My family had Slide Show Night when I was growing up. Not every Saturday, but a whole bunch of Saturdays. Either my sister or I would be in charge of setting up the projector, the screen, and loading the carousel. During the show, there’d be a few landscapes or skylines taken during vacations, but almost all the shots were up close. Like most dads, mine wasn’t a professional photographer, but he did a good job of capturing memory triggers: faces, gestures, and decorations.
Before we were driving age, my sister and I were given our own cameras as Christmas gifts. We’d spend our own money buying and developing film. We basically documented our Gen X life: playing in the woods, sledding, beach trips, birthday parties, and even selfies. (I shot a 24-exposure roll of me stupidly rock climbing in regular clothes and treadless high-tops on Pikes Peak in Colorado.)
Years later, when I graduated college and started working on transportation studies, that same camera came with me. It seemed natural to shoot study areas before and after team meetings. When I’d put together slide shows to document the work we did, I kept noticing two distinct types of picture: the charming local ingredient (e.g. historic train caboose), and the oppressive transportation ingredient (e.g. wide arterial with turn lanes on all corners).
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-desktop.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Urbanism Speakeasy\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/\u0022\u003Eurbanismspeakeasy.com.\u003C\/a\u003E","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91453933,"imageMobileId":91453932,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Documenting improvements
I’d look at those pictures and recall how dangerous it felt getting those shots to document the transportation “improvements.” My industry of highly educated professional planners and engineers was defining success in ways that didn’t make sense when you looked at the pictures I took of the study areas. Infrastructure projects were being executed in ways that prevented residents and visitors from taking a comfortable walk around town.
What is it about a place that makes people reach for a camera, hang out, spend money, and keep coming back? The status quo experts arent asking questions like that. Instead, theyre focused on technical requirements and processes that dont consider what the average person is looking for: a bench in the shade, a fountain, or a plaza for people-watching.
Professionals create infrastructure that makes or breaks bonds between friends, families, and strangers. It’s paramount to understand the context of our work. Town planners and engineers have the opportunity to turn ordinary studies into recipes for creating places that are loveable, enticing, and even irresistible.
Memorable human experiences
If you make decisions according to industry norms, your downtown will be easy to resist, because itll be entirely oriented around motor vehicle traffic rather than memorable human experiences. Regulations and permitting are anchored to car-oriented engineering, and that anchor weighs down our communities.
People across generations want walkable, bikeable downtowns. Millennials want them. Baby Boomers want them. Surveys consistently show communities of all types have an appetite for walkable, bikeable places. These are the places we see on family Slide Show Night or the modern social media equivalent.
Encourage your local leaders to plan infrastructure for slideshow-worthy human experiences. Consider how people of all ages are going to interact with each other and with their environment, and then (only then!) design the infrastructure. The internet is loaded with friendly people who would love to exchange ideas with you about irresistible places.
As legendary musician Frank Zappa said, progress requires deviation from the norm. That absolutely applies to planners and engineers working to create lovable, enticing downtowns.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-desktop.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Urbanism Speakeasy\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/\u0022\u003Eurbanismspeakeasy.com.\u003C\/a\u003E","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91453933,"imageMobileId":91453932,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
The Supreme Court struck down President Trumps sweeping tariffs on Friday, ruling that he overstepped his authority in imposing them on global imports.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court wrote that Trumps actions were unprecedented, noting that Trumps attempt to use his power to unilaterally impose unbounded tariffs and change them at will overstepped the law, and that his administrations view would represent a transformative expansion of the Presidents authority over tariff policy.
The ruling continued: It is also telling that in IEEPAs [International Emergency Economic Powers Act’s] half century of existence, no President has invoked the statute to impose any tariffs, let alone tariffs of this magnitude and scope.
In effect, the Supreme Court ruled that, despite Trumps assertions otherwise, the President lacks the authority to impose tariffs, and that he improperly used the premise of an emergency to impose them, most of which came during Liberation Day early last year. The government had collected somewhere in the neighborhood of $230 billion in tariff revenue between January and December 2025.
Critically, not all tariffs have been struck downonly the ones that Trump has imposed as an emergency under International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariff laws from the 1970s.
Will consumers get refunds for the tariffs?
Also critically, the Supreme Court did not indicate whether tariffs already paid would need to be refunded. So as it stands, its unclear whether anyone is due a refund for dues paid.
It could be a messy situation in terms of sorting it all out, and it appears that many legislators are trying to get ahead of that.
Several questions remain unanswered, including what happens to the revenue already collected and how the Administration may use alternative authorities to impose tariffs, said Senator John Curtis, a Republican from Utah, in a statement following the ruling. Looking ahead, it is critical that we provide the clarity and predictability businesses need.
That could result in individuals and companies looking to shipping and logistics companies for guidance and refunds. A spokesperson at DHL Express Americas tells Fast Company that the company is closely monitoring the legal developments regarding IEEPA tariffs to ensure our customers are positioned to exercise their full rights under the law.”
“We would play a technical role in the process, leveraging our customs brokerage technology to track filings to ensure that if refunds are authorized, our clients receive their capital back accurately and efficiently,” the DHL spokesperson added.
Fast Company has also reached out to UPS and FedEx for comment as well.
Additionally, businesses can try to request a refund on imports (assuming they qualify), or take legal action. For instance, they can file a formal protest with the U.S. Customers and Border Protection (CBP), or file a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade.
The ruling blows a hole in Trumps economic agenda. Administration officials have said, however, that they were prepared to respond. Last month, Jamieson Greer, the United States Trade Representative, told The New York Times that the administration would start the next day to find ways to reimpose tariffs if the Supreme Court ended up striking them down.
In response, the markets increased slightly; as of midday Friday, the S&P 500 was up about 0.5%. President Trump, meeting with the nations governors on Friday, called the decision a disgrace.
A federal judge has ruled that Tesla is still required to pay $243 million over a 2019 crash involving a Tesla equipped with Autopilot, despite the companys efforts to overturn the verdict.
In August 2025, a jury found Tesla liable for the death of Naibel Benavides Leon, a 22-year-old woman who was killed when George McGee, who was driving a Tesla Model S, drove through an intersection while he bent to look for his dropped phone.
The crash occurred in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. McGees vehicle, which was equipped with Teslas Autopilot technology, crashed into an SUV that was parked on the shoulder, killing Leon and injuring Dillon Angulo.
I trusted the technology too much, McGee said in 2025. I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.
That jury assigned Tesla 33% of the fault for the collision, and awarded $200 million in punitive damages, and $43 million in compensatory damages.
A courtroom first
The 2025 verdict was a first from a federal jury over a fatal Autopilot accident, though there have been multiple incidents of Tesla vehicles in Autopilot mode that were involved in vehicle collisions.
Soon after that case, Tesla challenged the verdict, filing a motion asking the court to throw it out, or grant a new trial.
The company argued that the Model S was not defective, and that there wasnt evidence that the company failed to provide warnings or instructions concerning Autopilot.
This week, however, U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom in Miami disagreed with Teslas arguments.
Bloom ruled that the evidence from the 2025 trial more than supported the verdict, and that the company did not present any additional arguments.
That means Tesla is on the hook for the $243 million in damages.
“The grounds for relief that Tesla relies upon are virtually the same as those Tesla put forth previously during the course of trial and in their briefings on summary judgment-arguments that were already considered and rejected,” the decision said, according to MarketWatch.
Fast Company reached out to Tesla for comment.
Prior to the 2025 trial, Tesla had rejected a $60 million settlement offer for the case.
Tesla has “indicated” that it will appeal the ruling, Electrek reports, but even if that appeal is successful, the judgement is still likely to be more than that settlement offer.
You’re stuck in traffic again, late for work, watching brake lights stretch to the horizon. According to the most recent data in the U.S. (2024), here are some of the ways traffic jams are lowering the quality of life:
Americans lost an average of an entire work week sitting in traffic.
Commuter costs have surged 16% over the past five years to reach $269 billion annually.
Congestion time for commuters has gone up 10% since 2019 and its 19% for trucks delivering all the products we buy.
Stress increases of 80%, and aggressiveness increases of 52%.
Long stretches in traffic lead to back pain, leg pain, and headaches.
Theres no one solution to dealing with crowds of people all trying to move in the same direction at the same time, but there is one opportunity staring us all in the face that hardly any commuter seems to noticepublic transit.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-desktop.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Urbanism Speakeasy\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/\u0022\u003Eurbanismspeakeasy.com.\u003C\/a\u003E","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91453933,"imageMobileId":91453932,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
The power of public transit
If you’re like most drivers, public transit is for other people. But here’s the thing: investing in better buses and trains could make your commute faster and less stressful, without you ever setting foot on one. Maybe transit is for other people to ride, but it can help improve your car trips.
A surprisingly small drop in cars on the roadjust 5-10%can dramatically ease congestion, and public transit is one of the most effective ways to get that drop.
Congestion doesnt increase linearly as the number of vehicles goes up. Streets handle car traffic just fine, until you cross a certain capacity threshold when everything quickly collapses. A transportation planning model developed in the 1960s quantifies this phenomenon. On a typical urban road running at 90% capacity:
Baseline: About 10% delay over free-flow conditions
5% fewer cars (85% capacity): Delay drops by roughly 18%
10% fewer cars (81% capacity): Delay plummets by 35%
Weve all experienced the exponential improvements in travel time from modest reductions in vehicle volume. If transit gives some commuters a viable alternative, your commute could save minutes each day without building a single new lane.
Transit helps people who dont use transit
A transportation system that offers reliable and convenient public transit isn’t forcing you out of your car. Theres only so much space on the roads, and one bus can hold 40 or 50 people, replacing that many cars. One train can replace hundreds of cars.
Transit already saves Americans 865 million hours in traffic delays annually. In dense urban areas, the potential is even greater.
Case study: New York
New York City’s decongestion zone offers a real-world example. By charging people who choose to drive into Manhattan’s core, the city reduced traffic volumes and delivered major wins: pollution fell, streets flowed better, and spillover congestion to outer areas decreased. And the people who drive themselves benefit from less crowded roads.
You might be thinking I will never use public transit, so why should I fund something I won’t use?” Whether or not you use public transit, think of it as an investment that delivers:
Better travel times because fewer people are driving at the same time.
Fewer crashes because fewer people are driving at the same time.
Less stress on you because fewer people are driving at the same time.
Transportation systems work better when people have real choices. You might always opt for driving yourself, and thats fine. But when others have practical alternatives like buses, trains, and subways, your drive is improved. Remember, if just 5-10% of people arent driving themselves, your experience on the roads can be dramatically improved.
The best thing for drivers might be investing in something they’ll never personally use, and it might be the fastest way to improve quality of life.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-desktop.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/12\/speakeasy-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Urbanism Speakeasy\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/\u0022\u003Eurbanismspeakeasy.com.\u003C\/a\u003E","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91453933,"imageMobileId":91453932,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
We have a complicated relationship with creativity. Intuitively, we understand its valuethe ability to produce new ideas and novel innovation. Instinctively, we know that it presents opportunities for marketplace advancements. When we think of some of the most revered organizations in modern times, like the Apples and Disneys of the world, we point to their creative contributions and their impact. However, although most companies revere organizations with a creative culture, there is a deep-seated misnomer that some companies are inherently creative and others just arent, as if creativity is a rare gene or a divine gift that is bestowed on some and coveted by others. But perhaps the mystical nature of creativity isnt that mysterious after all? What if a culture of creativity was more obtainable than you think? Something you can build, not just be born with? As unbelievable as that may seem, Alejandro Chavetta, the Executive Creative Director at Adobe, has made a career of doing that very thing; so, we invited him onto the From The Culture podcast to discuss what it means to facilitate a culture of creativity.
What is creativity?
To start, we need to lay some groundwork. If organizational culture is the operating system by which individuals co-labor, or collaborate, then fortifying a culture of creativity requires instituting an operating system that facilitates creativity. Simple enough, right? But what is creativity? There are a host of scholarly definitions but far too many are too abstract to apply or too esoteric to operationalize. Therefore, we must first establish a working understanding of what creativity actually is if we are to integrate it into our operating system.
Dan Wieden, the renewed advertiser who cofounded the most celebrated advertising agency on the planet, Wieden+Kennedy, and came up with such legendary campaigns as Just Do It for Nike, once described creativity as subversion. That is to say that creativity is the act of bending, contorting, or refashioning what is into something that could be. This framing of creativity makes what has long been considered something reserved for the few something far more democratized for the manyfor all of us. We may not all be able to conceive of brilliant taglines like Dan Wieden, per se, but we can all certainly subvert. In fact, we all do it, every day, unknowingly.
Subversion is merely the act of looking at something in a different way, usurping the orthodox frames by which we see a problem or situation. We all have the ability to subvert because we all bring new perspectives to the table in our organizations. We all see the world differently, and the heterogeneity of our diverse perspectives create a plethora of potential subversions that could lead to innovative solutions, new products, or new ways of work. The challenge isnt our ability to subvert, its that our organizations dont recognize this ability in its employees.
Chavetta argues that the key to facilitating a culture of creativity is to realize that everyone in the organization can be creativebecause everyone can subvert. Not just the creative directors. Not just the marketing team. But everyone. The guy in finance, Chavetta illustrates as an example, might see something that the copywriter does not, or might bring a point of view that may have otherwise been missed by the creative team which subverts the pre-existing way by which everyone else saw the situation. This new framing might reveal blind spots or unearth unrealized opportunities for the organization that lead to new outcomesa boon to any organizations business, regardless of the industry. And if that be the case, then its the job of the organizations leadership to facilitate an environment that invites everyone to realize this super power that lies within us and inspire them to share it freely.
Ideas come from anywhere
In the advertising industry, where Ive spent the lions share of my career, there is a ubiquitous refrain: ideas can come from anywherefrom the CEO to the janitor. Although these words are repeated in the halls and pitch decks of just about every creative agency on the planet, rarely are they ever truly practiced. Instead, there is a walled-off garden where creativity dwells. In advertising, we call it the creative department. It might go by another name somewhere else. Whatever the nomenclature, the designation of creativity is relegated to a specific group of people which insinuates that creativity is only capable of and expected from a few.
But what if we thought of creativity as something we all harness within us and creation as something achieved through craft? This small, but powerful, shift in thinking could not only welcome new perspectives that lead to new outcomes but also institutionalize an operating system inside the organization where everyone feels licensed to contributethus, facilitating a culture of creativity.
Check our full conversation with Alejandro Chavetta as we discuss creative work and organizations on the latest episode of FROM THE CULTURE podcast.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_16-9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_square_thumbnail.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"FROM THE CULTURE","dek":"FROM THE CULTURE is a podcast that explores the inner workings of organizational culture that enable companies to thrive, teams to win, and brands to succeed. If culture eats strategy for breakfast, then this is the most important conversation in business that you arent having.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Listen","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLvojPSJ6Iy0T4VojdtGsZ8Q4eAJ6mzr2h","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470870,"imageMobileId":91470866,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
When word started circling that AMC Theaters was screening an AI-generated short film, the internet’s cinephiles took it personally.
On Wednesday, some social media users reported that the short was playing in the pre-show before trailers at select AMC locations. A little digging revealed the source: Earlier this week, the short, titled Thanksgiving Day, was announced as the winner of the inaugural Frame Forward Animated AI Film Festival. The prize package included a nationwide theatrical release, which apparently entailed making its way to AMCs screens.
Movie lovers across social media were immediately up in arms. Some called for boycotts. Some found it insulting that if pre-show screen time were being given to short films, AMC would feature AI-generated content rather than human-made movies. Almost all seemed to agree that the move was, as one disgruntled user put it, “hot garbage.”
Don't go to AMC theatres.Boycott all slop. https://t.co/x4HrMttzGB— Ewan Morrison (@MrEwanMorrison) February 18, 2026
Imagine if they were screening traditionally made short films … https://t.co/cvCTtKlYMF— Scott Jeschke (@ScottJeschke) February 18, 2026
hey @AMCTheatres this is hot garbage https://t.co/aL1b05Xw46— Miss Gender (@girldrawsghosts) February 18, 2026
Less than 24 hours later, AMC issued a statement to set things straight. Showing Thanksgiving Day wasnt AMCs idea, but an initiative from Screenvision Media, a cinema advertising company that co-organized the Frame Forward festival. According to AMC, Screenvisions pre-show advertising packages run in fewer than 30 percent of AMCs U.S. locations.
AMC was not involved in the creation of the content or the initiative and has informed Screenvision that AMC locations will not participate, the statement, which was given to the Hollywood Reporter, concluded.
Social media users celebrated the news that AMC would no longer screen the short. Yes, its a victory in itself for anti-AI advocates. But perhaps more importantly, it suggests that brands take notice when consumers speak out against AI integration.
According to film critic Jacob Harper, claims about AIs inevitably dont hold water. Stand firm against AI in film! Make them listen and they WILL listen! Never underestimate the power of your voice! Harper wrote in his post on X. Very proud of AMC for this!
AI is inevitable. Adapt or be left behindNOPE. Stand firm against AI in film! Make them listen and they WILL listen! Never underestimate the power of your voice!Very proud of AMC for this! https://t.co/N8ExrXiKij— Jacob Harper (@JacobAtTheMovie) February 19, 2026
Good Keep being loud about how much you dislike AI. It works! https://t.co/7oLsZqwOjZ— Is this a 3D model? (@IsThisA3DModel) February 19, 2026
A wonderful example ofYou slop, you flop. https://t.co/WScuO9FEY6— Ewan Morrison (@MrEwanMorrison) February 20, 2026
KEEP COMPLAINING ABOUT AI!!! https://t.co/xBodh0vSEc— Drew (@HeyImReallyDrew) February 19, 2026
AMC wasnt the only theater showing the short, and its not the only theater to axe it. Social media users also reported seeing Thanksgiving Day ahead of films at Hollywoods iconic TCL Chinese Theatre, prompting similar outrage from moviegoers.
PUT SOME LOONEY TUNES ON INSTEAD OR SOMETHING WTF https://t.co/qfsjuEqsN8— Zac (@ZacStrikesAgain) February 18, 2026
But a representative for the theater tells Fast Company that the short has been removed, following AMCs example.
Though Thanksgiving Day may no longer be part of the AMC experience, organizers of the Frame First festival, including AI film company Modern Uprising Studios, arent giving up on the short.
In a statement issued by the festival, president and studio head of MUS Joel Roodman said that the theatrical run was only the beginning of plans for the AI-generated film, which include adapting Thanksgiving Day for a new immersive theatrical venue coming to New York City.
Shared theatrical experiences are an important cultural bond,” Roodman said. “The traditional theatrical chains are vital to our cohesion as a society, and are duly cautious [about AI]. However, the media landscape is changing and evolving rapidly.”
“They may be prudent, but it is important to MUS immersive that new and exciting films, filmmakers, cinematic language, and spaces for these shared experiences continue to develop,” Roodman added. “We will bring new content, and important existing content, to our developing venue network of venues, starting in New York. We will not see the theatrical window wither on our watch.
At one point in my life, I managed a team of seven. My days consisted of 1:1 calls, performance reviews, and running interference between the team, other departments, and customers.
I thought thats what I wanted: the perceived power and responsibility of being a manager. But in reality, it was very stressful.
Today, I have been a solopreneur for three years. The assumption is that solo businesses are a starting point. You launch alone, build momentum, hire employees, and scale. That’s the entrepreneurs playbook, right?
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
But over 80% of small businesses in the U.S. have no employees, according to the U.S. Small Business Administration. For many of us, that’s not a limitation. Staying solo is a deliberate strategy that prioritizes control and flexibility over growth for growths sake.
Small is a strategy, not a stepping stone
The “grow or die” mentality makes sense for companies that have dreams of becoming large, enterprise organizations. And some small businesses may have that dream.
The cultural assumption is that a solo business is Phase One: something to outgrow. But many solopreneurs are choosing to stay small permanently.
Hiring employees fundamentally changes what you do every day. You stop being a practitioner and become a manager. Some people want that transition. Many don’tand recognizing that isn’t a failure of ambition. It’s simply prioritizing a different way of working.
Revenue isn’t profit
A report by Gusto found that 77% of solopreneurs are profitable in their first year, compared to just 54% of businesses with employees. And 93% of solopreneurs expect to be profitable in 2025, versus 80% of employer businesses.
A company earning a million dollars per year sounds impressive until you subtract salaries, benefits, payroll taxes, equipment, and the overhead required to keep it all running. The owner of that business may take home less than a solopreneur earning a third of that revenue with almost no overhead.
When you stay solo, you can increase your effective rate by being selective. You might take on fewer, better-paying clients instead of chasing volume. In the end, revenue is a vanity metric if you’re working more hours for less take-home pay.
You don’t need permission to reinvent yourself
Staying solo means retaining total control over your business and your life. When you have employees, every pivot requires buy-in, transition planning, and often difficult conversations. You can’t just decide to raise your rates, shift your niche, or take a three-month sabbatical.
In the several years Ive worked for myself, Ive gone through several iterations of Who am I? What do I do? What clients should I serve?
I can change my entire service offering without consulting anyone. I can walk away from a client who isn’t working out without worrying about how it affects someone else’s paycheck. That flexibility is especially valuable in an uncertain economy because I can respond to market changes in days, not months.
The question solopreneurs should ask themselves isnt necessarily, “How can I grow and scale?” It’s “What kind of business do I actually want to run?”
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-1.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/work-better-mobile-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to Work Better\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"Thoughts on the future of work, career pivots, and why work shouldn\u0027t suck, by Anna Burgess Yang. To learn more, visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/www.workbetter.media\/\u0022\u003Eworkbetter.media\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.workbetter.media","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91457605,"imageMobileId":91457608,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
The venerable business case study method got its start in 1921 at the Harvard Business School. The method became standard at the school throughout the 1920s and since then Harvard has a near-monopoly grip on the business, selling its cases to over 4,000 rival schools.
Cases can be useful and informative, but recognize that they arent reality. The companies featured typically require that the case writer submit the case to them for approval. That introduces survivor biaswhoever is still around at the time of publication gets to dictate how the narrative is told. Another issue is that the companies selected and held up as exemplars are subject to the halo effect. This is the tendency to believe that because a company was successful, copying its practices will create success elsewhere.
Unfortunately, the iron law of transient advantage is hard to escape. The 1995 Dell case doesnt hold up so well. A 2002 case about Nokia centered on how the successful phone company was going to deal with the 8 billion in cash piling up in its accounts. And dont even get me started on the 618 (!) cases that feature the General Electric Corporation.
Which brings me to the decades of adulation long accorded to Southwest Airlines.
The Shortest Distance to Just Another Airline
Southwest Airlines ran a Super Bowl ad this year. In it, passengers scramble through a jungle, climbing over each other in a chaotic race to grab seats. The tagline? “That was wild. Assigned seating is here.” The ad was intended (I think) to indulge in gentle mockery of the past. I found it jarring. Herb Kelleher, the airlines colorful co-founder, would have been horrified, I think. I last met with him (over a Wild Turkey bourbon, of course) at the Strategic Management Society Meetings in 2004 and he was adamantemployees first, deep attention to details, and most importantly, fun!
The many (348!) cases, book chapters, and textbook references to Southwest reference its tightly integrated strategy where every element reinforced every other, allowing it to be profitable in a notoriously tough business.
A Boeing 737-2H4 in Southwest livery, ca. 1977. [Photo: Museum of Flight/CORBIS/Corbis/Getty Images]
Kellehers insight was that there was a particular kind of flyer whose other option was driving, so short flights that replaced a 4-5 hour drive were attractive. That meant you didnt have to offer meals. One aircraft type (Boeing 737s) meant simplified maintenance, training, and scheduling. Open seating enabled 20-minute turnarounds instead of competitors’ 35 minutes. That extra utilization squeezed more flights from every plane. Bags fly free meant fewer delays at check-in and faster boarding. Employees came first and everybody pitched in. Pilots helped clean cabins, gate agents jumped in wherever needed.
And even with all that, the companys culture of having fun at work made the operational discipline feel human rather than mechanical. One of my favorite examples is a flight attendant rapping the entire safety briefing to the tune of Ice, Ice, Baby. Or this one, safety with a sprinkling of humor.
The takeaway
The big teaching point from the Southwest cases is that competitive advantage isn’t about any single policy. It’s about the fit between policies. Remove one piece and the whole system weakens. Southwest has now removed all of them.
Assigned seating went into effect January 27th. “Bags fly free” ended in May 2025. The company is adding premium extra-legroom sections and tiered fare bundles. They’ve announced redeye flights and partnerships with Icelandair. They’ve conducted the first layoffs in their 53-year history. At least they are honesttheir COO explained the bag fee reversal with refreshing candor: “We need more revenue to cover our costs.”
Activist investors at Elliott Management got what they wanted. But what exactly has Southwest become? As one former loyalist put it: “There’s simply no reason to fly Southwest anymore.
Southwest’s leadership cited research showing “8 out of 10 customers prefer assigned seating.” They also acknowledged that after fare and schedule, bags fly free was cited as the #1 reason customers choose Southwest. The problem is that when you remove that differentiator, you’re now competing on fare and schedule against Delta, United, and American, carriers with better route networks, international reach, premium cabins, and decades more experience operating their models. Like all the other airlines, we are likely to now see pitched battles for overhead space, another blow to a business model built on fast airport turnarounds.
The Super Bowl ad could be a case study in strategic confusion. Southwest is making fun of customers who were passionately loyal to what made Southwest diffeent, while asking those same customers to believe the company’s “legendary hospitality” somehow exists independent of the operational system that enabled it.
Take lessons from case studies with caution
There’s a deeper lesson here. Case studies are snapshots. They capture what worked at a particular moment, under particular boundary conditions. What they dont speak to is what to do when those conditions shift.
Southwest’s open seating made sense for the short-hop flights taken by their initial core customers. When the alternative was expensive legacy carriers, those customers would have been driving were it not for Southwest. By 2024, travelers had options that didn’t exist in 1971 or 1991 or even 2011. JetBlue offered assigned seats with personality. Spirit and Frontier offered unbundled ultra-low fares. Delta went upmarket with better service. The white space Southwest once occupied got crowded.
My friends Zeynep Ton and Frances Frei exchanged concerns for the culture of the airline. Frei, a professor at Harvard Business School, captured this concern: “I sure hope this isn’t a case of activist investors coming in and insisting on a set of decisions that they won’t be around to have to endure. Great organizations get built over time. It doesn’t take very long to ruin an organization.”
I’m not arguing Southwest should have frozen in amber forever. Markets change. Customer preferences evolve. Even the most elegant strategy eventually needs updating. But there’s a difference between thoughtful evolution and abandoning your model.
Herb Kelleher once said humility and discipline go together: “You can’t really be disciplined in what you do unless you are humble and open-minded.” He built an airline that knew exactly what it was, knew exactly who it served, and had the discipline to say no to opportunities that didn’t fit.
Southwest’s new leadership knows what investors want. Whether they know what Southwest is anymorethat’s less clear.
Is it lawful to call boneless chicken wings ‘wings’? According to a U.S. District Judge, yes.
On Tuesday in Illinois, Judge John Tharp reached a verdict in a case brought against Buffalo Wild Wings alleging that the wings aren’t wings and shouldn’t be referred to as such on the restaurant chain’s menu. The suit, which was first brought by customer Aimen Halim in March 2023, claimed the business had violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act by referring to the product as “boneless wings” instead of something the plaintiff deemed more fitting, such as “chicken nuggets.
In the end, the judge didn’t feel the case had any bones. In a 10-page ruling, Tharp wrote, Boneless wings are not a niche product for which a consumer would need to do extensive research to figure out the truth. Instead, ‘boneless wings’ is a common term that has existed for over two decades.”
Tharp continued, asserting that the plaintiff didn’t have enough solid evidence to prove Buffalo Wild Wings was at fault. Halim did not ‘drum’ up enough factual allegations to state a claim. Though he has standing to bring the claim because he plausibly alleged economic injury, he does not plausibly allege that reasonable consumers are fooled by Buffalo Wild Wings’ use of the term ‘boneless wings.'”
The judge also cited a 2024 Supreme Court case, which also involved boneless wings at a different establishment in Ohio. In that case, the plaintiff was allegedly injured by a bone from a so-called “boneless wing” getting lodged in his throat. However, the court ruled that under Ohio law, a reasonable consumer could have reasonably anticipated and guarded against the bone at issue”, regardless of it being called “boneless.”
Judge Tharp wrote, “As the Ohio Supreme Court recently put it, ‘[a] diner reading boneless wings on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating chicken fingers would know that he had not been served fingers.”
Now, Buffalo Wild Wings is celebrating the case’s dismissal. In a social media post, the chain wrote, “Theyre called boneless wings and will forever be called boneless wings. Celebrate the courts decision today with BOGO FREE boneless wings.” According to the chain’s website, the BOGO deal happens every Thursday.
Regardless of the fact that the lawsuit has been tossed, the conversation about whether boneless wings are wings is still popping off. Commenters on Buffalo Wild Wing’s celebratory post ranged from pure disgust with the verdict to fierce defense of both the chain and of boneless wings.
“This makes me never want to go to BWW,” one user wrote. “They arent ‘Buffalo wings’, theyre just wings AND your ‘boneless wings’ are chicken tenders. Cmon man.” Others called the wings “grown up chicken nuggets” or simply vented that the chain’s wings are subpar in general.
On the contrary, some commenters expressed their enthusiasm for the menu item. “Boneless wings are the only wings that should be consumed,” wrote another X user on the post.
While the judge made his ruling, he also said that the plaintiff can amend his initial complaint by March 20. Halim will have the opportunity to “provide additional facts about his experience that would demonstrate that BWW is committing a deceptive act.”
Walgreens will lay off hundreds of employees as the pharmacy chain continues to struggle with increased competition and higher-than-desired costs. On top of this, the newly private company is expected to close at least another few dozen retail stores in 2026. Heres what you need to know.
Whats happened?
Walgreens has announced that it will cut at least 628 jobs across two states, according to communications it sent to the states in question earlier this month. A Walgreens spokesperson confirmed the layoffs with Fast Company when reached for comment.
News of the layoffs was first reported by Bloomberg.
The job cuts include 469 positions in the companys home state of Illinois and 159 jobs in Texas, where the company is shuttering a distribution center.
Were focused on becoming Americas best retail pharmacy, beginning with improving the instore experience for our customers and patients,” Walgreens said in a statement to Fast Company. “To do this, weve made the difficult decision to simplify our organization in both the support center and with our field leadership to speed decision making and improve the service that millions of customers rely on every day.”
“We have deep respect for our colleagues and greatly appreciate their contributions and are committed to supporting them throughout this transition,” the spokesperson added.
Walgreens has been closing stores
In addition to the layoffs, Walgreens also reportedly confirmed that it will be closing dozens of stores in 2026.
While no exact numbers were given, Bloomberg says the pharmacy chain confirmed that the number of closing locations would be fewer than 100, which is less than previously planned. Walgreens said in 2024 that it had targeted 1,200 stores for closure by 2027.
Walgreens will also reportedly open four new locations this year.
Pharmacy chains have struggled in recent years
Last August, Walgreens went private when the private equity firm Sycamore Partners purchased the company for roughly $10 billion. The move marked the end of the iconic pharmacy chains nearly century-long reign as a publicly traded company.
For years before the deal, Walgreens, like other pharmacy chains, had struggled with increased online competition from the likes of Amazon and falling foot traffic that was exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic.
Pharmacy chains have also struggled with rising costs and increasing debts. These factors contributed to competitor Rite Aids bankruptcy in 2025 and led to a wave of pharmacy layoffs over the past few years, including at CVS.
According to the company’s website, Walgreens currently has around 8,000 locations in the United States and Puerto Rico and employs around 211,000 workers.
