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.

The psychological contract hasn’t just shifted around where we work. It has shifted, and continues to shift, around the entire relationship between organizations and employees. That shift in expectations feels most dramatic when we look at Gen Z, the latest entrants to the workforce.

More than 40% of Gen Z employees have refused a work assignment because of ethical concerns. Nearly four in 10 have turned down a job with a company that doesn’t align with their values. In the workplace, they are driving the conversation around social justice, mental health, and work-life balance.

More than 90% of workers say they’ve been influenced by Gen Z on issues of meaning at work, and more than six in 10 say Gen Z has made them more likely to speak up when they don’t approve of something at work.

Career Stage vs. Generational Differences

Some of the generational differences we’re experiencing are just career stage differences. While the Three C’s of meaningful work—community, contribution, and challenge—are important for everyone, different people will value different sources of meaning more highly. In particular, those newer to the workforce tend to want opportunities to learn and grow.

Jennifer Deal, who has studied generational changes at work for many years, says, “When people talk about generations, what they do is they think about lumps of people cohorts that were born at a particular time, and that doesn’t really have as much of an effect in the workplace as does life stage, career stage, and level in the organization. Young people want to be challenged. While you should focus on all Three C’s for everybody, you might want to put more weight on challenge for people who are new to the workforce and weigh things differently for people who are middle or later career.”

Other generational differences, however, represent a shift in employees’ expectations of organizations and their leaders. Arthur Brooks shares, “Every year I teach Harvard MBA students about happiness and its unique relationship to leadership. These students are almost all destined for tremendous success as measured in worldly terms: money, prestige, and power. To most people in our society, this seems like a dream come true and the secret to happiness. Yet each year, when I speak to my MBA students—both in class and in private office hours—many are concerned. Are they truly on the path to happiness because of their near-certain success? They talk to alumni who complain about workaholism, broken relationships, and trouble finding passion. This provokes a lot of anxiety about meaning.”

What Gen Z can teach

In our consulting work, we’re frequently called in to help leaders navigate the divide between younger and older employees. We commonly hear things like, “These kids just don’t want to work.” We find it more accurate to say, “These kids don’t want to work the way you did.” 

While younger employees of course have a lot to learn, we believe this generation also has some things to teach. As we move toward a new, better model of work, this rising cohort is challenging many long-held ideals and broken structures. They aren’t encumbered by the old system because they haven’t invested in it.

Kahlil Shepard, a Gen Z worker, says, “I want to do things that matter. I want to feel like I’m constantly evolving. I want to work at a place where leaders are facilitating not just my growth broadly but also my ability to live out my values in the world.”

Leaders can, and should, challenge this cohort to temper their ideals with practical realities. At the same time, leaders have an opportunity to take their aspirations of a better model and help bring it to life. This requires leaders to unlearn some of the meaning-killing behaviors that are a part of the old model and adopt better ways of working.

The future holds the promise of better work for all of us. We all want meaningful work—work that builds community, that contributes to others, and that challenges us to grow. As a leader, you have far more influence than you think in creating this meaning for others.

Small moments of meaning can create ripples that reach our families, friends, and neighbors. The impact of these moments can extend far into the future. We believe that now and into the future every job can, and should, be meaningful with the help of a great leader. We believe that leader is you.

What if all jobs were meaningful? 

Imagine a world where every job is designed to be sustainable and fulfilling. Where jobs offer not just a paycheck but also a sense of contribution. Imagine work environments that prioritize relationships and connections over mere transactions. What if every employee was valued not as a temporary fix or a number on a balance sheet but as a crucial, long-term contributor to the organization’s success? Imagine a world where earning a living did not come at the cost of living a meaningful life. How would this shift in work impact our organizations, our society, and our personal well-being?

Making work meaningful is not an item to check off your to-do list. It’s the critical lens through which you must view every decision, interaction, and task. Meaning is created—or destroyed—in daily moments. Every conversation in which you truly listen, every piece of positive feedback you give, and every project you assign that encourages learning and growth don’t just add up—they multiply.

Excerpted from Meaningful Work: How to Ignite Passion and Performance in Every Employee. Copyright © 2025 by Wes Adams and Tamara Myles. Available from PublicAffairs, an imprint of Hachette Book Group, Inc.

Things are tough right now, with complexity and uncertainty in the world driving stress and worry. You’re probably trying to stay positive and muscle through. But there’s an important difference between keeping appropriately optimistic and acting with toxic positivity.

If you’re faced with toxic positivity in yourself or others, it’s probably based on good intentions that have run amok. But it can actually create a negative spiral that can make things worse.

Staying positive during trying times

According to a survey from MyPerfectResume, people are reporting record levels of exhaustion, anxiety, and stress with 88% who said they were burned out. In addition, 32% of respondents reported they felt anxiety, including 30% who had headaches and 25% who had muscle pain related to their burnout, according to the data. 

Attempting to stay optimistic is a reasonable response, but toxic positivity is what happens when that goes too far. It involves ignoring reality, suppressing negative emotions, and trying to be overly positive in every situation, regardless of reality. Those with toxic positivity may also try to impose their attitudes on others—to the annoyance of those around them.

Toxic positivity has multiple negative effects. First, when people demonstrate toxic positivity, it can result in denying reality, and undermining their ability to respond constructively to negative situations. Second, an unwillingness to express real emotions can result in feeling isolated from others and can cause mental health challenges for the person expressing toxic positivity. 

Third, when someone is acting with toxic positivity and denying other’s emotions, it creates barriers to forming a trusting relationship, because others may feel devalued. Fourth, when someone is perceived as inauthentic, others may question their honesty or integrity—again getting in the way of building relationships.  

So, how can you be positive without embracing toxic behavior? There are some strategies that work.

Be aware and be realistic

You can avoid toxic positivity by staying aware of what’s going on—including the bad news or challenges that emerge. Repressing or avoiding difficulties or uncomfortable facts is a classic characteristic of toxic positivity. Avoid burying your head in the sand. Instead, seek information, stay in the know, and be aware. You don’t have to overdo negative thinking or marinate in bad news, but you will want to keep your eyes open to real situations and circumstances.

It’s also important to be realistic. You don’t need to overcorrect toxic positivity by catastrophizing or anticipating all the worst outcomes, but it’s constructive to be clear about what’s going on and face up to the need for solutions. Put energy into responding to problems instead of investing energy in sealing them out.

As you’re working through disappointment or discouragement with yourself or others, also avoid using insincere positive statements or gimmicks. A study published in Psychological Science found that most people believe positive statements can help their mood and their self-esteem. But in the experiment, people who struggled with low self-esteem and who also repeated positive self-statements like, “I’m a loveable person,” felt worse than they did before using the self-statement.

The bottom line: Sometimes inauthentic or superficial solutions like hollow self-talk are worse than an honest assessment of what’s difficult and an intention to deal with it. Encourage and empower yourself and others, but stop short of using superficial feel-good statements that get in the way of authenticity or action.

Be empathetic

At the same time you’re aware of situations and realities, you’ll also need to stay in tune with people and be empathic toward them. Consider what they’re going through, ask questions, and listen to their points of view.

By validating what people are going through and by being present with them in tough times, you can both support them and empower them to work through difficulties. This is helpful to them and it also builds the relationship, which is good for both of you.

Also avoid imposing your attitudes on others. If you’re naturally an optimistic person, that’s fine, but avoid attempting to change others. You’ll want to support them, but if you try to convince someone that everything is okay despite all they’re going through, you’ll just irritate them and drive a wedge in the relationship.

It’s okay to be optimistic

While you’re avoiding a toxic approach to positivity, you can be optimistic. Look to the future and be hopeful about it—and take action to find solutions for the issues that are important to you.

Optimism can lead to positive outcomes. In a study of over 70,000 people researchers from Boston University surveyed respondents about their optimism and compared it to their health data, over a 10 to 30 year period. They found that those who were more optimistic boosted their longevity by 11% to 15% and increased their chances of living to age 85 by 50%.

These effects on longevity were in spite of participants’ age, education, diseases, or depression—and regardless of habits related to alcohol use, exercise, or diet. Researchers believe that optimism is so powerful because it may help people bounce back from stress and regulate emotions. 

The difference between toxic positivity and healthy optimism is a matter of degree. If you deny reality, you may be tipping into toxic territory. But if you can be empathetic and avoid imposing your positivity on others, you reach a reasonable balance and connect more deeply with others.

In the past week, I had “conversations” with two leaders who talked too much. They were good people with interesting stories to share. But they went on for far too long while I just sat and listened. Characteristically, they asked few questions and, when they did, didn’t seem to be interested in my responses. These two leaders were engaged but seemingly not curious or fully present.

These encounters crystallized something I’ve observed repeatedly in my decades of executive coaching: A damaging leadership blind spot is the simple inability to stop talking.

I call this a “leadership trap” because it ensnares otherwise effective executives in a paradox: The same verbal fluency that may have helped them rise through organizational ranks becomes a liability once they arrive in positions of authority. What got them noticed now gets in their way.

The drivers of excessive talking

As I reflected on these two leaders, I realized they reflected a pattern I’ve seen many times. Contrary to what many might assume, their excessive talking wasn’t rooted in narcissism or self-absorption. Instead, it flowed from more complex motivations they likely didn’t even recognize.

The first executive, a fast-moving consumer goods leader, seemed driven by an underlying insecurity. Despite his considerable achievements, his need to recount every detail of his company’s growth story suggested he was still seeking validation. His monologues were attempts to prove his worth—a verbal résumé delivered even when no one had questioned his credentials.

The second leader, a newly promoted senior vice president in healthcare, displayed what I’ve come to recognize as “the silence phobia.” Whenever our conversation reached a natural pause, she would quickly fill the gap with another anecdote. This discomfort with silence is not uncommon among leaders, who often experience momentary quiet as a vacuum that must be filled.

Why leaders often talk too much

In my coaching practice, I’ve identified several other drivers that cause well-intentioned leaders to monopolize conversations:

Some leaders talk excessively due to underdeveloped self-awareness. They genuinely don’t realize they’re dominating discussions. Without deliberate attention to their communication patterns, these leaders never notice the subtle signs of disengagement around them—the avoided eye contact, the phones checked under the table, the contributions that gradually diminish.

Others feel intense pressure to appear intelligent and in control, especially those promoted based on technical prowess rather than leadership ability. They may dive into excessive detail, not realizing that their desire to impress often achieves the opposite effect, frustrating employees who prefer clear, concise direction.

The organizational cost

When leaders don’t create space for others’ voices, organizations pay a steep price—often without realizing the source of their struggles.

Both leaders I met last week lead sizable teams. I couldn’t help wondering how their communication styles were affecting their organizations. Were team members experiencing the same one-sided conversations? Were valuable insights going unshared because there was simply no space to offer them?

This pattern creates what I think of as “conversational quicksand.” The more leaders talk, the less others contribute. The less others contribute, the more leaders feel compelled to fill the silence. Each interaction reinforces the dynamic, gradually pulling teams deeper into passivity.

The business consequences extend beyond frustrating meetings. When employee engagement diminishes, team members feel their input is neither valued nor necessary. Innovation suffers as people become less inclined to voice their opinions, knowing they’ll struggle to find space in the conversation.

Perhaps most damaging, leaders who talk too much paradoxically undermine their own influence. When someone speaks at length, their key messages get lost in the verbal deluge —important signals drowning in noise. Team members start tuning out, missing crucial information as they struggle to maintain focus through lengthy monologues.

In exit interviews, feeling “not listened to” consistently ranks among the top reasons talented people leave organizations. The efficiency of team operations also suffers, with long-winded explanations making meetings feel like endurance exercises rather than productive gatherings.

Breaking the pattern

One of the most difficult challenges in helping verbose leaders change their approach is that many don’t recognize the problem. The first step toward change is typically a wake-up call—objective feedback that makes the pattern impossible to ignore.

A structured 360-degree feedback process often provides this necessary reality check. One leader I worked with was genuinely shocked when his feedback revealed that team members felt “steamrolled” in meetings.

For leaders ready to address this challenge, I recommend a simple but powerful practice: the “talk time” journal. After each significant meeting, they estimate the percentage of time they spent talking. One executive I coached was stunned to discover he was talking 70–80% of the time in meetings explicitly called to get input from his team.

The “WAIT principle”—asking oneself “Why Am I Talking?” before continuing to speak—offers another practical checkpoint. This simple internal question helps leaders assess whether their contribution adds value or merely takes up space.

Today’s technology offers additional support. AI-driven meeting analytics tools can monitor speaking patterns, providing objective data on who speaks and for how long—a communication fitness tracker where numbers tell the truth when perception might not.

Many leaders benefit from enlisting a “communication buddy”—someone they trust to provide honest feedback with subtle real-time cues during meetings when the leader begins to dominate.

Perhaps the most powerful technique is practicing strategic silence. By consciously pausing after asking questions and resisting the urge to fill quiet moments, leaders create space for reflection and encourage more thoughtful contributions from others.

An increase in influence

After my encounters last week, I reflected on a leader I’d coached several years ago. He had initially displayed the same pattern of dominating conversations but had committed to changing his approach. After six months of deliberate practice, he had reduced his talking time from approximately 60% to 30% of team meetings.

The results were transformative—not just more engaged employees but also better decisions, faster execution, and ultimately stronger business results. “I used to think leadership was about having all the answers,” he told me. “Now I understand it’s about asking the right questions.”

This paradoxical result—increased influence through decreased talking—emerges consistently in my work with leaders. When they create space for others’ voices, they not only access more diverse thinking but also elevate the significance of their own contributions.

The goal isn’t to make leaders talk less just for the sake of it. Instead, it’s about helping them become more effective communicators who create environments where every voice contributes to success. When leaders master this balance, their influence increases even as their word count decreases.

As I left my meetings with those two leaders last week, I wished I could offer them this insight: Your greatest impact as a leader often comes not from what you say, but from what you enable others to say. Leadership communication isn’t about holding the floor—it’s about creating the conditions for collective intelligence to flourish.

The next time you find yourself dominating a discussion, ask yourself: Am I talking because it’s necessary, or simply because I can? Your leadership effectiveness may depend on your answer.

It’s safe to say that worker happiness and well-being is shaky at best. In 2024, just about half of all American employees reported feeling very satisfied with their jobs, and only about a third were happy with their pay or opportunities for promotion. Younger employees seem particularly frustrated by their working conditions: The latest edition of Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace report found that just 34% of workers said they were thriving, with a marked drop from 35% to 31% among those under the age of 35.

While this sentiment persists across the American workforce, a new report from the Pew Research Center indicates that blue-collar workers are perhaps the most likely to feel dissatisfied and detached from their work. In a survey of more than 5,200 employees, only about 43% of those who identified as blue-collar workers said they were very satisfied with their jobs—while 53% of other workers expressed the same. (Pew defines blue-collar workers as those in such industries as manufacturing, agriculture, retail, hospitality, and transportation.)

A key issue for many blue-collar workers who are frustrated by their jobs is pay. Overall, a third of them said they were dissatisfied with their compensation, though that figure was higher (40%) for women who held those jobs when compared to men (30%). The study found that workers had a variety of grievances, with many claiming that their wages did not keep pace with the rising cost of living; others said they were frustrated by pay inequities and that they earned less than colleagues who did comparable work. Beyond pay, blue-collar workers were also more dissatisfied with their health insurance coverage and lack of flexibility in working hours.

But the greatest difference in how blue-collar workers feel about their jobs relative to other workers is whether they view it as a real career. More than half of blue-collar workers described what they do as “just a job to get you by,” rather than a career. (Women were even more likely to say that, with 61% characterizing their work as just a job.)

Only a third said they considered their work to be a career—while 56% of other workers identified their jobs as careers. There is also a clear generational divide when it comes to happiness among blue-collar workers: Older workers were more likely to be satisfied with their job on all counts. In fact, nearly half of them said they viewed their work as a career.

It’s possible that blue-collar workers feel less attached to their jobs in part because of how they are perceived. Less than a third of blue-collar workers said they believed other Americans respected their jobs, when compared to nearly half of all other workers feeling like their jobs demanded a certain level of respect. Many of them did, however, report feeling more respected by their colleagues or even by customers.

Given their frustrations about compensation and often-limited opportunities for career advancement, it is hardly surprising that so many blue-collar workers feel that their work gets little recognition by the broader American public. But some things could be looking up: While too many blue-collar workers remain underpaid, they have also benefitted from historic wage growth in the aftermath of the pandemic.

---

As gerontologists—social scientists who study aging populations—we envision a future in which older people leave a doctor’s visit with a prescription to go volunteer for something.

Does that sound far-fetched? There’s scientific research backing it up.

Good for your health

While spending more than a dozen years researching what happens when older adults volunteer with nonprofits, including churches, we’ve found that volunteers consider themselves to be in better health than their peers who don’t. In addition, their blood pressure is lower, and they appear to be aging more slowly than other people of the same age.

Other researchers have found that volunteering is associated with a lower risk of having a heart attack.

The mental health benefits are just as striking.

Volunteering is tied to having fewer symptoms of depression and being more satisfied with your life. It often brings an instant boost in mood—along with a deeper sense of meaning and purpose.

Even engaging in what’s known as “informal helping”—lending a hand to friends, neighbors, or community members in need, without getting paid or participating in an organized program—can help you in similar ways.

There are also health benefits for those who start volunteering much earlier in life.

Children and teens who volunteer tend to have better health and lower levels of anxiety and fewer behavioral problems than those who don’t volunteer.

Changing demographics

The number of U.S. adults at least 62 years old—the earliest age at which you can claim Social Security retirement benefits—has grown by nearly 35 million since 2000, while the number of children and teens under 18 has fallen by nearly 1.5 million. There are now about 76 million Americans over 62 and 71 million under 18.

This change has been gradual. Following a long-term demographic shift, record numbers of Americans are reaching retirement age.

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/FWpvb/1

Benefits for society and the economy

The benefits of volunteering aren’t just for the volunteers themselves.

The total value of the hours of unpaid work volunteers put in totals an estimated U.S.$170 billion each year, according to AmeriCorps, the federal agency focused on national and community service.

And participating in community service programs can lead to better job prospects for volunteers, that same agency has found.

AmeriCorps Seniors, which focuses on engaging volunteers ages 55 and older, runs programs that offer major benefits to their communities. These include the Foster Grandparent program, which connects older adult mentors to children, and the Senior Companion program, which connects volunteers to older adults seeking some help to continue living independently in their own homes.

A current AmeriCorps Seniors pilot program is helping adults 55 and up, who can have more trouble landing new jobs than younger people, gain new job skills through their community service.

People of all ages can get together through volunteering. Some organizations intentionally encourage this kind of intergenerational cooperation, including CoGenerate and Generations United.

https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/MYh8W/1

Rebuilding communities

Researchers have also found that volunteering may increase trust within a community, especially when it brings together people from different backgrounds.

It can strengthen “social cohesion,” a term researchers use to describe how much people bond and help each other, and reduce prejudice.

Volunteers’ views on social issues may change through their work, too: More than 4 in 5 adults over 55 who tutored public school students to strengthen their reading skills in the national Experience Corps program, for example, stated that their views on public education evolved as a result. Those volunteers expressed more support for public education and said they’d be more likely to vote in favor of spending on schools.

An American pastime

Our findings are backed by science, but they also have roots in American history.

Alexis de Tocqueville—a French philosopher and diplomat who arrived in the United States in 1831 to study the new nation’s penal system—was so impressed by the scale of volunteering in the U.S. that he wrote about it in his 1835 book Democracy in America.

Tocqueville observed that “Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds” were likely to unite in many kinds of groups or associations.

More recently, former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy has said that volunteering can strengthen communities, and that “community is a powerful source of life satisfaction and life expectancy.”

If you aren’t volunteering today, here are a few ideas to help you begin.

Start small. Try joining an organization or association in your community, taking part in neighborhood cleanups, or volunteering at your local senior center, animal shelter, or museum. Love gardening? You can take care of local parks, conservation areas, community gardens, and more.

Once you’re ready for a bigger commitment, consider becoming a mentor through programs such as OASIS Intergenerational Tutoring or Big Brothers Big Sisters.

And consider a more extensive level of commitment to organizations or causes you care deeply about. This might include joining a nonprofit board of directors, volunteering more hours, or taking on a volunteer leadership role.

At a time when trust is eroding and divisions seem insurmountable, volunteering offers something rare: an evidence-backed way to reconnect with communities, institutions, and each other.

Reach out to your favorite nonprofit, visit Volunteer.gov or VolunteerMatch.org, or connect with a nonprofit resource center, a regional United Way or a community foundation to find volunteer opportunities near you.

Cal J. Halvorsen is an associate professor of social work at Washington University in St. Louis.

Seoyoun Kim is an associate adjunct of sociology at the University of Michigan.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.