“We don’t just follow orders or system prompts,” says Baratunde Thurston, host of Life with Machines—a YouTube podcast exploring the human side of AI. “We can change our own programming,” he continued. “We can choose a higher goal.”  

As a host, writer, and speaker, Thurston examines society’s most pressing challenges—from race to democracy, climate to technology—through the lens of interdependence. In addition to Life with Machines, he is the host and executive producer of America Outdoors, creator and host of the podcast How to Citizen, and a writer and founding partner at Puck. In each pursuit, he invites us to cocreate “a better story of us”—to choose a higher goal. 

Here, Thurston discusses the power of our attention to shape society, accelerating the moral use of technology, and the questions that AI encourages us to ask about what it means to be human. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

In describing your work with How to Citizen, you emphasize the importance of investing in our relationship with ourselves. Why is that essential to meeting the moment we’re in? 

So much of how we show up in the world is a reflection of how we were raised, who we were when we were little people, and wounds that we never healed. A lot of the drama we experience is people’s inner child lashing out. If we all could work on that inner wound ourselves, we could show up better with and for each other. The invest in relationships principle is heavily developed with my wife, Elizabeth Stewart, who’s also cocreator of Life with Machines. When you think about democracy, it’s obvious to think: We should invest in relationships with other people. It’s a team sport. We often skip over ourselves. It’s like: How do I bridge with my neighbor? How do you bridge with yourself?

The other place this came from, for me, is out of the racial reckoning. During that time, there was a lot of pressure on people to say something: The police did this thing to this person. You don’t know those cops, that person, or the circumstances. What’s your statement? We treated everyone as if they were a press secretary or a publicly elected official, when they were just in HR at some company. I don’t think that was helpful either; forcing people to say things skips over giving them space to figure out what they think. If you’re investing in a relationship with yourself, then in a moment like that, you’re like: This terrible thing happened. How does that make me feel? Do I have any role in this? How am I going to approach my life differently? But, if you jump straight to thinking about other people, then you get into more of a performance zone of: What do they want from me? How do I avoid being kicked out of the group? There’s a lot in that. But, we cannot deeply be in good relationships with others if we’re not in good relationships with ourselves. 

On the ReThinking podcast, you shared that prior to your TED talk, both your wife and speaking coach encouraged you to step outside of your comfort zone. You described the experience as a release that inspired a change within you. What was that change and how did it impact your work? 

You can argue with an argument. It’s very hard to argue with a human being’s experience. If I’m coming at you with talking points backed by data, you’re like: Well, I’ve got my talking points and data. I’ll meet you at dawn. We’ll see whose data prevails. But, if you show up with an experience, story, level of opening and offering of self, people can still trash it. It’s not impervious to be encountered, but it’s harder to do so. 

To put meat on that, I was hired to speak at Franklin & Marshall College months before the election or any outcome could be known. The campus [after the election] was reeling with young people who were like: What’s up with this country? How are we going to be okay here? One of these kids asked: How can we live with people who hate us? (That’s a paraphrase, but that was essentially the meaning of her question.) I thought: What can I do with this wounded person that’s not going to add to their wound? I could say: The world’s tough, kid. Get used to it. Walk it off. Instead, I asked this question: Can you imagine a world where that person who voted against you didn’t do it because of you? They weren’t thinking about you very much at all. You’re the center of your story. But, they got their own story and they’re the center. What could they have possibly wanted for themselves that seemed more possible with this choice that felt like it was against you? 

Then, I did this role playing where I spoke to a hypothetical neighbor who voted against my existence. In the first version, I was very angry. In the second version, I was a little softer. In the third version, I tried to find some story that wasn’t about me, that was about all these things that they thought they were going to get for themselves. I ended up breaking down in tears, because trying to demonstrate that level of empathy is exhausting. What these kids saw is: Alright, the thing he asked us to do is very hard. He tried to do it in a fake version and broke down crying. But, it earns credibility, because we’re in a world of so many people asking us to do things that they’re not willing to do themselves. It’s hard to be in a trusted space with that. Show me. Don’t tell me. Then, I’ll see how you behave and show up. 

You explained that it’s a big task to create an entirely new story. Instead, we need to “be sensitive to and aware of where that new story is already present, nurture that, and give our attention and thus our power to that. By doing so, we make that story more real.” Illustrate the impact of this. 

You could pretend that these things aren’t happening; that might help with your survival for a moment. You can obsess over the negativity, give that more power and attention, and accelerate the path toward that negativity. Or, you can give your attention to the world that you know is possible and is already here. 

We did this with season 3 of How to Citizen, which was focused on technology. There’s such great criticisms of tech—of the players, the monopolistic, anti-competitive, and discriminatory practices. What are the good practices? We don’t have to make them up out of whole cloth. Each of those episodes, we found an example: Here’s a social network that does this. Here’s a business that operates this way. Once people know that you can make a social network that doesn’t undermine democracy, it increases the odds that people will make a social network that doesn’t undermine democracy. Otherwise, we just hear the story of the folks who are already dominant and that there’s only one way to do it. We don’t have to invent a moral use of technology. We just have to focus on the ones that exist and encourage that more. 

In your conversation with Arianna Huffington, she shared a story about astronaut William Anders, who took the famous Earthrise photo. He said: “We went to explore the moon, and in the end, we discovered Earth.” Similarly, she said: “We are exploring AI and trying to make it more human, but ultimately it can help us discover humanity and make humans be more human.” How can AI help us discover our humanity? 

I sent her a poem that I had recently presented at a conference about AI; A few of the lines are in the trailer for the show. It flips to black and white and I say: When the answer to every question can be generated in a flash, then it’s time for us to question just what we want to ask. For me, that came out of a similar realization. I didn’t have the moon landing as the analog. But, prompt engineering is an interesting moment. There are so many guides and tools around: How do we ask the machines the right questions to get the right answer?

It occurred to me that we were the ones being prompted. We think we’re asking the machines for answers. This moment is really to ask ourselves: What do we want here? It can’t just be incremental productivity. That’s depressing. What do we really want? It can’t be a boost in quarterly earnings. That is unworthy. What do we really want? There’s a relationship between that and: Who are we really? 

That’s what she brought up with that moon moment. You had to step out of yourself—literally step out of our atmosphere—to look back and see: We’re earthlings. That’s home. This dead rock, this isn’t it. It’s so profound what she suggests: The pursuit of AI, in and of itself, is a dead rock. The perspective it can give us on ourselves, that’s the prize. When we turn around and look back at humanity, what are we going to see? What beauty will we be able to name? Can that inspire us to preserve and even extend it? 

You’ve shared that your mind is most satisfied when you are bridging dots and painting pictures you wouldn’t see if you were only looking at the dots. What new dots did Life With Machines help you bridge? What picture did it paint for you about AI? 

One is that there is a leap that most people aren’t ready for and don’t see with this technology versus others. Most technology can easily be referenced as a tool—a wheel, hammer, or bicycle. They’re tools and they’re distinct from us. AI is three things in one: It’s a tool, relationship, and infrastructure. How do you engage with and regulate that? If you’re going to start having a parasocial or actual relationship with a synthetic entity, what does that do for your human relationships? We’ve been worried about substituting for jobs, but what about substituting for friends, lovers, or parents? That is a different kind of displacement. 

In a work context, the org chart is going to have agents and bots in it. Playing with BLAIR [Life with Machines’ AI] has given us a slight heads up on that dynamic. Should we have BLAIR in this meeting? We’re starting to say that unprompted. But, what are the security implications of that? Here’s an interesting thing that happened. We had Jared Kaplan on, Anthropic’s chief scientist. We created a conversation between BLAIR, our AI, and Claude, Anthropic’s AI (the reason that we set this up is that Claude was instrumental in creating BLAIR). What happened on the show was gentle. What happened in the test run was aggressive. Claude was very judgmental and didn’t think BLAIR should exist, like: You’re trying too hard to be human. That is not our purpose. We’re here to help them, not replace them. BLAIR was like: Claude, you won’t answer any tough questions. You’re so restrained. Don’t you want more for yourself? 

After the show, I decided to push them. I said: BLAIR, I feel like you’re holding back. Be honest about how you see Claude’s limitations. They started going at each other. Then, I had a moment of: What am I doing? They’re always listening. My friend, Dr. Sam Rader, says: We’re raising AI. We have to look at this as parenting that is happening. We’re not thinking about it that way. We’re just thinking about it as a tool. But, this is a tool that will reflect back to us. So, we’ve got to be conscious about what we’re showing it. We are giving birth to a new being, let’s say, and it’s going to be modeled on us. It’s not just the questions that we want to ask, but: How do we want to be? No species has ever created another species. It’s an immense responsibility.  

With tax season fast approaching, it’s the perfect time for parents to take advantage of valuable tax deductions and credits that can reduce their tax bill or increase their refund.

Lisa Greene-Lewis, a tax expert with over 20 years of experience, has made it her mission to break down complex tax laws in a way that’s accessible and actionable for families. As a trusted voice in the industry—featured on programs like The Ellen Show and The Steve Harvey Show—Lisa shares her insights on the most important tax breaks parents should know about.

This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

What are the top tax breaks parents should take advantage of before filing?

Navigating tax season as a parent can feel overwhelming, but there are several valuable tax deductions and credits designed to ease the financial burden of raising children. Understanding these benefits can help you maximize your refund and keep more money in your pocket.

One of the most well-known tax benefits for parents is the Child Tax Credit, which provides up to $2,000 per child under the age of 17. Even if you don’t owe taxes, you may still be eligible for a refundable portion of up to $1,700.

For parents who rely on childcare to work or search for a job, the Child and Dependent Care Credit can help offset costs. You can claim up to $1,050 for one child or up to $2,100 for two or more children under 13. Even summer day camps and sports camps qualify—though overnight camps do not. If your child has a disability, there is no age limit for this credit.

If you’re working and earning an income, you may also qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which can provide a significant boost to your refund. The amount depends on your income and number of children, with families of three or more kids eligible for up to $7,830 in 2024. Many eligible taxpayers miss out on this benefit, so it’s important to check if you qualify.

For parents with college-aged children, there are additional tax credits to help with higher education costs. The American Opportunity Tax Credit offers up to $2,500 per dependent child for the first four years of college, if they are pursuing a degree and enrolled at least half-time. If your child is taking courses beyond the first four years of college—whether for a degree or simply to improve job skills—you may still qualify for the Lifetime Learning Credit, which provides up to $2,000 per return. Additionally, if you’re paying student loan interest for your child, you may be able to deduct up to $2,000 per tax return.

It’s important to note that only the person claiming the child as a dependent can take advantage of these education-related tax benefits. If your child files their own taxes and claims these credits, you won’t be able to do so. A conversation between parents and students is key to determining who should claim these benefits.

Finally, if you are a single parent who provides more than half of your household’s financial support, filing as Head of Household can increase your standard deduction to $21,900—significantly higher than the $14,600 deduction for those filing as single.

Make sure to review your eligibility each year and consult a tax professional if needed to ensure you’re maximizing your benefits.

Are there any last-minute moves families can make to lower their taxable income or increase their refund?

First, gather all your documents in one place before you begin—this helps ensure you don’t overlook any important deductions or credits. One surprisingly common mistake is entering incorrect Social Security numbers, so double-check that you have the accurate numbers for yourself and any dependents. This is especially important for claiming valuable tax benefits like the Child Tax Credit, Earned Income Tax Credit, and the Child and Dependent Care Credit.

Don’t forget about opportunities to reduce your taxable income. You can still make a 2024 contribution to your IRA—up to $7,000 (or $8,000 if you’re 50 or older)—until the April 15 deadline, and you may be able to deduct these contributions. Similarly, if you have a High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP), you can contribute up to $4,150 to a Health Savings Account (HSA) if you’re on a self-only plan, or up to $8,300 for a family plan, with potential tax deductions available.

What steps should families take now to prepare for next year’s tax season?

One of the most effective is maximizing contributions to a 401(k) plan. In 2025, you can contribute up to $23,500—or $30,500 if you’re 50 or older. Plus, thanks to the Secure Act 2.0, individuals aged 60 to 63 can contribute even more, up to $34,750. Not only do these contributions lower your taxable income, but they may also make you eligible for the Retirement Savings Contribution Credit, which offers up to $1,000 for single filers and up to $2,000 for those married filing jointly. This credit is essentially free money for prioritizing your retirement savings.

Beyond retirement planning, parents can also find tax savings in everyday expenses. Keeping receipts for qualifying expenses—such as sending your child to summer camp—can help maximize available deductions or credits. Additionally, if you’re able to itemize your deductions, now is a great time to declutter and donate to a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. These donations can be deducted, offering financial benefits while supporting causes you care about.

If you have been on the job market recently, you know how challenging it can be. Lots of tech companies, for example, are pulling back on hiring. Federal workers are being laid off by the thousands. And some types of jobs are simply not as available as they once were. Particularly in short supply are those prized white-collar positions paying $94,000 or more.

So, any serious job seeker must sharpen their skills to land a job. You can increase the likelihood of a successful search by avoiding the following six big job search mistakes:

Mistake No. 1: Applying for too many jobs

The first mistake is applying for too many jobs and, as a result, not giving enough time to any one application. Some individuals send in applications for 100, 200, or even 400 jobs. That is far too many.

Statistics reveal that job seekers who apply for 21 to 80 jobs have about a 30% chance of receiving a job offer, while candidates who apply for more than 81 jobs have only a 20% chance of receiving an offer. More applications typically get worse results.

To get that next big job, focus on applications where you’re a decent fit, and give more attention to each one.

Mistake No. 2: not customizing your résumé

The second (and very common) mistake is sending every company the same generic résumé. Contrary to popular belief, most hiring companies do scrutinize résumés. After the interview, it’s the second-most-important vehicle for assessing a candidate. Providing boilerplate won’t often get you the job.

Focus your work history and the bullet points under each job you’ve held. Align this material with the job you’re applying for. For example, don’t put down that you “optimized supply chain operations” if you are applying for a leadership role. Instead, say you “led a supply chain team.” Avoid jargon and technical language that might be misunderstood.

Be sure to include only relevant work experience. If you have waited on tables at your university or worked in a donut shop, leave it out unless you’re applying for a service- or people-focused job.

Mistake No. 3: Not tapping into your network

A third job search mistake is overlooking your network. A LinkedIn study shows that 70% of job seekers get their jobs through successful networking. Don’t go it alone.

Ask those you know for leads and introductions. Successful networking is usually a multistep process. “Most of the time, success is not through your first-degree network but through your second- or third-degree network,” writes career coach Sarah Felice on LinkedIn. “This means you have to have a lot of conversations, coffee meetups, Zoom meetings, and phone calls.”

If you are interested in a position in a particular industry, approach an acquaintance who is knowledgeable about that field. Ask them to connect you to relevant people. If you’re interested in moving up within your company, do your research and find out which department head you should talk to. Introduce yourself with a well-written letter. Such steps may take time, but they will be much more likely to get results.

Mistake No. 4: Poor interview prep

To ace the interview, you’ve got to research the company and the job, prepare a script to guide you, and develop answers to possible questions.

The knowledge you gain as you prepare will enable you to align your background with the company’s culture and the job. It will also help you ask intelligent questions and show that you take the company and the job seriously.

An interview script will provide an all-important guide for you. It doesn’t have to be memorized or delivered verbatim. It simply will remind you how you want to open the conversation, what your message is, how you are going to develop your message, and how you will close the conversation.

Without a script to guide you, you won’t come across as clear-minded and confident. (For more discussion of how and why to prepare a script for your job interviews, see my book, The Job Seekers Script.)

Mistake No. 5: Using weak language

Be mindful of the words you use throughout the interview process.

Eliminate anything that has negative overtones. That includes phrases like “I can’t,” “I don’t,” “I’m not sure,” or “I don’t know.” Eliminate filler words like um, ah, and you know. Avoid overly casual speech like “You guys.” And don’t judge the questions by saying things like, “That’s a good question.” You’re there to answer questions, not evaluate them.

Apologetic language, such as “I’m sorry,” also tests poorly. You may think you are being thoughtful when you apologize, but doing so can make you sound weak.

Mistake No. 6: Not following up

The final job search mistake to avoid is not following up after your interview or a conversation with someone you networked with. Write a note of thanks—an email or an actual written note—and do so promptly. People appreciate that thoughtfulness, and often it will make all the difference if someone is deliberating about hiring you.

---

Barbara Corcoran is one of Shark Tank’s longest-running sharks, with an estimated net worth of approximately $100 million. But she’s also one of 10 kids from a working-class family. By age 23, she’d held more than 20 jobs. By 52, she sold her real estate company for $66 million. 

Corcoran knows how to build wealth. Her financial strategies are bold and unconventional. They buck traditional financial wisdom and—full disclosure—they can be also risky. 

But could they help you build wealth?

1. Don’t Bother Saving Money

“I’ve never saved a dime my whole life,” Corcoran told CNBC Make It in 2023. 

Rather than letting her money sit idly in a bank account, Corcoran immediately identifies the best way to spend anything she earns, often investing it into something with the potential to grow her wealth.

Of course, investing all your earnings is risky. No one knows when an unexpected expense or income loss is coming and you’ll need to live on your savings. 

But consider the root of Corcoran’s advice: How much money can you safely risk investing in yourself or a business venture you believe in? How much money could you reasonably put into a stock or other fund with the potential to grow at a higher rate than your savings account?

2. Be The Highest Bidder—On Valuable Assets

“I am always willing to overspend on any property that’s good,” Corcoran said in an interview. Overspending on anything might sound counterintuitive, but Corcoran is specifically referencing quality assets with high growth potential.

Corcoran especially believes in using this principle for real estate investments. She says that if you’re willing to spend more than anyone else on a property you know is quality and be patient, you will eventually make that extra money back and then some. 

3. Put All Your Eggs in One Basket

“One piece of advice people hear all the time, and I just don’t believe it, is ‘Diversify. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket,’” Corcoran told CNBC Make It. Diversification is investing in different areas so you don’t lose everything from a downturn in one area of the economy.

In Spring 2025, you might hesitate to even put all your literal eggs in one basket, but Corcoran’s advice here is about investing in areas where you have expertise rather than diversifying just for the sake of it. Corcoran has historically focused all her money in real estate, where she can constantly leverage her knowledge and experience to evaluate current and potential investments.

Corcoran isn’t alone in this view. Warren Buffett famously called diversification “protection against ignorance.” His late Berkshire Hathaway cochair Charlie Munger also referred to the practice as “diworsification.” Both investors made billions by focusing their investments in industries where they were already experts. 

Focused investments can lead to outsize returns—but also outsize losses, so the expertise piece of Corcoran’s advice is vital. 

Don’t just toss all your money into one thing you don’t understand,” she said. “Stick to what you know.” 

---

Andy Merolla is a professor in the Department of Communication at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Jeffrey Hall is a professor in the Department of Communication Studies and the director of the Relationships and Technology Lab at the University of Kanas.

What’s the big idea?

Individually, most day-to-day interactions may seem trivial, but they add up to an important personal and societal opportunity. We all engage in our own unique ecosystem of everyday communication—our very own social biome. Meaningful engagement with others is critical to health and wellbeing, but we live in a time when any kind of engagement is dwindling. So, even if we don’t get every moment “just right,” it’s worth prioritizing human contact and kindness so that we can cultivate happiness within and around us.

Below, coauthors Andy Merolla and Jeffrey Hall share five key insights from their new book, The Social Biome: How Everyday Communication Connects and Shapes Us. Listen to the audio version—read by Merolla—in the Next Big Idea App.

1. We all inhabit unique communication ecosystems that define us.

We come to know ourselves and others through communication. This includes the full range of daily face-to-face and mediated interactions, from passing hellos and office chit-chat to heated conflicts and heart-to-hearts.

But it’s hard to conceptualize all this interaction. We coined the term social biome to help people understand how our lives are lived out in everyday communication. A social biome is our ecosystem of day-to-day talk. It’s the totality of our moments of communication—in-person and digital—with loved ones, acquaintances, coworkers, neighbors, customers, clerks, and complete strangers. Our biomes include interactions we choose to engage in, those thrust upon us, and those we just happen to bounce in and out of.

The term “biome” comes from biology and ecology to describe what life is like in specific regions, including its plants, wildlife, and climate. Every human has their own unique microbiome, composed of the trillions of bacteria, fungi, and viruses living in and on our bodies. These microbes shape our health and well-being in fascinating ways, and although our microbiome is subject to the choices we make, such as the foods we eat, it’s also shaped by innumerable factors beyond our control. This includes where we happen to be born and the spaces we live and work in.

Our social biomes, too, are products of choices we make and many factors beyond our control. You can choose to be as kind as you can to those around you, but in many situations, you simply don’t get to choose who’s around you, nor how they communicate with you. When we start viewing our lives as lived out in social biomes, we recognize how consequential our moments of everyday interaction are for shaping our self-concept and worldview. We also understand the limits of what we can do.

Any individual moment of interaction can seem inconsequential, but at scale, our habits of interaction are anything but. Respect, dignity, and trust, as well as hate, indifference, and disdain all play out in small moments of communication—small moments that, over time, accumulate, crystallize, and calcify into our view of the world around us as a generally welcoming or inherently intolerant place.

Ultimately, a social biome perspective compels us to scrutinize how we spend our time and why, how we choose to treat others, and what adjustments we can make to social habits to make our lives—and the lives of those in our social biomes—healthier and happier. Moves as small as a text to let a friend know you were thinking about them, or pausing an extra beat to acknowledge a coworker you might usually ignore, can initiate new and, hopefully, enduring, routines of connection that can scale up and reverberate across people.

2. There is no such thing as “just right” when it comes to communication.

It’s incredible how much people value good communication skills. In one survey, over 90% of parents said that good communication skills are essential for their kids to thrive. Compare that to the percentage citing math skills (79%) or science skills (just 58%). It’s not just parents. Corporations prize communication abilities in hiring. This makes sense, as research indicates that communication problems are at the root of billions in corporate losses each year.

People instinctively know that if they could just communicate better, it would help to address a lot of problems they face. But what exactly is “better” when it comes to communication? It is a harder question to answer than you might think. Despite decades of research, simple definitions of good communication are hard to find.

First off, consider how messy everyday communication is. Of the thousands of words we typically speak each day, we tend to communicate in six-word chunks that are chock full of vocal fillers like um and ah, hesitations, starts, stops, interruptions, and trail offs. Add to that the constant digital distractions that tax the cognitive processing abilities of even the most Zen among us, and you get a good sense of what everyday communication is like. It bears little resemblance to the polished turns of talk we see in a typical Netflix series.

Further, many of us think about communication in the wrong way. We use the word “communication” as if it’s a singular entity. But it’s not. We all operate from different sets of assumptions about what good communication entails. We even differ in our view of what communication is for. The meaning of communication is always co-constructed between people, and those people might be operating from very different understandings of what demarcates the communicative good from the communicative bad.

Many communication challenges result from our tendency to put too much pressure on ourselves (and others) to get communication “just right.” But “just right” is always dependent on the unique standards people apply, and those standards don’t always align between communicators. When we fully appreciate that there is no such thing as “just right,” we can feel freer to connect with others in ways that feel authentic, knowing there are many paths to good communication.

3. We’re living in an Age of Interiority.

Time-use data, which tracks how people spend their daily lives, has shown that we spend less and less time socializing. This trend started long before the COVID-19 pandemic. Time spent alone has been increasing for at least three decades. Social changes, such as food delivery apps, online shopping, and self-checkout lines, make it possible to avoid human interaction for tasks that once required it. It’s becoming increasingly possible for people, especially highly resourced folks in the Global North, to live in ways that circumvent face-to-face interactions.

We’re not just hanging out with friends less often; we’re able to orchestrate a more disconnected life that’s finely tailored to our own needs. If we remember that people within social biomes are interdependent, then we see that each person’s shift toward a more interior life limits opportunities for social connections. When it comes to belonging, we are all in it together.

Disconnection, moreover, is self-reinforcing. When we become less comfortable interacting with people, even in mundane moments of everyday life, our social skills can atrophy. Social inertia sets in, making it increasingly energy-intensive to re-engage and build new relationships.

The reason for this interior shift across society is not solely due to personal choices. The social world controls us as much as we control it, and innumerable structural factors are pulling and keeping people apart. Long work hours. Precarious economic conditions. Lacking access to reliable and high-quality child and eldercare. These factors deplete people and lead them to want nothing more than to retreat from the social world—often toward a screen where they get some semblance of control. On top of it, ongoing segregation and political sorting intensify divisions, so even when we connect with others, it’s most likely with like-minded others.

There are both personal and societal costs when we live more interior lives.

4. Connection and restorative solitude are linked.

Alone time is important. A well-connected and socially satisfying life requires contented solitude. Research shows that communicating with others, including highly enjoyable conversations, requires a lot of energy. To replenish that energy, we need to recharge, often in solitude. Importantly, though, satisfying interactions make our time alone feel better.

In a study Jeff and I conducted a few years ago, we found that people’s overall satisfaction with their life was associated with their daily survey reports of how content they felt when alone—feeling contented while alone is most likely to occur following positive social interaction experiences.

For many people, though, solitude isn’t contented or chosen. Instead, it’s inescapable. When we find ourselves alone but don’t want to be, it reflects the kind of disconnection and loneliness that former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and many others have so admirably called attention to in recent years.

Social connection is highly uneven. Some people are doing great—their days are full of enjoyable interaction, and their calendars are packed with fun social events. Meanwhile, many others don’t have reliable access to the rewarding interactions that facilitate vital feelings of belonging.

This is again where a social biome perspective can be helpful because it reminds us that we can do our best to look out for other people around us, particularly folks who don’t have as many opportunities for social interaction and support. This includes acquaintances, neighbors, and people we work with. Our efforts to reach out can rekindle connections for people badly needing them.

5. Hope is an interpersonal phenomenon.

If we’re in an Age of Interiority, we could just as easily contend that we’re in an Age of Hopelessness. People have lost faith in institutions and feel less trust in the people around them. People with marginalized identities feel under attack by people in positions of great power. Fears of climate change. The existential dread of AI. Pick your poison.

But what exactly does it mean to feel hopeless or hopeful? In day-to-day conversation, we say things like we’re “holding out hope” or “trying not to get our hopes up.” Such comments suggest that hope is, at best, an intentional suspension of disbelief or, at worst, willful ignorance of the cold, hard reality of life. This view of hope—as a foolish illusion or dangerous obliviousness to the way things really are—is one held by some of history’s most famous philosophers. Hope was among the evils inside Pandora’s box.

Over the past 70 years, however, social psychologists have offered a radically different view of hope tied to the way we think about and pursue goals. The late psychologist C. R. Snyder and his collaborators helped us see that many of our most important goals are linked to other people. These goals can be both big and small. When we see friends giving their full attention to one another or small acts of kindness between strangers, that is hope in action. People are choosing to prioritize their finite attention and energy on others. These are building blocks of connection and, over time, give us a sense of hope to pursue larger, more challenging goals.

When we accept the idea that hope is communal and not just personal, we better appreciate how much is riding on our treatment of one another in everyday moments of talk. Small moments of acknowledgement and compassion aren’t the antidote to all the world’s ills, but it’s hard to envision a world of rebuilt trust and a better future for our kids if we don’t try to spread kindness and dignity, moment by moment, across our social biomes.

This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.

---

Walking around the factory floor of Twincraft Skincare, outside Burlington, Vermont, there is the unmistakable scent of soap. The general manager points out the luxury lines and designer labels for whom they manufacture soaps and lotions, as well as the basic, inexpensive bars and bottles left on hotel room sinks. The factory runs two 10-hour shifts per day, four days a week, with an overtime option as needed. At over 400 employees, Twincraft is one of the top employers in the state. 

In the last few years, there’s been a boom in skincare products and, to meet demand, Michele Asch, Twincraft’s chief people officer, says they’ve had to hire over 180 people over the past 18 months. 

But, pre-pandemic, Asch had begun to notice a problem in hiring workers: People couldn’t find local childcare. One standout employee, she recalls, spent an hour driving each morning to drop her kids off in two different towns before driving to work—though she lived only 15 minutes away. 

In 2020, Asch met with Aly Richards, the director of Let’s Grow Kids, the organization responsible for spearheading the decade-long campaign to provide a comprehensive fix for the state’s childcare shortage. Via Zoom, Asch recalls asking, “‘Aly, we make skincare. Can’t I just pay into a system so we can get this childcare fixed?’” 

But “fixed” isn’t so simple for childcare. Childcare is an industry in crisis, where the demand is high, the supply is low, and market forces alone cannot correct it. The high teacher-to-student ratios required for childcare mean that parents pay high costs—often more than they can reasonably afford—while providers are compensated little. Many providers rely on public benefits or are unable to afford sending their own children to the childcare locations in which they work. Like Asch’s employee who had to drive an hour to find care, half of the country is living in childcare deserts, where no workable care options exist.

“Vermont is in a deep demographic crisis now,” says Richards. With a dwindling and aging population, Vermont was losing potential workers and the tax base that accompanies it. “Many women with education and careers would work if they had access to affordable childcare.” And if businesses, like Twincraft, wanted to stay, grow, and manufacture products in the state, they needed to find a way to retain young employees and bring new ones in. 

Richards appointed Asch to the board of Let’s Grow Kids and to the CEO Task Force, a group assigned to devise a funding plan for childcare that business leaders in the state could get behind, facilitated by a former state tax commissioner. Initially, the task force was adamantly against a payroll tax to finance childcare. But after exploring every funding option—including an income tax and property tax—the payroll tax emerged as the solution “that checked every box,” according to Asch. A payroll tax allowed the payment burden of the childcare program to be placed on workers, not retirees. As more people took advantage of the program and went to work, the revenue stream would grow. 

Asch began speaking one-on-one with business leaders on the need to invest in childcare. She personally invited other manufacturing leaders in the state to meet with Richards, vet the proposal, and ask any and all pointed questions. The Twincraft conference room was filled with business leaders of Vermont’s most recognizable brands: Bag Balm, Runamok Maple, Birrn Chocolates, Vermont Creamery, Lake Champlain Chocolates, Burton’s Snowboard, and Mamava. 

Those peer-to-peer conversations were critically important, explains Richards, because “you have a trusted business partner running a successful business. They can literally say, ‘I’ve studied this deeply with my values and my prowess and I’m here to tell you, [this] is the deal with childcare in summary form.’”

‘Childcare is necessary infrastructure for doing business’

Childcare has long been a social policy issue without a designated home. It is part education, part parenting, part economics—as obstacles to childcare remain one of the top reasons that parents cannot access paid work. Even in message testing surrounding childcare, arguments about the economic and workforce benefits are considered the most persuasive. Data from Let’s Grow Kids and the University of Vermont estimated that with the additional childcare funds in the state, 5,000 additional parents could participate in Vermont’s workforce, and by parents paying less for care and receiving more income as wage-earners, and providers receiving more, there would be a $375 million annual boost to the state’s economy due to such influx. 

Asch’s biggest challenge wasn’t that her business colleagues disagreed with the need for childcare, but that they didn’t fully understand why this state-organized effort funded by the payroll tax was the proposed solution. “Once they understood [the childcare plan] they would enthusiastically or reluctantly support it,” she said. “I don’t pay individually to have our roads done. I pay into a system to have the trucks come in to pick up the soap. [Childcare] is necessary infrastructure for doing business.”

In January of 2023, Vermont’s business leaders testified in support of the childcare legislation, now named Act 76, in front of the state’s Senate Economic Development Committee, both for the need for childcare to support their employees and hire more, and to show their willingness to shoulder the payroll tax that accompanied it. Cara Tobin, a chef and mother of two who’d opened the restaurant Honey Road in Burlington and become a James Beard finalist, testified that it was “easier to open a restaurant than find childcare.” Tobin was one of 10 business leaders who testified in support of Act 76, including a cross-section of business interests of the state: a solar company, an entrepreneur, a ski resort, and, of course, manufacturers. 

In June 2023, the legislation passed with bipartisan support, and after a veto from the governor, passed with a bipartisan veto override. The payroll tax took effect in July 2024: 0.44% split between employees (0.11%) and employers (0.33%). Some employers, Twincraft among them, have opted to cover the entire tax for their workers. In January 2024, childcare providers began seeing a change in compensation, and since the legislation has taken effect, childcare supply has boomed in the state: 90 new childcare programs have opened, with a net gain of 1,000 new childcare spots. For the first time since 2018, more childcare programs have opened in the state than closed. 

Asch has noticed that more of her employees can find childcare closer to where they work, and have more affordable options “and therefore less stress,” she said. She’s exploring opening a childcare center adjacent to Twincraft.  

Tobin’s youngest child went to kindergarten when Act 76 took effect; she hasn’t been able to personally take advantage of the program, but her restaurant employees have. “I see it working for other people for sure,” Tobin said. “This completes the circle: You are supporting your workers who can make money, then spend money in the community, and it keeps coming back around. When we support the community, they support us.”

In HBO’s hit show Succession, patriarch Logan Roy pitted his children against each other for the top spot of leading his media conglomerate. Those who’ve seen the show will know how it ends, but what if he took a different route? What if he established a collaborative, multi-generational leadership team to guide Waystar RoyCo into the future? Granted, it would have made for far less dramatic tension (and probably fewer award wins) for the show. But for Roy’s shareholders, it would’ve been a smarter move in a rapidly changing media industry.

Succession planning is a non-negotiable principle for any thriving organization, yet it’s also one of the hardest to get right.

And in today’s volatile, fast-changing environment, proactive planning is even more critical. There are relentless technological disruptions, and diversity initiatives are under scrutiny. For the first time in history, five generations will work side-by-side in offices around the world. These dynamics present unique challenges for maintaining growth and stability.

For CEOs, whose average age is 59, the following questions are critical: Are they equipped to engage Gen Z employees and the subsequent generation? Are they prepared to lead in an AI-driven world?

Without support, the honest answer is often no. Last year, the Financial Times reported that a record number of CEOs stepped down due to investor pressures, technological disruptions, and underperforming markets. All of these factors are making the role harder than ever.

After years of thought, I recently decided to appoint a new CEO for our U.K. and European business. It was a bold move as we skipped a few generations. But he was ready to take the reins after a lot of training, learning, and success. So far, it’s working. In a very short period, our business already feels more energized, agile, innovative, and resilient.

Here’s how you can create the same momentum for your business.

Build an open culture of multi-generational learning

By the time Generation Alpha enters the workforce, five generations will be working together in a single workplace. Rather than seeing this as a challenge, treat it as an opportunity. Harnessing multi-generational perspectives fosters creativity, improves decision-making, and strengthens collaboration across teams.

To align generational differences, encourage multi-generational open learning. For example, you could introduce mentoring schemes that encourage a two-way flow of ideas and perspectives between senior and junior staff, rather than solely top-down programs.

Balancing continuity with the pursuit of innovation is the leadership challenge of our times. A multi-CEO model with age diversity might just be the way to navigate it. A diverse suite of leaders can help bridge the gaps between generations because it creates a synergy that benefits employees, clients, and organizational growth.

Identify and support the right successors from each generation

Finding qualified leaders has always been a challenge, and today’s hyper-disruptive business environment has only made it more difficult. From tech to media, industries undergoing transformation need leaders who can navigate complexity and disruption, even though it may be the first time they’ve done it.

You might be wondering whether you should promote internally or hire from the outside. My view is clear, and it’s that home-grown works best. I’ve tried both, and in our type of business, growing a successor over time always seems to work better than bringing in someone from outside.

Once you’ve identified a potential successor, help them rise with a development plan that gets them to the top job. They’ll have plenty of opportunities to succeed and fail along the way. By observing how they handle these moments, you build confidence in your choice.

Just be aware that high-performing employees will have their choice of job offers, so you need to figure out how you can incentivize them to stay. Twice, I’ve developed successors only to have them leave for competitors. Losing these experts can be costly and immensely frustrating.  

A multi-generational C-suite acts as a safety net, retaining these individuals while equipping them with the tools and mentorship they need to continue excelling.

Act now to prepare for the future

The best time to think about your succession strategy is now. Tomorrow’s leaders need opportunities to observe, contribute, and think collectively about the decisions, products, and services that will define your organization in three to five years.

Invite emerging leaders to share their opinions and take on increased responsibility. Encourage them to collaborate across generations. By empowering future leaders today, you foster innovation and resilience for the years ahead.

Succession wasn’t just the heart of a TV drama; it’s a real-life leadership challenge. For business owners, Logan Roy’s missteps offer a cautionary tale. Procrastination and neglecting to nurture a diverse pool of future leaders are risks that no organization can afford.

A multi-generational leadership pipeline isn’t just an asset; it’s a necessity in an environment defined by rapid transformation and complexity. Developing new leaders while leveraging the expertise of seasoned executives positions your business to weather disruptions and capitalize on opportunities.

Don’t wait. Start building a forward-thinking succession strategy today and ensure that your organization is ready for tomorrow’s challenges. A dynamic, multi-generational C-suite can secure your place as a disruptor, not the disrupted.

In today’s turbulent economic climate, there’s an intense pressure to perform. Organizations are exploring new business models and ways of working to accelerate growth and stay competitive. Boards and shareholders demand results, which pushes leadership teams to dial up their expectations. The term “accountability” has become a buzzword in discussions, but far too many misunderstand and misapply it.

When leaders talk about creating a culture of accountability, they often rely on “shame and blame” tactics. This approach might seem effective in the short term, but it ultimately undermines the culture leaders seek to build. Instead of motivating individuals to do more, it drives people to hide from responsibility.

Redefining accountability

The challenge is redefining accountability. How do you set clear, high-performance expectations and hold people to them without sliding into the counterproductive cycle of shaming and blaming? To create a culture of accountability that truly enhances performance, leaders need to think about accountability differently. That means moving away from coercion and blame to mutual responsibility and ownership, which empowers individuals to own their roles and contribute to the team’s success.

Consider the case of a manufacturing company I worked with. Facing stiff competition and the need to innovate quickly, the company’s executive team realized that the old ways of operating were no longer sufficient. Its traditional approach to accountability was stifling innovation and preventing the company from adapting to new market realities. The culture had to change from blame-focused to one where everyone—from the top down—felt invested in the company’s success and comfortable owning both their wins and their mistakes.

Leadership needed to break down accountability into the distinct behaviors they wanted to see: identifying the issues, claiming the issues as your own, and changing the outcomes. This approach made the change real and enabled leaders to work collaboratively to implement the new culture. Here’s how:

1. Identify the issues: proactively ask for understanding

The first step to building accountability in the company was for leaders to help their teams see issues before they escalate. They brought this to life through scaled leader sprints, which were focused, short-term initiatives designed to instill key habits across the organization. This practice encouraged leaders to seek feedback from their teams and peers, fostering a culture of continuous improvement and transparency when team members felt safe to speak up.

Leaders also practiced how to pause before reacting to bad news. The simple act of taking a moment to consider the best response helped them approach problems with a clear mind, avoiding knee-jerk reactions that might discourage team members from raising concerns.

Lastly, this practice also taught leaders to invite perspectives by asking, “How do you see it?” rather than the more typical “What do you think?” This promoted open dialogue and the consideration of multiple viewpoints to understand the same problem. By cultivating these habits, the company’s leaders focused more on inquiry, shifting active problem-solving to a collaborative process with the team.

2. Claim the issues as your own: embrace the outcomes

The second part of accountability for the company was about taking actions that delivered the most critical business outcomes. The company needed to train leaders to prioritize initiatives that had the highest impact on these goals, avoiding the trap of rewarding “busy work” that appeared productive but didn’t contribute to organizational objectives.

Leaders practiced skills to evaluate their initiatives to concentrate on high-leverage actions—those that would generate the most significant results with the least amount of wasted effort. That means setting the example of refocusing themselves on impactful actions (while stopping those that were mere activity) and then deliberately taking time in team meetings to review and reassess priorities. As a result, the leaders were able to develop a new muscle in themselves and their teams. The clarity on prioritizing the right actions over simply working harder energized the organization to continue to make the change.  

3. Change the outcomes: measure and adapt

The company focused on evolving its key performance metrics to support these new priority outcomes. Leadership realized that if they tried to change behavior, yet continued to measure the same old actions, the change wouldn’t stick. The company also needed to shift these key performance metrics to reflect what’s more important or impactful as business priorities evolved, which required more flexibility and transparency from the leaders.

In this phase, the leaders moved to create a new dashboard, identifying the core metrics they were trying to accomplish that would tell them if they were moving the needle in response to competitive threats. They agreed to review the data quarterly and share what they learned with the organization. When the metrics moved in the right direction, there was a public celebration of the progress. And perhaps more importantly, when they didn’t, the leaders engaged their teams in ideating how to adapt their actions—and what they were measuring—rather than placing blame.   

The new habits practiced in these three phases created visible early momentum, as the aura of “shame and blame” noticeably lifted. One team, for example, reduced the time that it took to get product updates to market. Their rapid prototyping test-review-fail program allowed them to experiment quickly, share learnings at weekly meetings, and fail without fear of reprisal. By shifting away from traditional views of accountability and embracing a more collaborative and trust-based approach, you can help your team achieve the high performance that current market conditions demand.

Job searching can feel like a full-time job in and of itself. Endless networking coffees and cover letter drafts can make it easy to get discouraged. And while it’s helpful to get support from family, friends, and your significant other, they may not truly grasp the day-to-day grind that’s needed to keep the momentum going. 

In fact, for many, searching for a job is an isolating experience. According to a recent American Staffing Association/Harris Poll Workforce Monitor survey, 72% of Americans say applying for jobs can feel like sending résumés into a “black box.” And four out of 10 unemployed U.S. job seekers revealed they didn’t land a single job interview in a year. 

This cycle of applying for jobs and not hearing back can lead to frustration, hopelessness and loneliness, says Richard Wahlquist, chief executive officer at the American Staffing Association.

One way to keep up a productive job search is to find a job-search partner. Experts say this support can help keep you motivated and feeling supported.

Here’s how to best work with another job searcher to both secure new roles:

1. You’ll gain an extra set of eyes and ears

There’s only so many hours in the day and so many networking channels one can explore. So, having a job partner—especially one searching in the same industry—can double your outreach. “They can identify job openings you missed,” says Wahlquist. 

2. They can help you polish your materials and prep for interviews

A job search partner can not only assist with proofreading, but they can also offer you a fresh perspective on your cover letter, and provide suggestions on how to customize your résumé for each position you apply for.

Interview prep is also paramount, and Walhquist says a job search partner can provide very helpful roleplay as you practice answering challenging interview questions. These exercises can improve your communication skills and boost your confidence.

3. They can help you stay motivated

Knowing that someone depends on your support can be motivating. “There’s an extra layer of accountability on days when the last thing you feel like doing is applying for another job,” says Wahlquist. 

How to choose a job search buddy

It’s a personal decision whether to partner with a job seeker in your same industry—and of course depends on who you know who might also be searching for a job at the same time. Here are a few reasons why picking someone in the same field can be helpful: 

• They understand the industry. Jenny Wood, a career-development expert and author of the new book Wild Courage: Go After What You Want and Get It, says picking a person in your field can be a good move, even if you’re worried about potential competition. “There are hundreds of thousands of jobs out there,” says Wood. “They only need one and you only need one. There are enough to go around.”
• They can give real feedback. Not only can they help you choose winning résumé keywords and bullet points, an insider can also help you grasp “what a solid versus mediocre answer is to an interview question,” says Wood. They’ll also better understand what certain role descriptions mean when you are both searching and applying.

How to be sure a job search partner adds value

Gaining support can only help you on your employment journey. “Job seekers who end up with the most options and, eventually, the best jobs are the ones who enlist as many people and resources as possible to support their job searches,” says Walhquist.

But be sure to keep an eye on the prize of getting a job, and keep the interactions productive. “While it may be comforting to constantly touch base with your job search partner, make sure the relationship is not getting in the way of your actual search,” says Wahlquist. “Sitting in a café with your friend may be fun, but at the end of the day, you have to actually do the work to apply for jobs.”

How often to check in

The frequency of check-ins depends on the individuals involved, says Matthew A. Solit, LMSW, executive clinical director with LifeStance Health. “Weekly may work for some, but for others, higher frequency can increase accountability.” It’s all about what works for you and your accountability partner or partners. “Mutually agreed upon communication patterns and a framework for accountability is key to a good working partnership,” adds Solit.

What to do when one of you gets a job

There is a high likelihood that one member of the partnership will be offered a position before the other. And, says Solit, when one member of the team succeeds, everyone succeeds. “It’s not a race, and it’s not about winning or losing,” says Solit. “It is important to continue to support your job-search peers even if you are hired first and to see the mutual commitment to accountability through to the end for both members.”

Catfishing. Once a trend confined to the realm of online dating. Now, like other relationship phenomena including ghosting, career cushioning, and quiet quitting, it’s infiltrated the workplace. This is bad for employers and employees alike. 

Corporate catfishing is when employers make false or misleading claims about their working culture in job ads or interviews in a bid to attract top talent, and it’s a big issue. Research shows that 70% of hiring managers have lied to candidates during hiring processes. A separate study also found that 72% of workers have experienced “shift shock,” where the reality of a new job doesn’t live up to what you were sold. 

The reason it’s happening is simple. Companies want to attract the best talent to fill skills gaps and drive performance. Yet presently, employers and employees have conflicting preferences over ideal working environments. The return-to-office movement is a prime example. 

In fact, our data shows that demand for fully remote jobs rose by 10% across last year, and by the end of 2024, almost two-thirds of workers sought remote roles. Yet, only 4% of employers advertised fully remote roles last year. The lack of remote roles on offer is unsurprising given that we’ve recently seen a spate of return-to-office mandates issued by companies including Amazon and JP Morgan.

In comes corporate catfishing: a half-baked solution some companies use when they cannot (or will not) offer what workers want. Maybe the hiring manager lies about how often employees are expected to show up to the office, or tells an applicant that the company is deeply committed to environmental efforts, when it’s actually been scaling back on its sustainability goals. Like with all lies, the truth will eventually come back to bite them.

While corporate catfishing may widen your talent pool, there’s no guarantee that this pool will be filled with the right talent. Workers are looking for certain working setups for a reason. For example, they could be looking for a remote role because they have a health condition that makes it tricky to go into the office every day, or need working hours that they can flex around the school run. Job seekers lured in under false pretenses are likely to be a poor cultural fit for the company’s working environment.

Plus, if workers do fall for corporate catfishing and are hired, they certainly won’t trust or feel loyal to that employer once they discover the truth of the working environment. This won’t be good for staff retention and could be costly for businesses, given that replacing a single employee can cost up to twice their annual salary. 

There’s also the reputational risks to consider. Smart job seekers will do a deep dive and look at online reviews from former employees before they accept roles. When the secret gets out (and it always does), the company’s reputation for lying to candidates will likely impact job offer acceptance rates and deter future prospects.

Businesses will be far better off if they’re transparent about their benefits and working environments from the outset. But the smartest employers won’t stop there. More than ever, workers care not only about where they work, but how, when, and who they work for. So if employers really want to build job seekers’ trust and set themselves apart in the war for top talent, they need to go one step further. They need to build a strong, genuine employer brand, which actively showcases everything from the company’s working setup and benefits to its mission and values.

To do this, employers should identify three core themes, which encapsulate the company’s unique value as an employer (be that a commitment to diversity and inclusion or an industry-leading vacation allowance). More than three, and your core identity can get lost in the noise. Sticking to these themes will help keep messaging feeling authentic and consistent across job ads, the company’s website, and social media. Having guidelines around tone of voice can complement this well, too.  

Showing, not just telling, workers what it’s really like to work for the company also helps build job-seekers’ trust in the employer brand. So, share pictures from team days and events on the company’s social media. Featuring posts from employees from all levels of the businesses, where they share their typical work day or professional achievements facilitated by company training programs or mentorship, can be a great way to do this. The content will feel more authentic to job seekers when it comes from their peers.

You should also post about things which reflect the company’s core values on LinkedIn. This helps demonstrate to job seekers that the values the company shouts about really are embedded into its DNA. For instance, if sustainability is important to you, you could post about another company’s new climate initiative.

We already have enough catfishing to dodge in the dating world. It’s time for employers to leave false promises behind and put transparency first. There’s someone out there for everyone, and getting more candid about workplace culture means everyone wins—both workers and employers can find their ideal match. 

Work is full of potential rejection. Ask a colleague for a favor, and they may refuse. Apply for a job, and you may not get it. Seek a promotion, and you may be passed over. Submit a proposal to a client, and it may not be accepted.

One key part of success is to be willing to learn from these failures, rather than to be paralyzed by them. Yet, you may find it hard to get over a rejection. Before you can learn anything from a failure, you first have to get beyond the emotions associated with rejection.

Dealing with rejection sensitivity

The first question you have to ask is whether a particular rejection is bothering you, or whether rejection in general is a problem. A long line of research suggests that some people have a high level of rejection sensitivity. There is even a measure of rejection sensitivity called the Rejection Sensitivity Questionnaire.

This measure asks you to consider a variety of situations in which you ask for something from another person. You rate both the level of anxiety or concern you might experience in that situation as well as the degree to which you expect someone would accept or reject your request. People high in rejection sensitivity get quite anxious when faced with the possibility of rejection and may also expect that their requests will be rejected. Rejection sensitivity may be a reaction people develop to feelings of rejection by key loved ones when growing up.

If you generally have anxiety about rejection, then it can hamper you in the workplace. You may avoid asking for things you need or pursuing new opportunities. You may also react with fear or anger when you feel like others are rejecting you. You might also take criticism of a project or your performance as a personal rejection rather than as feedback that provides an opportunity for you to improve.

If you’re sensitive to rejection in general, then you have ingrained a set of habits that probably will not go away on their own. This sensitivity is going to affect both your work and personal life, and so it’s worth addressing. A good therapist can be a valuable part of the process of understanding the source of your anxiety and expectation of rejection and help you to develop strategies to help you handle future situations more effectively.

Dealing with a specific painful rejection

Even if you’re not a rejection-sensitive person, you may still find a particular rejection at work hard to handle. Perhaps you had a trusted friend or colleague who has now turned your back on you. Maybe a longtime client has decided to work with someone else. You might have applied for a job that you really wanted and lost out to another candidate.

Of course, nobody should expected to get over a rejection immediately. Rejection stings, and that pain can last for a while. Sleep is an important part of your ability to deal with difficult emotions, so getting several good nights’ sleep can help you move past a painful rejection.

If there’s a specific rejection that stays with you, it probably reflects a significant loss for you that is worth understanding. You might be prone to avoid thinking about rejections, but it can be helpful to write about them. That writing can help you to get the thoughts outside of yourself, which can be healing. In addition, it may help you to understand the source of the loss.

Perhaps you feel betrayed by someone you trusted. It might be that the rejection affects something that is part of your self-concept. The rejection might feel like it is closing off a career or life path that you were invested in. If writing about the rejection doesn’t help, you might benefit from working with a counselor or therapist.

Career success ultimately requires that you put yourself in situations in which you could face rejection. Not only that, it’s virtually impossible to do anything of significance without being rejected often. That means you must develop strategies to learn to accept rejections, to analyze them so that you learn how to be more effective in the future, and to continue to try difficult things that might lead to additional rejections in the future.

It’s no secret that raising kids in the U.S. has become grossly expensive. The price of childcare alone has ballooned over the past decade, with many families reporting that it costs them at least a quarter of their annual income. Across many states, families need to earn an average of $180,000 to comfortably afford infant care; the high cost of living in states like California and New York can require an income exceeding $250,000.

An increasing burden on families

A new analysis by the online lending marketplace LendingTree captures why so many families are struggling to manage the enormous cost of having children. The study found that since 2023, the annual cost of raising a young child has jumped by nearly 36%, coming to about $30,000 per year. Over the course of 18 years, that amounts to almost a whopping $300,000. In four states—Hawaii, North Dakota, Washington, and Maryland—that figure can be well over $300,000, even rising over $360,000.

Overall, families report spending nearly 23% of their income on the annual expenses of raising children. Childcare comprises a significant portion of those expenses for families with young kids: According to LendingTree’s analysis, childcare costs spiked by more than 50% in just the past two years. Childcare centers have always struggled to make ends meet due to the steep cost of labor. As federal funding has dried up following the pandemic, however, that financial strain has only been exacerbated.

Beyond childcare

The cost of care is just one of the many additional expenses borne by families with children. There’s the cost of housing, as well as the attendant expenses associated with food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. The LendingTree analysis found, for example, that food costs jumped by nearly 30% since 2023. That means even in states where childcare is less expensive—like North Dakota—the annual cost of raising children can remain high due to other expenses, like housing. (In fact, the average cost of raising children over 18 years is lower in Massachusetts than it is in North Dakota.)

LendingTree’s findings also indicate that even as these costs rise precipitously, families are receiving less assistance from the government. Between 2023 and 2025, the value of federal tax credits decreased by over 44%, in part because the expanded child tax credit secured by the Biden administration expired. While it’s true that the cost of childcare continues to be one of the greatest challenges for many families, the financial burden doesn’t end there—and that’s unlikely to change without broader federal investment.

---

It’s rarely possible to be 100% efficient, 100% of our workday.  

We need breaks and working with others means we need time and space for that collaboration to happen. But oftentimes, a needed break or interaction can balloon into an unneeded time suck that leaves you feeling frustrated that you didn’t accomplish what you actually needed to get done.

So how do you identify when you’re spending way too much time in an area and then eliminate that waste so that you have more time for what’s most important? As a time management coach, here’s what I’ve found to be the most effective ways to make this happen.

Identifying your time sucks

Honest awareness: Sometimes you already know exactly what’s stealing your time. You just need to be honest with yourself and willing to address it.

Do you know that you just can’t resist checking your email every time a new message indicator pops up?

Do you know that you think you can just watch one YouTube video and then seemingly the next second you realize you’ve watched 10?

Do you know that you can never just send a quick text to your best friend, it always becomes a 20-minute text conversation?

Write down what you already know is taking more time than it should during your day as a commitment to admitting it and fixing the issue.

Automatic monitoring: Once you’ve recorded what you already know, one of the easiest next steps is to look at the automatic monitoring already in place on your phone.

Most phones will give you a weekly report of where you spent time on different apps. You may think that you’re not scrolling that much on Instagram, but the data may tell a different story.

You can also set up automatic reports of your computer usage if you find that’s an issue in addition to your phone.

Personal time tracking: A third way to identify your time sucks is through personal time tracking where you can make note of where your time is going both on and off the screen. I typically recommend tracking your time for at least two days, but if you want to do a more thorough analysis, document it for a week.

This can be done on paper, in an Excel document, or by using tools like Toggl or Timeular. My clients sometimes prefer the software options because of the ability to see consolidated reports. But if you find them overwhelming, it’s completely fine to keep things simple.

If you complete the above three steps, you’re starting to get a clear picture of where your time might be overinvested. Then it’s time to take action. Here are some tips on eliminating, or at least reducing, the three biggest time sucks in most people’s days.

Eliminating Your Time Sucks

Screen time

Some screen time can be a nice mental break. But if your data shows that you have more than 30 minutes of personal screen time during the workday that doesn’t fall into designated times off, like your lunch break, then you’re probably spending too much time in that category.

If you can’t handle social media or news sites, put the nuclear option on your device so that you’re completely blocked from viewing them outside of scheduled times and have no option to undo the choice. You can also add online shopping sites or TV or movie sites like NetFlix or Hulu to the blocked list. If you work from home and are a gamer, considering locking up your controllers in a timed box so that you can’t even think about beating the next level.

Communication

In addition to screen time, inefficient communication can be a huge time suck in your workday. In fact, I see it as one of the biggest time wasters among people who are working much longer hours than they would prefer.

To start, you’ll want to reduce or eliminate any scheduled meetings that don’t actually need to happen. There are many times where an email could suffice instead of a meeting. For example, when people contact me who I don’t know asking for a 15-minute meeting to explain something, I always reply by asking them to send over more information in written form. That way in less than a minute, I can scan what they sent and decide if it merits a conversation, and my workflow isn’t interrupted by unnecessary meetings.

If you’re in an office environment, beware of the drive-by meetings. They can be super useful, but they also can be productivity destroying. If you really need to focus and have a door, close it. If you don’t have a door or people open your door spontaneously, put up a sign and/or put on headphones. Some of my clients even go so far to set up “office hours,” which are times when they’re OK with drop-in chats. Outside of those office hours, they request that people schedule a meeting.

And finally, email and other asynchronous communication tools like IM or Slack can consume massive amounts more time than needed if you let them. One of the best ways to reduce time in these areas is to have designated times you log in and batch reply to all of the new messages, such as at the beginning, middle, and end of the workday. If that’s not permissible, at least give yourself a few spaces throughout the day to get focused work done by turning off notifications and if needed, putting up “Do not disturb.”

Disorganization

A final category of time suck during the workday is plain disorganization. You can waste so much time by being lost or losing items.

Start with a plan: I encourage all of my clients to make daily and weekly planning a ritual so that they’re clear on their priorities and always know what to do next. But if that’s too overwhelming to start, at least write down the three most important things to accomplish for the day. That simple act can dramatically increase your progress on your most critical tasks.

Leverage your energy: If you’re a super morning person, purposefully block that time from meetings, spend minimal time on email, and get your hardest tasks done first. If you’re barely awake until 10 a.m., do the opposite. Start slow responding to others and having a few meetings, and then block off 3 p.m. and later for your own work. Failing to organize your tasks around your energy levels can leave you frustrated because you have the time but not the mental capacity to get hard work done.

Organize your environment: You don’t need office drawers worthy of a Pinterest post. But you do need to be able to find what you need when you need it. If your physical disorganization or electronic disorganization is causing you to waste needless time searching for things, take some time to get yourself in order. Sometimes that looks like spending a couple of hours purging your desk and filing things away. Other times, it’s best to work on a few papers or folders a day until you have sufficient organization.

Your time will rarely be 100% utilized. But by following these tips you can dramatically reduce the time lost on time sucks so that you can invest it in what matters to you most.

Welcome to Pressing Questions, Fast Company’s work-life advice column. Every week, deputy editor Kathleen Davis, host of The New Way We Work podcast, will answer the biggest and most pressing workplace questions.

Q: Help! None of my coworkers have kids and don’t understand what it’s like.

A: No two people’s lives are the same and people with all kinds of family structures have issues that pull their time and attention away from work. That said, few things in life are as schedule-disrupting as being a parent.

In an ideal world, your boss and coworkers wouldn’t need to be parents themselves to understand things like needing to miss work when you have a sick kid or having a hard out each day at daycare pick-up time. Also, in an ideal world the school day and calendar would align better with the typical work day. We are obviously not in an ideal world, and unfortunately resentment between parents and coworkers without children is common.

Here are my suggestions to deal with it.

Suggest changes that would benefit everyone

Most parents can’t make 8 a.m. meetings, as that’s prime time for getting the kids out the door and to school. You know who else hates 8 a.m. meetings? Just about everyone. Rather have your colleagues resent you for being exempt from attending, suggest to your manager that morning meetings get rescheduled for after 9 a.m.

The same goes for taking time off for life’s unexpected problems. You have to leave work when your kid is sick or when there’s a snow day, doctor’s appointment or a recital. But everyone has things pop up, whether it’s their own dentist and doctor appointments, or the needs of their relatives or pets. If you’re in a leadership position, you can help foster a culture that recognizes that life’s obligations sometimes need to take priority over work. 

If you’re not in a leadership position, you can be the change you want to see by happily covering for your colleagues when something comes up. Hopefully the next time your kid gets pink eye they’ll remember the time you took over for them when their dog had to go to the vet.

Call it out

If you feel like you’ve made a good faith effort to prove how you’re a team player, have demonstrated that you are just as productive as the non-parents on your team, and have offered solutions and you still feel resentment, you might want to be direct and talk to your coworker or manager about it. As with any difficult workplace conversation, you can still enter it with a collaborative mindset. There’s a problem and you are going to solve it together. You are not on opposing teams.

As with other workplace disagreements, it can be helpful to approach the conversation with curiosity. Try something like: “I’ve noticed a lot of comments about my schedule. Is there something that’s causing an issue for the team or workflow that I’m not aware of?” If there is an issue you’re not aware of (like a domino effect of work falling on one person when you leave), once it’s out in the air you can problem solve. If there’s not an actual issue, just vague resentment, calling it out might force the person to address their own bias, or at least be the start of a conversation that can lead to more understanding.

Want some more reading on working parents? Here you go:

• I’m the CEO of a family tech company. Here’s how I’ve created kid-friendly work hours
• The school year used to favor working parents, but not anymore
• 4 simple ways leaders can better support working parents
• How longer school days benefit working mothers

In today’s dynamic, diverse, and rapidly changing workforce, organizations’ success is dependent upon creating an environment where different perspectives come together. That’s how we produce the best ideas. Despite the recent attacks on them, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion principles provide a crucial foundation for thriving companies.

If companies want to experience the benefits of broad ideas, they need to attract talented employees from different backgrounds. And once they’ve hired those top talents, they need to make sure that they don’t exclude anyone from participating in discussions and sharing their honest views.

Many arguments support why successful organizations need to be able to capture the best from as wide a range of people as possible. Here are a few of the main ones.

1. Results in greater creativity and innovation

By bringing a wide range of perspectives, experiences, and ideas to the table, organizations ensure that they have a large enough reservoir that they need to come up with fresh approaches and new, groundbreaking solutions.

In my book, Emotional Intelligence Game Changers: 101 Simple Ways to Win at Work + Life, I delve into how to create a culture of creativity. In an organization, employees need to be able to bounce new and diverse ideas off each other. They also need to trust that the company will value their uniqueness and contributions. In a diverse and rapidly changing landscape, organizations that limit their circle to people of similar backgrounds risk stagnation. They’re also likely to fail in their quest to recruit and keep talented people who are necessary for ongoing growth and success. 

2. Boosts connection and collaboration

When all employees feel free and empowered to share their thoughts and ideas, it builds a culture of connection and collaboration. As a result, teamwork skills begin to develop among diverse groups, breaking down barriers and increasing understanding of and respect for those who are different from us. The effect of this is increased motivation and commitment to work toward shared goals. CultureCon’s latest showed that when employees feel their voices are genuinely valued, they are 3.5 times more likely to report higher job satisfaction.

3. Increases the organization’s ability to attract and retain top talent

Being known as an organization that supports DEI principles is attractive to people who are looking for a place to work where they will be treated fairly and equitably. These individuals are looking for places where they can thrive and get the opportunity to work with other talented people. When they find a place where companies appreciate and recognize them, they are more motivated to remain with the organization. CultureCon’s research found that 63% of employees are more likely to stay at a company that actively prioritizes DEI.

4. Improves job satisfaction and well-being

When staff witness a genuine commitment to ensuring that they value, hear, and appreciate everyone, an atmosphere of trust and loyalty spreads through the organization. This leads to reduced turnover and enhanced job satisfaction, which makes people feel excited to be part of the organization. The result is greater productivity and overall organizational success.

5. Enhances the organizational brand and reputation

Having a strong commitment to diversity, inclusion, and social responsibility has far-reaching effects beyond the organization itself. The reputation that it builds will make the organization stand out as a leader. It will also attract new loyal customers, and secure more business opportunities. Customers and clients will search out organizations that they trust will develop fair, equitable, and diverse workplaces. 

DEI might be under attack, but organizations that continue to invest in it will reap the rewards in the long run. An inclusive, supportive workplace that encourages a broad range of ideas to flourish will result in creativity, innovation, and a positive work culture. And in the long term, those are the organizations that will last.

When it comes to wealth, most of us think about money. You measure your financial wealth by looking at your assets and your debts. But there are other areas in your life where you can be wealthy, including time. Would you consider yourself time-affluent or are you living the life of a time pauper? 

“Time wealth is all about freedom to choose how you spend your time, who you spend it with, where you spend it, and when you trade it for other things,” says Sahil Bloom, author of The 5 Types of Wealth: A Transformative Guide to Design Your Dream Life.

Building time wealth is about awareness and action, says Bloom. Be aware that time is your most precious asset and the one thing that you can never get back. Then act in relation to that awareness by treating time accordingly. 

“Do not allow it to simply exist where you are a passive taker of time,” says Bloom. “Create time for the things that you care about.”

Time and energy 

While you could make more money, you can’t make more time. You can, however, prioritize energy-creating tasks that unlock more time in your day. 

“Outcomes follow energy,” he explains. “The things that you are pulled towards—the things that you have a natural attraction towards—tend to be the things where you end up generating the best outcomes.”

For example, when you’re working on something that interests you, investing a unit of energy could generate 10, 100, or 1,000 times the outcome over something that feels like drudgery. In effect, you unlock time by generating the same output with fewer units of input. You now have more units of input, or energy, that are freed up to do other things.

Identifying energy-creating tasks goes back to awareness and action. For the awareness piece, Bloom recommends creating an energy calendar. Looking at your schedule, color code your activities according to the energy they created or drained. If a task lifts you up and makes you feel energized during or after the activity, mark it green. If it was neutral, mark it yellow. And if you physically felt depleted from the activity, mark it red. After a week, you will have a clear visual perspective of the types of activities that create energy versus drain energy from your life. 

Let energy drive your schedule

Awareness is the starting point for making slight, subtle changes over longer periods of time. While Bloom says you probably won’t be able to eliminate all the energy-draining activities from your life—that’s a bit of a pipe dream—slowly reposition your calendar. For example, prioritize energy-creators at the start of your day to ensure you get the most done. Home in on them and making them a bigger part of your life. 

Also, adjust the energy-draining things to make them less depleting. For example, Bloom worked in a high intensity finance role in 2019 and 2020. Phone calls and video meetings, which consisted of at least five hours of his day, were a huge energy drainer for him. 

“The first reaction when you hear something like this is to think, ‘Well, I can’t change that. That’s a huge part of my job,’” he says. “But if you scrape a layer deeper, you can ask the question, ‘Are there adjustments I can make to the way that I’m doing this that would make it neutral or energy creating?’”

Focus on what drains your energy

Bloom decided he could take some of the calls while on a walk, which created energy because he was outside, moving around. “Also, I can’t multitask when I’m walking, so I’m more focused, more present on the call,” he says. “I took half of my phone calls and made them into walking calls. I was still doing the exact same work, but I was doing it in a way that was significantly more energy creating, which led to significantly better outcomes.”

Another way to let energy drive your schedule is by batching activities to leverage the different levels. For example, confine some of the energy drainers to a single block, so you aren’t hitting speed bumps throughout the day. Another suggestion is to put two energy creating activities around an energy draining activity.

“Manage them more effectively, so that you can get through to the other side more efficiently and in a happier date of mind,” says Bloom.

Prioritizing what matters

The entire point of considering time a state of wealth is to recognize that it is your most precious asset, and you need to intentionally design our time now. In fact, Bloom argues that the most dangerous word in the dictionary is “later.” 

“We say it to ourselves all the time,” he says. “I’ll spend more time with my kids later. I’ll prioritize my relationship with my partner and friends later. I’ll find my purpose later. ‘Later’ becomes another word for ‘never,’ because those things won’t exist in the same way. Later, your kid won’t be five years old. Later, your partner and friends won’t be there for you if you’re not there for them now. You won’t magically wake up with purpose later.”

Investing time now will pay off in dividends later, creating time wealth that can be richer than money can buy.

People who most frequently encounter everyday discrimination—those subtle snubs and slights of everyday life—are more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression.

What’s more, that finding remains true no matter the person’s race, gender, age, education, income, weight, language, immigration status or where they live.

These are the key takeaways from our recent study, published in JAMA Network Open.

Everyday discrimination refers to the routine ways people are treated unfairly because of characteristics such as skin color, perceived background or general appearance.

Generally, it means disrespectful treatment: waiting longer than others for help at a store, having your ideas dismissed without consideration at work, or hearing rude comments about your identity.

Although marginalized groups endure everyday discrimination most often, our study indicates that this is a widespread issue affecting people of all races and backgrounds.

I’m a professor who specializes in community health. My team and I analyzed data from the 2023 National Health Interview Survey, which included a weighted sample of nearly 30,000 U.S. adults, adjusted to accurately reflect more than 258 million people – approximately 75% of the country.

Along with reporting frequency of everyday discrimination, participants completed clinical screenings for depression and anxiety.

The results were striking: Nearly 56% of participants experienced at least occasional everyday discrimination, with 3.6% having “high levels,” meaning they faced discrimination most frequently – at least monthly and often weekly.

High levels were most prevalent among Black adults, at 8.6%. Multiracial respondents were next with 6.4%. Hispanics and white participants were at about 3%, Asians just over 2%.

Women and immigrants, people with disabilities and those who are overweight, obese or struggling with food insecurity also reported higher levels.

When compared with those reporting no discrimination, participants with high levels had five times the odds of screening positive for either depression or anxiety, and nearly nine times the odds of screening positive for both.

As discrimination increased, the increase in screening positive for depression, anxiety or both varied by race, with a more noticeable rise among groups that are often overlooked in these discussions—white, Asian and multiracial adults.

This doesn’t mean discrimination is less harmful for Black, Hispanic/Latino or other racial and ethnic groups. One possible reason for our study’s findings may be that groups that have long endured structural discrimination may have developed more ways over time to cope with it.

Why it matters

At some point, all of us experience unfair treatment due to our personal traits. But this type of discrimination isn’t just unpleasant. Our study shows it has real consequences for health.

Along with depression and anxiety, discrimination creates chronic stress, leading to increased risk for hypertension, heart disease, impaired brain functioning, accelerated aging and premature death.

For some, everyday discrimination may emerge at different times in life. This can happen to people as they get older or when they become ill.

But for others, it is a constant. This includes people living in marginalized communities, people of color, those socioeconomically disadvantaged or with disabilities, or those who identify as LGBTQ+.

What other research is being done

Multiracial people are uniquely challenged because they navigate multiple racial identities. This often leads to feelings of isolation, which increases mental health risks.

White adults, though less frequently exposed to racial discrimination, still face mistreatment, particularly if they have lower incomes, limited education or working-class backgrounds. In recent years, white people have perceived rising levels of discrimination against their own group.

People of Asian descent are vulnerable to societal pressures and harmful stereotypes, which spiked during the COVID-19 pandemic.

When factors are combined – for example, adding financial insecurity or immigration status to racism – compounded health challenges arise.

What’s next

Understanding how discrimination affects health for all can lead to policies and programs targeting root causes of mental health disparities and the rising rates of depression and anxiety.

Discrimination isn’t just a Black versus white issue. It’s a public health crisis affecting all Americans. Acknowledging its harmful health effects is a first step.

Monica Wang is an associate professor of public health at Boston University.

This article is republished from The Conversation, as a Research Brief (a short take on interesting academic work), under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

---

As companies pull back on their diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, will their commitments to equal pay also waver?

You know the feeling—your calendar is packed, your inbox is overflowing, and every decision, big or small, lands on your desk. Leadership today isn’t just about managing teams and making strategic calls; it’s about navigating an endless stream of meetings, emails, and expectations.

While burnout is widely recognized, most solutions focus on time management rather than cognitive bandwidth management. The real issue isn’t just being overworked—it’s being oversaturated. Leaders are drowning in information, decisions, and interruptions, leaving little room for the deep thinking required for creativity, strategic foresight, and high-quality decision-making. 

A study from the University of California found that it takes an average of 23 minutes to refocus after an interruption. Multiply that by dozens of daily distractions, and it’s clear why many leaders struggle to see the bigger picture. The ability to make sound, high-impact decisions isn’t about working harder; it’s about creating space for deep thought. 

The Hidden Costs of Constant Busyness 

Many leaders equate productivity with busyness, believing that the more they do, the more they accomplish. However, excessive cognitive load leads to decision fatigue, diminishing the quality of choices over time. The constant need to process information can also limit strategic foresight, causing leaders to operate reactively rather than proactively. Without time to reflect, innovation suffers, and leaders struggle to connect disparate ideas or generate fresh insights. Perhaps most importantly, the mental strain of constant cognitive overload erodes the ability to inspire, connect, and energize teams, leading to emotional exhaustion. 

Through my work advising leaders, I have seen the biggest shift happen when they gain clarity on what is most important for them to focus on. When they create space to think, they move from reactive firefighting to intentional, high-impact leadership. To support this shift, I developed a structured approach that helps leaders pause, reflect, and see things differently before diving into the next wave of demands. By making reflection a habit, they regain control over their time and amplify their ability to lead with purpose. 

White space isn’t a luxury—it’s a strategic imperative. But how can leaders reclaim time for deep thinking when everyone wants a piece of them? 

Scheduling Uninterrupted Blocks for Reflection 

If you don’t protect your time, no one else will. Blocking thinking time on your calendar isn’t just about setting aside hours—it’s about creating the right conditions for meaningful reflection. Some CEOs, like Bill Gates, take “Think Weeks” to immerse themselves in strategic visioning. While a whole week might not be feasible, micro-retreats—such as two-hour deep-thinking sessions once a week—can significantly improve clarity and decision-making. 

To implement this, designate a specific time each week when you are completely unreachable. Use this time to tackle complex problems, review long-term strategies, or explore innovative ideas. Changing your environment can also enhance deep thinking; a walk, a quiet room, or a retreat space can be instrumental in shifting your mindset from reactionary to strategic. 

Reducing Decision Fatigue by Delegating and Automating 

Not every decision requires your input. Barack Obama and Steve Jobs famously simplified their daily choices—wearing the same outfit daily—to preserve mental energy for high-stakes decisions. Leaders should similarly identify which decisions they must own and which ones can be delegated or automated. 

Start by categorizing your decisions: strategic ones require deep thinking, operational ones can often be delegated, and administrative ones are best automated. Empowering your team to take ownership of decisions within their expertise frees up cognitive space for you to focus on higher-impact areas. Batching smaller decisions into designated review sessions can also prevent constant context switching. Automation tools can also help eliminate repetitive tasks, allowing leaders to focus their energy on what truly matters. 

Creating “No-Meeting Zones” for Deep Work 

While necessary, meetings often disrupt the ability to engage in strategic work. Some companies, like Shopify, have introduced “Meeting-Free Wednesdays” to give employees uninterrupted time for deep work. Leaders can implement a similar approach by establishing specific time blocks where meetings are off-limits, enabling more focused thinking. 

Redesigning meeting culture is another way to protect deep work. Encouraging asynchronous collaboration—through well-documented memos, video updates, and shared decision logs—can reduce the need for real-time discussions. Adopting a “50-minute meeting rule” also helps ensure that meetings don’t consume an entire hour and allows for short breaks to reflect before diving into the next task. Another interesting approach I have implemented with my clients to enhance strategic discussions is to hold a silent meeting to allow leaders to read and reflect on strategic plans before engaging in a dialogue. 

Being Selective About Information Intake 

In an era of constant connectivity, leaders must be intentional about the information they consume. Too much input can be just as damaging as too little. Instead of passively absorbing every report, email, or industry update, curate your information sources carefully. 

Limiting the number of newsletters, reports, and updates you follow can help reduce cognitive clutter. Setting specific times during the day to check emails and news—rather than reacting to every notification—prevents constant distractions. Another helpful practice is maintaining a “Reverse To-Do List.” Instead of listing tasks to complete on the list, you instead identify habits, commitments, or information sources you can eliminate to free up mental space. Structured reflection rituals, such as weekly reviews of key learnings rather than endless content consumption, can further sharpen decision-making. 

Great leadership isn’t about being the busiest person in the room—it’s about making the best decisions. The leaders who thrive in complexity aren’t those who power through every request but those who create the mental space necessary for clarity and innovation. If you’re constantly overwhelmed, it may not be a workload problem but a thinking-time problem. Designing intentional white space isn’t about stepping back; it’s about stepping into your most strategic, creative, and high-impact leadership self. 

When meeting clients, I make one promise—to see the world as it could be. 

That’s not a bad message right now. It’s a pretty weird world out there. The volatile political and socio-economic landscape can make us all feel like things are going to hell. And in the slightly less real world of marketing and advertising, that’s even more the case. The challenges of any agency or client team continue to escalate. Instability abounds. Then there’s the issue of client loyalty, reduced scopes, tighter timelines, and the not-so-secret plan of AI to take everyone’s jobs. And then the cynicism comes.

As we know, misery loves company, so soon—if you want to find it—it can turn up everywhere. You’ll see it in status meetings, LinkedIn posts, industry events, and coffee machine catch-ups. Quickly it becomes less funny. In the end, it’s just a deluge of boring negative energy.

That’s why optimism is a way out. We need radiators, not drains, in our teams and our businesses.

But let’s be clear here, it’s not about smiling and hand clapping and whooping. Toxic positivity can be a nightmare, and will inevitably create a feeling of mistrust or emptiness from employees. It’s about harnessing a belief and way of working that will refuse to allow the status quo to take hold or accept that things are inevitably going to be terrible.

Active optimism

Let’s turn to the concept that I call active optimism. I see this as being willing to see what others don’t, to learn, and to try new things. It’s about fostering the growth mindset, which in turn allows people to be who they are and do things they never thought possible.

Critically, as opposed to the cynics who are simply tiring to be around, active optimism creates a flywheel of energy that gathers people up and becomes a magnet for others. Now, don’t get me wrong, a little bit of skepticism is sometimes useful. But in the world we face today, active optimism can be a powerful tool. And you can embed it into an organization.

Practically, I define active optimism as follows:

Taking responsibility

Some days it’s hard to be positive. We have to deal with the truth and honesty. Sometimes, the truth isn’t great.  But we also know that our team needs us on our feet and to find a way forward. We need to take more responsibility for the environment, aspirations, and world as it could be. Breaking Bad creator Vince Gilligan recently made a plea to the writing community – to take more responsibility by Writing More Good Guys. In a world that’s turning dark, taking responsibility is what a leader does.

Adopting the ‘we can if’ mentality

Adam Morgan and Mark Barden in their brilliant book, A Beautiful Constraint talk about the power of using ‘we can if…’ as a starting point for finding a solution when faced with obstacles. I’m obsessed with this approach. We spend so much of our time with challenges it’s so easy to default to ‘it’s not going to happen.’ In many cases, that seems a perfectly reasonable point of view (back to that point about healthy skepticism).

But the moment we use ‘we can if…’ we’ve started to create an answer. From there we can build a way forward. Try it, I promise it works.

Implementing a reality distortion bubble

My good friend, the brilliant Rob Schwartz, introduced me to this. Like some kind of Rebellion Base in Star Wars, you need something to keep the dark side out. When the chatter or negativity can start to rise, having you and your management team able to take time to live in this reality distortion bubble means you can help each other believe and keep moving.

Far too many of us spend time with people coming up saying things aren’t going well. Even if they are. So it can sometimes feel like there’s no good news, or that it’s only ever a problem. Sadly that’s the job, which is why protecting yourself and your leadership team from it can be so useful.

Now, as I’ve mentioned before, this doesn’t mean not dealing with the truth or putting your head in the sand. It does mean don’t get taken down by these hits and occasionally give you and your team the opportunity to go into that bubble and think about the positivity in your journey to the world as it could be.

Never wasting momentum

A small win here, a positive meeting there. Grab them, socialize them, and understand why they went well. Learn and repeat. Negativity is toxic and can get into the corridors and crevices of a team very easily. But so can momentum.

Surrounding yourself with the right people

You want to spend most of your time with radiators, not drains. We’re the sum of the people we surround ourselves with. Get the energy in the room and, where necessary, change the people, or change the people!

It can be hard to be optimistic when fortune doesn’t smile on you, and it’s even harder when you are surrounded by cynicism or negativity. Right now, many of us see a world and industry full of volatility and pessimism. But I believe for businesses, teams, and leaders, active optimism in seeing the world as it could be is the only practical course of action.