological safety, which is foundational to high-performing teams, you need shared risk and shared effort. When you constantly say “no” without context or care, you inadvertently signal disengagement, which corrodes the very trust high-performing teams rely on. When you display frequent signals of detachment and resistance to take on stretch projects, you run the risk of them seeing you as a “non-participant.” When that happens, others might start to exclude you from influence, advancement, and trust-building. And when colleagues can’t rely on your participation, they inevitably stop including you in pivotal conversations. Saying “yes” is a social cue that communicates engagement, cooperation, and a willingness to be part of the ensemble. The importance of saying ‘yes’ when you don’t want to Sometimes and often in life, we have to do the things we don’t want to do. And at work, it’s no different. Every job has unpalatable aspects. Even the most glamorous of positions. It’s the ying that balances the job’s yang. Accepting that we sometimes have to do things we don’t want to do is part of being a productive member of the workforce and your team. Helping—even when it’s inconvenient—signals credibility and fosters influence across teams. Additionally, reaching long-term goals often means doing things we don’t feel like doing. Too many refusals over time, and others may interpret your “no’s” as disengagement or entitlement. If you’re in a leadership or management role, don’t delegate parts of your job because you don’t like them. You might have the authority to do that, but your team will see through it. Over time, it can erode trust and credibility, two things no leader can afford to lose. Say “yes” if you don’t want to, but only if you’ll benefit from the learning, networking, and development. Say “yes” if it assists a team member, and if it is a critical team and business value. Don’t forget that you might need the favor one day, too. The more people who see your actions, the more influence you have. When should you say ‘no’? Of course, there are times when “no” is the appropriate answer. Saying “no” when saying “yes” would compromise your values, ethics, or professional integrity. Just ensure your claim on values is genuine and not a cosmetic excuse. Otherwise, it risks becoming another false boundary. Say “no” when the cost is too high, when it leads to too much stress and burnout. If you feel burdened and overwhelmed, saying “no” can be a legitimate and smart decision. However, you still need to say it the right way. Knowing when and how to say “no” is a skill. Your “no” should never be a limitation. Saying “no” at work—the right way and for the right reason—should empower, not restrict. Refusal isn’t inherently bad. Quite the opposite, it’s essential. But discernment is key. When you do say “no,” maintain goodwill. It can be a redirection rather than a rejection. You can achieve this by offering an alternate solution. This may mean a change of date, deadline, or part of the task. Follow up to make sure all went well. A well-placed “no” isn’t about shutting things down, it’s about knowing when, where, and how to create the most value. View the full article

When you reach the role of manager in an organization (particularly for the first time), you have often been there a while. Chances are, you’re managing people who had roles like the one you had before you started to supervise others. The rhythms and routines of work are familiar. Despite your feelings of closeness to team members on the front lines, you’re likely to forget three key issues that can hamper your ability to succeed. These factors can be a particular problem when working with people who are new to the organization. Now you’re one of ‘them’ When you become a manager, you don’t feel much different than you did before your promotion. In fact, when you first step into that managerial role, you may feel less confident about going to work and doing your job than you did when you were a successful individual contributor. When you head to work, you’re probably going to see most of the same people you used to work with closely. Only, something is different. You have suddenly gone from being one of “us” to being one of “them.” That’s right—now you’re on the management side of things. You may very well want to be friends with all of your supervisees—particularly because you may have been close to many of them before getting your new role. But, your responsibilities will make it difficult to have the same relationship with the front-line team as you did before, because you also have to give them assignments and evaluate their performance. It’s easy to forget the way you used to view management before you entered into that role. There are big information asymmetries Once you move into a leadership role, you are privy to a lot of information about what is happening across the organization including discussions of strategy and new initiatives. Much of this information isn’t spread to the front lines of the organization, and is often not relevant to the daily work of individual contributors. That means you need to become more effective at talking with people who do not share some of the knowledge you have. You may have to explain more of your references and remind yourself of the likely state of information of the people who report to you. In addition, while I’m not a huge fan of organizational secrets, there are times when you become aware of information that is not supposed to be shared more widely. There are often good strategic reasons for a company to withhold some information from all employees until it can be communicated broadly and with a consistent message. It can be difficult to avoid spilling the beans, but you have to practice having knowledge other people might want to know, but can’t hear yet. New people are still learning A common problem for many people who have developed some expertise is returning to the beginner’s mind. It can be difficult to remember how little you knew before you were steeped in the processes, jargon, and lore of the organization. As a manager, a significant part of your role is coaching new people. That means reminding yourself what it is like not to know anything about how the organization works. Early on, you may find that what’s wrong with new employees is that they do not have basic knowledge of how to do their jobs or how the organization functions. Remember that you probably had no clue how to do your job when you first started. What makes people so smart is not that we come preloaded with lots of understanding of how to do tasks, but rather that we are so effective at learning from others effectively. So, give your newest employees some grace. Give them a chance to adapt to their new environment. Teach a lot. Create a team where people want to let you know all the things they don’t yet understand. It’s much easier to teach someone who owns the gaps in their knowledge than to have to ferret out the holes in your employees’ knowledge that they are reluctant to reveal. View the full article

The hottest thing in meat, these days? Apparently, it’s vegetables. Nectar, a nonprofit research organization dedicated to advancing alternative proteins, released findings last week from a large-scale blind taste test comparing hybrid meat-veggie products with traditional meat. The blended products, which they’re calling “balanced proteins,” are a hit with omnivores—so much so that testers actually preferred some of them to their all-meat counterparts. “The irony is that a burger is a blended product,” says Andrew Arentowicz, CEO & Co-Founder of Both, one of the brands that taste testers in the Nectar survey rated as on-par with comparable all-meat products. “You got lettuce, tomato, onion, cheese, ketchup, mayonnaise, pickles, that’s a burger. So this isn’t some like oh-my-god what a revolutionary concept; it’s actually very obvious, the whole thing.” Perhaps Arentowicz is right that this is a no-brainer, but I do think the study results are impressive, and maybe even a little surprising, given that we aren’t exactly a nation of veggie lovers. Only about one in ten Americans eat the recommended amount of fruit and vegetables. That gap matters—not just for personal health, but for the planet and animals, too. Issues of access, cost, and culture are, of course, factors here, but it can’t be denied that taste is also a concern. No matter how convenient or inexpensive, if people don’t find the healthier and more eco-friendly option to be tasty, they’re going to have a hard time choosing it. And for some people, the taste and texture of vegetables just aren’t appealing. That’s where the whole idea of plant-based meat like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods even came from: People like the taste of animal flesh, but aren’t okay with the health, environmental, and ethical drawbacks, so mission-driven entrepreneurs devised a sort of compromise. But so far, that compromise just hasn’t been good enough to win most people over. “The market identified the right problem, that people want to eat less meat,” says Arentowicz. “But it picked the wrong solution. Nobody asked for more processed plant[-based meat], or more lab-grown meat. So we decided to give consumers what they say they want, which is meat, but less meat.” As someone whose life’s work is devoted to empowering people to reduce their intake of factory farmed animal products, I remain enthusiastic about all forms of alternative protein. After all, it’s not as if any other strategy—including non-tech-food ones like policy and education—have shown great promise in achieving this goal (societal meat consumption is more or less up year over year). But I also welcome the trend of plant-forward products that are chock-full of vegetables, fungi, and/or legumes. For example, DUO’s and Fable’s blended burgers are infused with mushrooms and Perdue’s blended nuggets contain chickpeas and cauliflower—all were rated as tasting better than comparable conventional products. While I wish more people were drawn to vegan options, less meat is less meat, and it could be a pathway to a more plant-forward lifestyle. Crafty parents have been doing it for generations: Trojan-horsing some veggies into their kid’s diet by hiding them in more preferable foods. Some might object to using this kind of “spoonful of sugar” strategy with full-grown human adults—a wife who stealthily buys blended meat for her husband, for example—calling it paternalistic or rolling their eyes at grown-ups who can’t “just eat a vegetable.” But frankly, I don’t see the problem. The reason people have been pulling this trick for ages is because it works—and that’s what matters. Granted, it might not work as well when they know what’s inside. Food aversions can be severe and deeply psychological; for some individuals, just knowing that mushrooms are in a food—even if they’re not obvious—can spark disgust, or worse. And of course, some people are just picky eaters who won’t be sold on a partial-veggie burger. Still, it’s worth a shot, and as the Nectar study shows, taste is on the side of blended meat. The reality is most people aren’t going to hop on the all-kale-all-the-time train. Still, sans a few carnivore-diet shills, everyone knows they should be eating more vegetables. But if you’ve ever met a human being, you know we’re not entirely rational animals. Every smoker knows it would be healthier to quit, but that knowledge doesn’t make it any easier, let alone more enjoyable. A gentler approach, one centered around harm reduction, may be the best way to help some people change their habits. If adding some veggies into a beef patty or chicken nugget is what’s going to get people eating in a way that’s not only better for their own health, but for the climate and the well-being of animals, isn’t that ultimately worth it? Perhaps there doesn’t need to be a binary that pits “alternative” and “traditional” meat as competing products in a zero-sum game for consumer favor. Perhaps embracing balanced proteins could be the solution for brands struggling from the perception of being unhealthy, in these supposedly hyper-“wellness”-conscious times. In fact, 61% of parents Nectar surveyed said they would visit a fast food restaurant more often if it served blended meat. It could be beneficial for people’s health, but it’s also just good business sense. As a society, we probably should be taking a multipronged approach to major issues like public health, environmental protection, and animal welfare. Some people happily subsist on diets made up entirely of plant foods. I salute them. For everyone else, let’s meet them halfway, or even a quarter of the way, at least to start. If people are willing to cut their meat consumption, just by mixing it with some mushrooms, let’s welcome that. The world will be better for it. View the full article

On April 2, in an event he called “Liberation Day,” President Donald The President stood in the White House Rose Garden and announced a long list of reciprocal tariffs his administration planned to impose on trading partners around the world. It would be remembered, he said, as “the day American industry was reborn, the day America’s destiny was reclaimed, and the day that we began to make America wealthy again.” Some small American businesses saw the tariffs much differently. Vestaboard, a five-year-old California startup that makes customizable split-flap displays, looked at the tariffs and decided it had to radically change its business plans. Production of its flagship device, which is manufactured in China and retails for $3,500, was paused, and the company put an indefinite halt on a major R&D effort for a lower-cost product it was banking on to diversify its market. Instead of pursuing an ambitious project, Vestaboard’s CEO and founder Dorrian Porter found his 25-person company scrambling to figure out whether it would have to find another country—and a whole new chain of suppliers and factories—where it could get its products built. “My main thought was, how do I eliminate every risk that’s within our control as a business,” Porter says. “We knew we had to change manufacturers. I couldn’t really eliminate that if we wanted to keep making Vestaboard.” But abandoning the R&D effort—a project that aimed to turn Vestaboard’s train station-inspired fixed width display boards into a modular system of magnetic “bits”—still stung. After The President’s Liberation Day pomp, Porter began to think about how he could still keep his company growing. Vestaboard had just come off its biggest quarter ever, with $3.3 million in sales, but the chaotic rollout of The President’s tariffs made Q2 and beyond almost impossible to predict. For a startup like Vestaboard, which is backed by $15 million from about 200 customers-turned-investors, bracing for an economic storm could only last so long. “That kick-started a process for us to say, well, what can we do with what we have?” says Porter. “What if we didn’t have to change our whole marketing approach to go mass market? If we didn’t have to change our whole software to launch something, what could we do?” In about four weeks, the company came up with a workaround product that hits closer to the lower price point the company had been working toward, while also hewing to its already established supply chain and manufacturing process. The new product is the Vestaboard Note, which is essentially a smaller version of the company’s flagship display, having a grid of 45 characters to the Vestaboard’s 132. Prices start at $899. Porter calls it the “Tariff Edition of a Vestaboard.” Though he acknowledges that making a smaller version of the company’s main product is not exactly a groundbreaking innovation, given the circumstances it does qualify as a creative pivot. It’s also an example of the stifling impact The President’s tariffs have had on small businesses. Creating a new product during a time of such uncertainty meant that Vestaboard had to work around significant limitations. The Vestaboard Note was a feasible concept because it could be produced in almost the same way as the company’s main product. “Our supply chain stays substantially the same, our manufacturing process stays substantially the same, our software stays substantially the same,” says Porter. “[It was] a period of great creativity, trying to live within the constraints of this massive new risk we face as a business.” Much remains unclear about the tariffs for small businesses like Vestaboard, which currently rely on China as a manufacturing partner. The President’s proposed revival of American industry is a pipe dream for companies that actually need to get things manufactured. “The reality is electronics are not buildable in the U.S. at any kind of cost that the consumers are willing to accept,” Porter says. “The supply chain for electronics has been completely built out in China over the last 25 years. You’re now seeing some assembly start to occur in places like Vietnam and other countries, but even in those cases a lot of your electronic components are still going to come from China . . . they are the best in the world at producing things like this.” So, for the time being, Vestaboard will continue to be produced in China. Porter says the company plans to restart production this summer, with both the original Vestaboard and the Vestaboard Note coming from its usual suppliers and manufacturers. The tariff-inspired research the company did into new production options is still in its back pocket, though, with a viable alternative in Southeast Asia. Porter says the company will be watching the evolving state of tariffs to see whether it will need to pull out of China and go with Plan B or a murkier Plan C. “We are still evaluating alternatives that might bring it closer to home, but even in those circumstances, it would most likely not be the United States,” Porter says. View the full article

When Sky Kurtz set out to grow produce in the desert via vertical farming in 2016, laying the groundwork for what became Dubai-based ag-tech startup Pure Harvest Smart Farms, “People thought we were crazy,” he says. “I was fearful, I would never get off the ground.” But Kurtz’s came at a time when the UAE was beginning to take the idea seriously and companies like Pure Harvest began cropping up. Over the past nine years, though, Pure Harvest Farms has become one of the sector’s biggest players. It has raised more than $450 million in funding, according to market analysis company PitchBook, and grows an array of crops that includes tomatoes, green vegetables, and berries in temperature-controlled facilities. With farms strategically located throughout the UAE, the company boasts the capacity to produce over 12 million kilograms of crops annually. Despite the competition, Pure Harvest has distinguished itself as the dominant player in the country’s indoor farming sector. Unlike other ag-tech companies which were designed for temperate climates, Pure Harvest developed technologies specifically built to withstand the harsh climates of the Middle East. Unlike other ag-tech companies that focus on niche produce and cater to premium markets, Pure Harvest sells a wide range of produce and supplies to major supermarket chains across the country. The UAE has rapidly become a global hub for ag-tech innovation, attracting diverse companies from around the world: U.S.-based Plenty plans to open a vertical farm in Abu Dhabi by 2026 whereas AeroFarms launched the world’s largest indoor vertical farm in Abu Dhabi in 2023. As companies from abroad come to the UAE, Pure Harvest is expanding its vision. It’s currently in the midst of raising at least $100 million to expand operations into Singapore, Morocco, and Kuwait, and an initial public offering is possible in the coming years. “I think the world has woken up that the problem that Pure Harvest Smart Farms is solving is acute and it is here now,” Kurtz says. Adapting to the region’s weather Global demand for efficient indoor food production globally is surging, given climate change disrupting traditional agriculture as water sources dry up and temperatures rise. In the United States the Colorado River—responsible for irrigating 15% of the nation’s farmland—is drying up rapidly. Meanwhile, across the Horn of Africa, prolonged droughts are responsible for more than 23 million people experiencing severe hunger. The Middle East, particularly the UAE, experiences brutal heatwaves, with less than 1% of the land suitable for agriculture. This makes the country heavily dependent on food imports, with over 80% of its food coming from abroad. Producing locally not only reduces the costs and carbon emissions associated with transportation but also makes the UAE less reliant on imports. The UAE is making huge strides to advance agri-tech in the country with an ambitious aim to improve hydroponic farming and source 70% of produce from local farms by 2025. This push toward local food production gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic, which severely disrupted global food imports—and what ultimately accelerated Pure Harvest’s success. “When COVID stopped travel, places that relied on the bellies of airplanes to move food around suddenly woke up to the fragility of their food supply chains,” says Kurtz, adding the pandemic prompted governments and markets into supporting agri-tech companies that produce efficiently and locally. Agri-tech companies like Pure Harvest Farms benefit from a unique geographical advantage in the UAE: Around 80% of the world’s population lives within an eight-hour flight of Dubai. This ideal location places them at the heart of a vast consumer base. “You know that expression: ‘skate to where the puck is heading’. We are building a company where the world’s population is growing . . . so we sit in a wonderful market position where there’s huge tailwinds,” says Kurtz. Beyond its strategic location, one key reason Kurtz chose Abu Dhabi as the base for Pure Harvest Smart Farms was his conviction that if the company could succeed in producing food in the “harshest environments in the world,” where temperatures can soar to 125° Fahrenheit, it would prove the credibility and capability of his company to produce food anywhere in the world. With ambitions for worldwide expansion, Kurtz aimed to first prove that the technology could thrive in such extreme conditions. “If you think of the problem of climate affecting food, resource scarcity, water scarcity, what’s worse than the Middle East?” Kurtz says. “I mean, this is literally ground zero.” Another factor making UAE an attractive hub for Pure Harvest was the country’s funding for startups trying to solve the region’s pressing issues. “When I first came out trying to pitch people on, you know, I had a PowerPoint, a pile of dirt and the promise of what we were going to build,” says Kurtz, recalling that initial support came from the Mohammed bin Rashid Innovation Fund, which provided a $1.5 million loan. The Abu Dhabi Investment Office has played a pivotal role by offering significant financial support through grants. Indoor farming’s growing scope Pure Harvest is no longer the only player in indoor farming. It has spearheaded a growing sector that now includes companies like Below Farms, which leverages temperature controlled indoor environments to produce over 120 tonnes of premium mushrooms annually. Below Farms leverages controlled-farming environments in the UAE to grow premium mushrooms in the desert, with a capacity of 120 tonnes annually. Beyond efficiency, Bronte Weir, founder of Below Farms, emphasizes that indoor farming can produce food of superior quality compared to traditional methods. He notes that vegetables start losing their nutrients at an increasing rate after harvest, and when they are exported and consumed days later, they “are not going to be as good as when it’s harvested 100 or 50 kilometers down the road.” Below Farms mushrooms are currently purchased by several fine dining restaurants across the UAE such as Emirates Palace and Atlantis. Mushrooms, in particular, have a short shelf life and are extremely perishable due to their high-water content—which Bronte says makes local production especially advantageous. “We’re harvesting pretty much straight into the kitchen,” he says. At Pure Harvest, the company has has begun getting creative about how to expand its offerings. It has launched a line of all-natural strawberry preserves and tomato sauces, made from surplus seasonal produce, an effort to turn potential food waste into premium products. Kurtz says the company’s growing ambition—and goal of becoming a household brand in the next 50 years—goes hand in hand with responding to the world’s growing need to get creative about farming. “It’s becoming a global dialogue about how are we going to secure the future of food in a world that will have nine and a half billion people,” he says, “that is not making more land, and where water security is now becoming a crisis.” View the full article

Few illustrations have electrified the climate movement more successfully—and globally—than Ed Hawkins’s climate stripes. Since the British climate scientist first published his graphic in 2018, the stripes have been displayed on Times Square billboards, printed on beer cans, splashed across fashion collections, and even woven on a scarf that was worn by the late Pope Francis. The graphic was enshrined as a design object in the Museum of Modern Art’s permanent collection in New York. The problem is, “warming stripes” have only ever shown part of the picture—namely, global average temperatures on the surface of the Earth. But climate change doesn’t stop at the surface. A newly updated version of the stripes now visualizes the impact climate change has had not just on land, but also on our oceans and the atmosphere. Some parts of the new graphic may come as a surprise. The new “Climate Stripes” The new version was developed in collaboration with Ric Williams, a professor in the University of Liverpool’s Department of Earth, Ocean, and Ecological Sciences, alongside other scientists from the University of Liverpool and the U.K. Met Office. The data behind this expanded graphic has existed for years, but it has remained largely unknown to the public. “I got approached by two people saying, ‘What about atmosphere?’ and ‘What about ocean?’ So it was a natural thing to do,” Hawkins says. “We’ve had [these] warming estimates for a long time, but having them all in one graphic is what we’ve managed to do here.” For the ocean portion of the graph, the team drew from a mix of long-term ship-based measurements and the Argo float program, an international network of nearly 4,000 autonomous drifting sensors that measure temperature and salinity across the world’s oceans. Their findings revealed that the ocean has been warming at a rate similar to the atmosphere. That’s because a staggering 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gas emissions is absorbed by the ocean, leading to coral bleaching, mass die-offs of fish, and sea level rise (due to thermal expansion). The atmospheric stripes paint a more complex picture. While the troposphere—the lowest layer of the atmosphere—has been steadily warming, the stratosphere above it has been cooling. That contrast might seem strange, but for Hawkins, it is actually one of the clearest fingerprints of human-caused climate change. Here’s how it works: Carbon dioxide acts like a heat-trapping blanket, warming the lower atmosphere and preventing heat from reaching the upper layers. At the same time, more CO₂ in the stratosphere helps it radiate energy out into space more efficiently, which cools it further. The ozone layer is another factor at play. In the 1970s and ’80s, damage from CFCs (the chemicals once used in things like aerosol sprays and old refrigerators) reduced the amount of solar radiation absorbed in the stratosphere, especially in its lower levels, adding to the cooling. Though the ozone layer has been gradually recovering, thanks to international agreements like the Montreal Protocol, the effect is still visible in the data. For Hawkins, this vertical pattern—warming below, cooling above—is a “very clear signal” that humans are driving it. “Nothing else can explain this change,” he says. The impact of a visual When Hawkins first released his climate stripes, the image was downloaded more than a million times in its first week. There’s no easy way to quantify its impact beyond those downloads, but Hawkins believes it gave people—many of whom may never have engaged with climate science—a visual way to connect with the data. “My local football team in Reading used stripes on their kit for a season,” he says. The updated graphic is more complex and unlikely to go viral in quite the same way, but Hawkins believes it’s a crucial tool for more informed audiences. “That’s the key,” he says. “We need a range of ways of communicating, verbally as well as visually, to different audiences, depending on their level of expertise.” He might also need a new range of colors. When 2024 was confirmed as the hottest year on record—surpassing even the record-breaking heat of 2023—Hawkins had to update the visual to include a new, darker red stripe that appears almost black. If temperatures continue to rise over the next few years—as scientists expect they will—he may have to redesign the entire visual scale. “I have painted myself into a corner,” he says. The scientist anticipates having to rescale the entire graphic to reflect a broader temperature range. “That’s a message in itself,” he adds. View the full article

The Google co-founder explains that search is shifting from link retrieval to AI-powered synthesis of information. The post Google’s Sergey Brin Says AI Can Synthesize Top 1,000 Search Results appeared first on Search Engine Journal. View the full article

Companies are spending more than $65 billion globally on corporate wellness, offering everything from meditation rooms and resilience webinars to nap pods and self-help apps. Projections suggest this market will exceed $100 billion by 2032. And yet burnout is worse than ever. Post-pandemic, 77% of U.S. employees report experiencing workplace stress, according to the American Psychological Association, and 82% say they’re at risk of burnout. Experts blame collaboration overload, digital fatigue, and blurred work-life boundaries. Even artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT, intended to streamline work, can amplify pressure by raising expectations for speed and output. This disconnect exposes a hard truth: More wellness spending doesn’t mean better employee well-being. If anything, it masks the root of the problem. The Corporate Wellness Paradox The more companies invest in wellness, the worse employees seem to feel. Is wellness spending the cause of burnout? Probably not. But it’s clearly not preventing it either. So why are both rising in tandem? 1. Wellness as a deflection, not a solution. The 10 most dangerous words in business: Burnout is an organizational problem that needs an organizational solution. Too often, companies outsource that responsibility—handing out mindfulness apps rather than asking why employees need them in the first place. Like blaming the canary instead of clearing the toxic mine, we focus on individual resilience instead of fixing the system. 2. Perks that miss the point. Wellness perks like yoga sessions sound good, but they don’t address what’s actually broken: unsustainable workloads, poor management, lack of autonomy, and toxic cultures. These programs treat symptoms, not causes. It’s like handing out umbrellas in a flood and calling it disaster relief. 3. Branding over behavior. Wellness is often treated as a recruitment asset—front and center in job postings and Mental Health Awareness Month campaigns, but rarely integrated into how work actually gets done. If wellness isn’t embedded in deadlines, resourcing, and manager training, it won’t move the needle. The result? While 81% of employers say their well-being programs are effective, 61% of employees disagree. That gap signals a deeper issue: performative wellness that looks good on paper but fails in practice. 4. The illusion of progress. Companies often equate the presence of wellness programs with progress. But few measure what matters: burnout rates, psychological safety, and team performance. When wellness becomes symbolic, it can obscure the deeper structural problems driving stress. How Companies Can Improve Their Workplace Wellness Programs If traditional wellness programs aren’t solving the problem, what will? Start by shifting from symbolic gestures to structural change. The most effective strategies don’t focus on fixing individuals—they fix the systems creating burnout in the first place. Here are five ways to start. 1. Measure what matters. Don’t confuse participation with impact. It’s one thing to track completion rates; it’s another to measure real behavioral outcomes. Metrics like absenteeism, turnover, psychological safety, and employee net promoter scores offer a far clearer picture of employee well-being than satisfaction surveys ever could. 2. Ask better, validated questions. Move beyond generic surveys. Use research-backed questions from sources like Mental Health America, having employees rate statements such as: My work stress affects my mental health. My manager provides emotional support to help me manage my stress. These surveys reveal insights about workload, leadership, and organizational culture—three of the strongest predictors of workplace mental health. 3. Rethink ROI. The best wellness investments aren’t flashy—they’re foundational. Fair compensation, job security, schedule flexibility, and a culture of respect aren’t perks; they’re prerequisites for a healthy, high-performing workplace—and exactly what workers want. These elements do more to buffer against chronic stress than any app or wellness challenge ever could. 4. Train managers as mental health allies. People don’t leave jobs—they leave bad bosses. Train leaders to recognize burnout, normalize open conversations, and model healthy boundaries. Research shows managers influence employee mental health more than therapists. That’s a leadership skill companies can’t afford to ignore. 5. Design work differently. Instead of pushing employees to “build resilience,” ask how your organization might reduce the need for it. Redesign roles, expectations, and collaboration norms to create environments in which people don’t have to constantly recover from their jobs. We Don’t Need More Wellness Programs—We Need Better Workplaces If companies frame wellness as a benefit instead of a responsibility, they’ll keep spending billions while burnout grows. The real opportunity isn’t in launching the next app or hosting another webinar. It’s in rethinking how we design work itself. View the full article

Kelly Krasner was always interested in healthcare, but losing both parents to cancer when she was 24 reinforced what she thought would be a lifelong calling. After spending 13 years helping hospitals integrate more cancer screening and diagnosis technologies as a radiology sales and marketing director, Krasner spent six more working at various healthcare technology startups. When her company downsized and she lost her job in 2023, however, Krasner said it felt nearly impossible to get back into the industry. “I was applying and applying, and unfortunately—perhaps because of my age, my status, or people thinking I had to have a high title or a high income—I just wasn’t getting the roles,” she says. “I was okay with less money. I wasn’t really interested in the title. I was just interested in making a difference.” After nearly a year searching for a role in the industry in which she had spent almost two decades, Krasner, who had juggled small side ventures throughout her career, decided to try something completely different. “I had been thinking about [launching a] mowing company for a while. I just never really thought it would be something I would do,” says Krasner, who founded SeaWeeds Mow Co. in her coastal community near Wilmington, North Carolina, in early 2024. “We offer affordable lawn care, painting, and interior care, and always give back to our community. We adopt sea turtles that have been rescued from injury or illness and help the sea turtle hospital take care of them.” Though the new business doesn’t pay nearly as much as her previous roles, Krasner says it’s proven more gratifying in other ways. “I really love being outside. I love growing it with my family; the people I’ve met have just been incredible,” she says. “It’s probably the most rewarding thing I’ve done.” Why blue-collar roles are booming A four-year degree and desk job was long considered the most direct path to stable employment with strong career and wage-growth potential. But recent shifts in the U.S. workforce are causing some people, like Krasner, to question whether that remains true. In fact, surveys have found interest in blue-collar work is growing, especially among young Americans, thanks to strong demand for talent and the skyrocketing cost of a four-year degree. As job opportunities, career mobility, and wage-growth opportunities slow among knowledge worker roles, other sectors—especially those that were hardest hit during the pandemic, like hospitality, food services, and healthcare—are experiencing historic staffing shortages, causing many to offer more aggressive salary increases. According to a 2024 report by McKinsey Global Institute, advanced economies like the United States have been facing the tightest labor market in nearly two decades, but historically high staffing shortages have persisted in certain key sectors. “It was much more the physical and manual type of work that had shown increases in vacancies,” says McKinsey Global Institute Partner Anu Madgavkar, who coauthored the report. Some of the sectors facing the largest staffing gaps, according to Madgavkar, include construction, manufacturing, leisure and hospitality, and hands-on healthcare roles like home health aides. One of the driving forces behind the shortage is America’s aging population, which is increasing the demand for (and reducing the supply of) workers in physically demanding roles. “Older people spend a lot more on healthcare services, on housing and utilities—especially in the U.S., where a large percentage actually own their homes, and many take on home improvements [in retirement]—and they need those physical skills,” Madgavkar says. “On the supply side of the story, you have fewer younger able-bodied people, and younger people also have higher rates of college enrollment, as more aspire to be in white-collar jobs than their parents.” The white-collar recession The growing demand for workers in physically intensive professions has coincided with a recent stagnation in job opportunities in the knowledge economy. Economic uncertainty, AI fears, and a deterioration in the pay premium that previously came with switching jobs has inspired more Americans to hang onto their jobs for longer, especially in knowledge economy roles, in what is sometimes referred to as the “Big Stay.” Analyst and author Josh Bersin instead labels it a “white-collar recession.” “Most of the white-collar workers I talk to are sticking with their jobs because they’re afraid of leaving,” he says. “And then when I talk to employers, there’s this massive, almost unanimous trend towards finding AI tools that can reduce the number of people they need to hire.” Bersin points to numerous studies that show that job growth opportunities for those with a four-year degree are stalling, while IT spending—especially on generative AI tools—is increasing. “I think a lot of the slowdown in hiring is just budget shifting towards automation,” he says. “Not necessarily replacing every job . . . but instead of hiring three more people, we should hire two more people, or one more person—and invest in this new tool.” Whether the technology is truly capable of replacing knowledge workers at this early stage is still up for debate, but Bersin says vendors are advertising their AI solutions as productivity enhancements, inspiring some employers to adjust their payroll budgets accordingly. In contrast, he says, “you look at nurses, you look at truck drivers, you look at blue-collar workers, you look at restaurant workers, you look at hospitality workers—there’s not enough of them,” he says. While technology is still displacing workers in manufacturing, construction, and other labor-intensive industries, Bersin says technology-driven workforce reductions in those sectors likely peaked years ago. “That hasn’t happened in white-collar work yet, so we’re in the painful stage of companies figuring out what this is going to look like, and that hurts when you’re the one in the job that they don’t need anymore,” he adds. “We’ve sort of flipped the narrative in the job market; the people that are the most nervous are the people that are more educated and more administrative in their roles, and the operational people—the hands-on jobs, the more hourly work—are the ones that are [in demand].” Does it really pay to switch collars? While increases to hourly earnings for more educated workers have remained relatively flat since the pandemic, those in more manual roles have experienced historic growth, according to a recent study by the Economic Policy Institute. That’s especially true among workers at the lowest end of the wage spectrum, Black workers and less educated workers. According to the study, hourly wages for the bottom 10% of earners grew 15.3% between 2019 and 2024, after that same cohort saw their wages shrink by 2.1% in the five years between 2007 and 2012. By comparison, workers at the highest end of the salary spectrum saw a more modest 6.8% pay bump between 2019 and 2024, while those in 50th to 80th percentiles saw their earnings grow less than 5%, once adjusted for inflation. “Wage growth for workers with lower levels of educational attainment has actually been much faster over the most recent period than it has for much of the prior 40 years,” says Economic Policy Institute senior economist Elise Gould, who coauthored the report. “The wage growth for somebody with a bachelor’s degree or more, that’s been pretty consistently solid for a long time. It’s just most recently been eclipsed.” While wages are rising faster among less educated workers, Gould emphasizes that there is still a significant pay gap between those with and without a four-year degree. Those without the credential earn an average of roughly $20 per hour, while those with a bachelor’s degree or higher average $37 per hour. Since 2019, both groups have seen average hourly wages increase by roughly an inflation-adjusted $1 per hour; however, that dollar represents a much more significant percentage increase for those earning less. “That slower wage growth [among higher earners] could have also been because there were some other benefits white-collar workers were able to negotiate in lieu of faster wage growth, like working from home,” Gould says. Not just a paycheck Workers with less educational attainment and in more manual roles may be experiencing greater demand, more career stability, and faster wage growth, but the data suggests knowledge workers are still commanding significantly higher salaries. At the same time, career instability, AI anxiety, and relatively stagnant wages have made knowledge work more precarious than it has been in generations, leading some—like Krasner—to seek more stable and potentially fulfilling opportunities doing more manual work. “It’s not as much of a fight for my life against AI out there in the field,” she says. “While it can mow lawns, believe it or not, it’s not something I’m afraid to lose my job to at this point.” Though her career pivot has required some lifestyle adjustments, Krasner says the transition has also inspired a different outlook on work and the role it plays in her life. “Once you get back to being human again and feeling the sunshine and the fresh air and being tired at night from doing something that actually matters, it really does change your perspective,” she says. “It’s not easy—this [is] a major financial change for me . . . but when I am done at the end of the day, I’ve never been happier.” View the full article

In my work, I frequently observe teams whose purpose is to provide top-level service fall into frustration with their inability to deliver. With stress coming from a lack of support from their workplace’s practices, communication, or training, I can empathize. Studies find that workplace burnout is at unprecedented levels, and with layoffs forcing workers to handle multiple roles, emotionally exhausted teams deserve support to carry on. With frustrated customers being redirected to apps, endless hold times, or inadequate self-service forums that can’t address complex problems, we need solid teams to help us with our customer-facing problems. When trapped in bureaucratic dysfunction, even high-performing teams feel defeated by their inability to create solutions. Despite advanced technologies, research shows employees spend significant time frustrated by organizational processes and policies that block their progress. And when customers experience these stall-outs, it translates to sinking loyalty and profits. Why Workplace Productivity Is Falling In fact, a recent study from Gallup found the average knowledge worker spends nearly 10 hours each week navigating internal processes and bureaucracy, which translates to 25% of their total workweek. Referred to as the “productivity tax,” these findings revealed that 77% of employees report differing levels of frustration with organizational barriers; only 23% feel organizational procedures support employee productivity. It’s not just employees that are discouraged. Larger enterprises lose up to $15 million annually per 1,000 employees due to process inefficiencies and bureaucratic friction. That’s not to mention the emotional tolls employees suffer—like spikes in anxiety and cortisol levels—from handling angry customers. The result: sagging motivation to keep trying to make progress, often culminating in a sense of defeat by the very systems that are supposed to help employees complete their work. How can teams exhausted from these experiences stay agile to spark the needed innovative work-arounds that will solve customer and morale problems quickly? Three proven strategies can give teams the needed momentum to not give up. A Stressed Team on the Frustration Threshold At her bank, Sara’s team struggled with routine foreign account payments for premium clients. The process required verbal approval from the account holder plus two digital approvals, making it cumbersome for busy executives who often confirmed without reviewing transactions. “Multimillion-dollar transfers disappeared for days. Some accounts experienced bounce-backs weeks later due to system errors,” one banking team member said. Yet Sara’s team always cited the same reasons as the source of their stall-outs: The Dodd-Frank Act requirements for international transfers leave us no options to do better. For years, multistep confirmations have been used by banks, exacerbating banking client’s frustrations. Already wasting thousands of dollars in lost time, the team asked a key question: Why is transferring the same amount, to the same account, on the same day each month so complicated? Interrupting the Team Frustration Pattern The breakthrough came not from accepting established limitations, but from three key elements working in concert. 1. Identifying the right people. The team-based resolution accelerated three essential perspectives from a small team of the right people close to the problem: A customer with a problem, perplexed by a seemingly simple task, asking the question, “Isn’t there a better way by now?” An operations specialist with deep systems knowledge A customer service representative willing to dig deeper into the maze of systems to check assumptions and ask, “What’s missing in order to do this?” All parties unwilling to accept the answer, “Sorry, that’s just how it works.” This combination provided the authority, expertise, and motivation needed to pursue nonstandard solutions. 2. Safely asking the same question differently (and repeatedly). Returning to one fundamental question, and reframing it in a psychologically safe way, the solution came from a practice referred to as shifting frames, coupled with not accepting explanations about regulations and international banking protocols. “There must be a better way. What are we missing?” This refusal to normalize inefficiency eventually cracked the case. After hearing the same question framed slightly differently multiple times, the customer service representative looped in an operations specialist who recognized, “Wait—is this account a certain type? Because if so . . .” The aha moment came not from new information, but from seeing existing information through a different lens—precisely because they refused to stop questioning. 3. Problem-solving collaboratively with a shared goal. What made this experience remarkable wasn’t that one person found the solution. Rather, it was how three people—frustrated but committed to finding an answer—worked together with increasing focus. The answer that the customer had received for nearly six months from other banking team members transformed into “How can we make this work?”—reframed from explaining why it wouldn’t. The Breakthrough Formula The resolution revealed a repeatable formula for breaking through frustrating problems: Persistence + Right People + Questioning Assumptions = Breakthrough Solutions. This approach works because it addresses the three common failure points in problem-solving: Giving up too soon. Most teams stop at the first or second “no,” never reaching the insight that comes after sustained effort. Involving the wrong people. Problems often stall because the people with the expertise, authority, or motivation to solve them aren’t in the conversation. Accepting false constraints. Teams frequently operate within imagined limitations, never questioning whether the rules that appear to block progress actually apply to their specific situation. So how can you apply these principles to your own seemingly intractable problems? Create psychological safety around persistent questioning. The most valuable question wasn’t the first or second asking about alternatives—it was the fifth. Eliminate fear by creating an environment in which people feel comfortable asking the same fundamental questions repeatedly, knowing that breakthrough insights often emerge from persistent inquiry. Bring multiple expertise levels to stubborn problems. While the banking example is a simple one, it’s also one many can relate to. The long-standing issue wasn’t solved by a single technical specialist, frontline employee, or customer pressure. It required the combination of all three perspectives. Focus on the desired outcome, not the process. “Throughout the team’s interactions, focus was maintained on the end goal (completing the transaction) rather than debating the merits of existing processes,” Sara explained. This orientation prevented the team from getting lost in explaining why things weren’t working and kept them searching for how they could find a solution. The Payoff of Productive Persistence The difference between problems that linger forever and those that get solved quickly often comes down to how teams approach the frustration threshold. Average teams give up when initial solutions fail. Exceptional teams recognize that the moment of greatest frustration often precedes the breakthrough. By assembling the right people, maintaining persistent questioning, and collaborating with a solution focus, even the most frustrating bureaucratic tangles can unravel—revealing pathways that were available all along, just waiting for the right combination of perspectives to discover them. This isn’t just about banking transactions or customer service. It’s a fundamental approach to organizational effectiveness that transforms frustration from a signal to give up into a signal to dig deeper, ask better questions, and find the people who can help you see the problem differently. In 2025 and beyond, the competitive advantage belongs not to organizations with perfect processes, but to those with teams who excel at breaking through barriers when those processes inevitably fail. View the full article

Finance ministry survey appears designed to confirm that demand for super long-dated JGBs is lowView the full article

Fast Company explores the complicated truth about the effect social media has on this generation’s teen population. View the full article

Well over a decade on from its initial launch, it’s safe to say that Google Glass was not a success. While the product had some forward-thinking ideas, it’s generally not a good sign when your product leads to the coinage of a brand-new insult. The design was off-putting and the technology wasn’t ready—and neither was society. Today, things are a little different. Meta and Ray-Ban’s smart glasses are a hit, despite offering the same camera capabilities that turned so many off Google Glass in the first place. It helps, of course, that they just look like normal Ray-Bans. So for Google’s second swing at the product category, it’s focusing on design and functionality. At its I/O keynote this week, Google’s XR VP Shahram Izadi gave a snappy but convincing demonstration of how the company plans to attack the form factor this time around. Android apps and Gemini While Google’s glasses strategy falls under Android XR, the same operating system powering Samsung’s upcoming Vision Pro competitor, it made sure to emphasize that the platform will appear in different forms on a range of hardware. “We believe there’s not a one size fits all for XR, and you’ll use different devices throughout your day,” Izadi said, noting that an immersive headset like Samsung’s is better suited to movies or games, while lightweight glasses are designed for on-the-go use as a complement to a phone. The connecting thread between the form factors is Android apps and Gemini. Google says it’s adapting its own apps like Maps, Photos, and YouTube for XR, while mobile and tablet apps will work as well—although presumably not on glasses, unless they get some significant updates from developers. A multi-device future The Gemini AI assistant, meanwhile, ought to work seamlessly across both headsets and glasses. Elsewhere at I/O, Google placed an emphasis on how Gemini will benefit when you share more personal information, which positions it well for a multi-device future—including the phone. Meta, of course, will have something to say about that after recently converting its Ray-Ban companion app into a more general app for Meta AI. The standard spec for Android XR glasses covers devices with and without an in-lens screen. Google didn’t go into details about the display technology involved, but it’s the most obvious path to a functional improvement over the current Meta Ray-Bans. Lately I’ve been using Gemini with Google’s Pixel Buds Pro 2—supposedly “built for Gemini AI”—and while it works well for what it is, I think AI chat interfaces are a lot less compelling when you can’t read the responses. Beyond Gemini, the ability to see notifications, Maps directions and real-time language translations could make a huge difference to the smart glasses experience. Design Partners Design is obviously critical to any wearable technology, and Meta made a strong move by tying up dominant eyewear company EssilorLuxottica—parent of Ray-Ban and many other brands—to a long-term partnership. The Meta Ray-Bans would not be anywhere near as popular if they weren’t Ray-Bans. In response, Google has partnered with U.S. retailer Warby Parker and hip South Korean brand Gentle Monster for the initial batch of Android XR glasses. No actual designs have been shown off yet, and it’ll be hard to compete with the ubiquitous Wayfarer, but the announcement should ensure a solid range of frames that people will actually want to wear. Google is also working with AR company Xreal on a pair of developer-focused XR glasses called Project Aura. Xreal is a leader in the nascent space for smart glasses; I’ve been using its Air 2 glasses for a while and have found them to be great for watching movies or extending a MacBook display on the go. Project Aura is intended to be more capable than the first set of display-equipped Android XR devices that hit the market—it’ll hook up to an external processing puck that handles computational tasks. Xreal ‘Normal glasses’ Google cofounder Sergey Brin weighed in on the company’s past ventures into glasses in an I/O interview with Alex Kantrowitz’s Big Technology Podcast this week. “I learned a lot,” he said. “Definitely feel like I made a lot of mistakes with Google Glass, I’ll be honest. I’m still a big believer in the form factor, so I’m glad we have it now. And now it looks like normal glasses and doesn’t have the thing in front.” Beyond the form factor, Brin pointed to the rise of AI as a game changer for smart glasses capability, allowing them to “help you out without constantly distracting you.” He also noted that this time Google is working with hardware partners rather than attempting to wrangle efficient manufacturing by itself. Compelling and deliverable Overall, Google’s take on Android XR for glasses looks pretty compelling at this stage—but more importantly, it feels deliverable. It’s still early, of course, and lifestyle products like this aren’t necessarily well-suited to keynote demonstrations. But as someone who uses Meta Ray-Ban and Xreal glasses regularly, it isn’t hard to imagine a world in which Android XR glasses are ultimately able to combine the best qualities of both. Now Google has to execute on the design and the software. View the full article

Meghan carries many titles these days. Besides being the Duchess of Sussex, she’s a podcaster, a philanthropist, a children’s book author, the star of a Netflix show, and the founder of a direct-to-consumer startup. But when I sit down to speak with her, she says she’s recently taken on a new role: that of Tooth Fairy. Archie, her 6-year-old son, recently lost his first tooth. Meghan rushed home to ensure she could be the one to leave a little money and a small dinosaur under his pillow. At 2 a.m., Archie woke Meghan up excitedly to tell her what had happened. “I had a lot of business meetings the next morning, but I still chose to cuddle with him the rest of the night,” she says. “Those mom moments energize me to be a better founder, a better employer, a better boss.” These are the kinds of work life details that Meghan likes to get into in her podcast series, Confessions of a Female Founder, made with the production company Lemonada Media (which is also behind podcasts by Sarah Silverman and David Duchovny, among others). It has had more than 800,000 downloads since its April launch. On the show, Meghan talks with female founders about the origins of their business, along the lines of Guy Raz’s How I Built This. But the show also has another dimension: It allows Meghan to get practical advice about launching her own lifestyle brand, As Ever. “I’m pulling back the curtain to allow people to see the candid experience of being a founder,” Meghan says. In the eight-part series, she’s spoken to guests ranging from Bumble’s Whitney Wolfe Herd to Kitsch’s Cassandra Thurswell. The finale, released May 27, features Sara Blakely, founder of Spanx and Sneex. Sara Blakely A Pioneering Netflix Deal In her conversation with Blakely, Meghan talks about how she partnered with Netflix to create As Ever, her new brand, which launched in February. The line included products like tea, jams, honey, cookie mixes, and her iconic “flower sprinkles,” which are edible flower petals that spruce up dishes (priced between $9 and $28). Over the past few years, even as Netflix’s subscriber numbers have continued to show impressive growth (it added 18.91 million subscribers, a year-over-year increase of 15.9%, in the fourth quarter of 2024), it has also been exploring how it can create products tied to the content of shows. The streaming service now has an online shop that sells everything from cosplay costumes for Squid Game to Stranger Things bomber jackets. With Bridgerton, one of Netflix’s biggest hits, the streaming service produced its own products, like coffee mugs, but also licensed Bridgerton branding to other companies, like Hill House Home and Selkie, to produce dresses. Meghan says that she had been exploring various ways of launching a business when Bela Bajaria, Netflix’s chief content officer, approached her. “At the time, I had been working towards building out my own in-house team,” Meghan says. “But I had a complete U-turn because I completely bought into the vision she was sharing, which is where content and commerce meet, not in a product placement way, but rather in an ideological way.” In many ways, this is a pioneering partnership for Netflix. Along with Meghan, the Netflix team decided that it made sense for As Ever to exists on its own, without any Netflix branding. This is why the line isn’t called, “With Love, Meghan,” like the show. “The brand is in the same universe at the show, but they’re not the same,” Meghan says. Meghan also points out that Netflix is not just a financial backer. The company’s consumer packaged goods team works closely with Meghan’s team to manufacture the products. “We are on calls daily, working through product development, SKUs, and inventory,” she says. “We have a field trip tomorrow to look at different manufacturers and suppliers as we expand the brand.” What Comes Next for As Ever As Ever’s first collection was a runaway success. Meghan says that even though the team spent a year preparing the line and forecasting demand, all the products on the site sold out in 45 minutes. Now, they’re trying to plan As Ever’s next phase. The easiest thing to do would have been to simply restock the products, which would likely sell out very quickly again. But instead, Meghan wants to take a step back, gather data from the launch, and figure out exactly what As Ever could be. She says she’s planning to announce new products in the first quarter of 2026. There are some clues about what new items might be in the pipeline. Meghan’s trademark application for her brand includes things like cookbooks, tableware, cutlery, and serving ware. “I want to really focus on the hospitality angle of As Ever, but as we take the learnings, we can understand what the customer’s needs are seasonally,” she says. There are now many models for successful celebrity brands. As Meghan contemplates what comes next, there are many directions she could go, from focusing on a single product category, like Selena Gomez’s Rare Beauty and Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS, to a broader play, like Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop and Jessica Alba’s The Honest Company. But for now, she believes it makes sense to build a brand around a single idea. “My heart is very deeply in my home,” she says. “Everything comes from being rooted in the love story of your home and garden, and then you can imagine different verticals coming out of that.” In the future, though, the sky’s the limit. I ask whether she might explore a clothing business, since many women are drawn to her personal style. “The category of fashion is something I will explore at a later date, because I do think that’s an interesting space for me,” she says. As she continues building As Ever, there’s a good chance we’ll hear about her twists and turns through through a podcast. There’s interest in doing a second season of Confessions of a Female Founder, and many female founders have approached her to be a guest on the series. But Meghan is now involved in such a wide range of projects, she’s sure to find some way to tell her story. “If I had to write a résumé, I don’t know what I would call myself,” she says. “I think it speaks to this chapter many of us find ourselves in, where none of us are one note. But I believe all the notes I am playing are part of the same song.” View the full article

Keyboard shortcuts are efficiency’s greatest secret weapon. Yes, they can take a bit to learn and yes, sometimes you’ve got to—gasp!—take your hand off your mouse to reach all the keys. But man, oh man, once you’ve mastered the best ones, you’ll wonder how you ever lived without them. If you want to navigate Windows 11 faster, work smarter, and minimize unnecessary clicks, these are the 10 shortcuts worth memorizing. Alt + Tab: Switch Between Open Apps As far as most shortcut experts are concerned, this is the Windows shortcut to rule all shortcuts. This venerable classic lets you cycle through open applications with ease. Hold Alt and tap Tab to jump between the windows you’ve got open. It’s perfect for multitasking without losing momentum. Win + E: Open File Explorer Instantly No more hunting for the File Explorer icon: just press Win + E, and all your files are right there. Whether you’re accessing documents, downloads, or external drives, this shortcut is a must-learn. Win + D: Show the Desktop I’m not ashamed to admit that sometimes I have so many projects going at once that I get overwhelmed by my own mess of windows, apps, and settings. Sometimes you just need a clean slate, you know? Press Win + D, and all your open windows will minimize, revealing the desktop instantly. Take a breath, and then tap it again to restore everything right where you left it. Win + V: Access Clipboard History Something of a dark horse in the handy shortcuts competition: Ever copied something only to lose it moments later? Win + V saves the day by opening the Clipboard history, allowing you to retrieve text or images you’ve copied earlier. Alt + Spacebar: Open Copilot Now for a relative newcomer. For quick assistance, answers, and creative ideas, Alt + Spacebar launches a little Copilot search box, making it easy to get help directly within Windows. Use it to look stuff up on the web, launch programs, or open folders, all with a quick keyboard combo. Win + I: Open Settings Tired of digging through menus just to get to Settings? Why did they bury it so deep?! Press Win + I to open Settings instantly, letting you tweak stuff much more quickly than navigating there by mouse. Win + Shift + S: Take a Screenshot When you need to capture something on your screen, the excellent Snipping Tool is your best friend. Win + Shift + S opens it, letting you select and save any part of your display. Ctrl + Shift + Esc: Open Task Manager Slow? Laggy? Chugging along? Keep tabs on your system performance by pressing Ctrl + Shift + Esc. This shortcut opens Task Manager immediately, letting you manage RAM-hogging apps and CPU-taxing processes with ease. Win + L: Lock Your Computer This one’s especially handy for those of you who’ve been summoned back to the office. When you step away from your desk, pressing Win + L locks your screen instantly, securing your work and keeping prying eyes out. Win + Period (.) or Win + Semicolon (;): Open Emoji Panel Here’s one for the youths out there. Spice up your messages with emojis and GIFs. Press Win + . or Win + ; to open the emoji panel and add some flair to your messages. View the full article

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go… 1. Manager husband is cheating with a much younger employee A very dear friend of mine has recently learned that her husband/partner of 10 years has been cheating on her. They work together, in different departments but with some overlap, and everyone at work knew that they were married with children. Her husband is 31 years old and a manager, the affair partner is 20-21 and a junior staff member on his team. He has been scheduling them on late shifts together in order to facilitate the affair. He has decided to continue the relationship with the affair partner rather than pursue marriage counselling or reconciliation. My friend is job searching, but in the interim her performance is suffering because she regularly has to see her estranged husband and his affair partner at work. He has told some of their coworkers about the separation but obviously has not disclosed the details, and he and the affair partner have not made their relationship public. My friend is crushed and humiliated and is just trying to push through it, but I think her managers need to be told about the concerning nature of a manager starting a relationship with a direct report 10 years their junior, affair or not. As a manager, would you want to know the full context of this situation? Hell yes. It’s a serious breach of ethics (and usually company policy) to have an affair with someone you supervise, and it opens the company to legal liability as well. That said, your friend might have her own reasons for not reporting it. She might know enough about her company to know that too much of the fall-out would land on her, or she might have children and wants her ex to keep his job in order to keep financially supporting them, or all sorts of other things. You can encourage her to consider disclosing it, and you can point out that most companies would want to know and would take it seriously because of the legal liability, but in the end it should be up to her. If she doesn’t want to, it’s her call (and definitely not one you should make for her). Related: my manager and coworker are divorcing their spouses and secretly dating 2. My employee has terrible attendance issues … in this economy? I have an employee with terrible ongoing attendance issues — not calling in when he’s going to be late, not calling in when he’s going to be gone all day, saying he’ll be in at noon but not showing up until 2:00, etc. I’ve clearly stated what I need from him (call in when you are going to be late/out), and I helped him take a month off for FMLA earlier this year, but the issues just continue. My issue is, he’s Latino, he’s a second generation immigrant, he has no other job history besides this one (other than a brief stint bagging groceries in college), and if I cast him out in this political climate, appropriate as the action is, I genuinely think that would be an act of evil. Is there anything I’m missing in order to get him back on track, or do I need to bite the bullet? Have you asked him what’s going on? On the face of it, it sounds like simple irresponsibility, but it’s possible there’s more to it — like that he’s dealing with a crisis at home or who knows what. It’s worth asking what the obstacles are to him calling in, if you haven’t already (not because it would change your need to be called, but because it might help you collaborate on solutions with him). But ultimately you can’t be more invested in keeping him employed than he is in staying employed. You can give him the opportunity to tell you if something is going on, and you can make it clear that you cannot keep him on if this continues, so that he understands the stakes, but from there it’s really up to him. I’m sorry; it’s a rough position to be in. 3. Asking about potential cuts during a job interview I work in a field related to science that has been impacted by the The President administration’s recent budget cuts. As a result, my company and others in our industry have recently undergone layoffs, hiring freezes, promotional/merit raise freezes, etc. I am particularly frustrated by this as the last year I have worked towards an important promotion that is now on hold indefinitely (at least a year, in my prior experience). I’m tired of this — I’ve been held back in my career too many times to count by this very same type of broad scope “freeze” (as opposed to it being related to my work) and I’m looking for said promotion externally. But I’m of course concerned to leave behind the decade of seniority I have at my current company. I know it’s not always the case, but often when there are layoffs, it’s last one in, first one out. Any new role I take will mean I’d feel a lot less job security than I have now. How can I broach this during a job interview? Is there a way to professionally say, “How confident are you that your company won’t undergo layoffs soon / that my role would be affected?” We all know that certain roles are considered more expendable than others; how can I try to gauge where on the spectrum a role I’m interviewing for would fall? Or is this one of those things that’s impossible to ask and you have to just take the chance? You can ask, “How is the current federal landscape affecting the team, and what are the potential ways the federal cuts could affect this position in particular?” You can also ask, “If there are further cutbacks, what’s the likely impact to this role?” You just need to take whatever they say with a grain of sand, since they may not really know or they may have info they can’t share. But it’s worth asking, because you might get info that does reassure you in a convincing way (or, conversely, makes you think it’s too much of a risk). 4. Interviewer was surprised I left my last job at a bad time for my company I recently had a second round interview where, in the three weeks between the first and second round, I left my last role (the situation was becoming toxic and for my own sanity I couldn’t stay). I let the interviewer know that I had left my last role in the interview because these companies do work together sometimes and I didn’t want them to feel that I was lying and misrepresenting that I still worked at my old firm. When the interviewer asked why I had left, I said something very boring and polite (I was ready for a new opportunity to grow my skills …) The interviewer interrupted me to express that she felt the projects that my old company was working on were very important and it didn’t seem like a good time to leave. She then launched right into her questions without offering me time to respond and clarify. What should I have done here? Did I just blow my chance at this role because I was honest? In my mind it doesn’t make a difference if I still work there or not because I was interviewing to leave my old company. There are different ways she could have meant it. She might have meant it in a disapproving way, but it also could have been a more neutral observation — like, “oh, bad time to lose someone” without judgment of you attached to it — or, “Huh, surprising timing if it’s just because you were ready for something new” (which could have a little more judgment attached but not torpedoing-your-chances levels of judgment). She also might have just been reacting out loud without meaning much at all. Interviewers sometimes forget how much their words are scrutinized by candidates. Because it seemed weird to you, ideally you would have raised it again later in the conversation (since she had already moved on in the moment). For example: “Before we wrap up, I wanted to say a little more about why I left my last role. You seemed surprised at the timing, but I’m confident I left them in good shape for the transition and the timing ended up making sense because of XYZ.” Since you didn’t do that at the time, the next best option would be to address it if they move you to another interview if you’re still sensing they feel weird about it (or even in a follow-up note now, if you want to). 5. Thanking a security guard who helped my family during a difficult time Recently, a relative of mine died suddenly in her apartment. She lived alone, and sadly it was several days before she was found, along with her dog (who is doing fine). The person who discovered her was a security guard in her building; he had a warm but professionally distanced relationship with my relative and her dog. He’s been very kind and helpful through the post-death process of managing my relative’s apartment, and I get the sense that the experience of finding her in the apartment was difficult for him. My family intends to send the security guard a heartfelt card thanking him for all he’s done and for being a kind and frequent presence in my relative’s life, but I wonder if something more substantial is warranted — a gift card, check, or donation to a favorite cause in his name (though I don’t know him well enough to speculate what a favorite cause might be, I’m sure I could ask)? Is there a done-thing etiquette for this kind of terrible but inevitable situation? I don’t think there’s a specific etiquette, but anything you do would undoubtedly be lovely and appreciated. I might stay away from asking about a favorite cause because (a) not everyone has one and (b) there’s always the risk he could name something you really don’t want to donate to, but that’s probably me being overly persnickety and it would likely be fine if you did. I also don’t think you need to do more than the heartfelt card, but if you want to, a gift card or a check with a note saying how much you appreciate his going above and beyond during a difficult time would be very thoughtful. I’m sorry about your family member. The post manager husband is cheating with an employee, asking about potential cuts during a job interview, and more appeared first on Ask a Manager. View the full article

Electrical equipment makers including ABB and Legrand are surging thanks to a pivot to data centre infrastructure View the full article

Head of Debt Management Office says demand for long-term gilts is waningView the full article

Reservists’ association says Berlin has lost contact with almost a million potential reservists View the full article

Tools which monitor, direct or organise processes may reduce the scope for employees to try new ways of doing things View the full article

As the institution tries to move on from the Horizon scandal, its Shrivenham branch illustrates the profitability problemView the full article

Business minister suggests Arctic territory may look elsewhere for help exploiting mineralsView the full article

Luxembourg outfit founded in 2014 backed failed businesses including augmented reality and fashion groups View the full article

Move likely to raise concerns among hedge funds and private credit groups of greater regulatory scrutinyView the full article

Tokyo seeks to widen international partnerships on military equipment as The President administration rattles confidenceView the full article