Its 7:45 a.m. in the office. Someone bounces in, already back from the gym, already through their emails. Cheerfully asks if everyone’s “okay” because its so quiet and people seem a bit tired.
Around the office, people clutch coffee like a life raft, waiting for their brains to come online and cursing the 8 a.m. meeting. And the cheerful colleague. But at least they got in early enough to find parking and grab coffee before it ran outthis time.
Now: which person are you? The early riser, or the one watching them, wondering why you can never feel that awake at this hour no matter how hard you try?
Those clutching their strong brews are probably not just tired, they are socially jet-lagged. Up to 80% of the workforce uses alarm clocks to wake earlier than their body is primed to. That’s not a discipline problem. That’s a design problem.
That coffee isn’t a character weakness. And the fact that most humans require chemical and digital intervention to function at socially mandated hours should tell us something important about those hours.
Neurodiversity and Chronodiversity
What comes to your mind when people mention neurodiversity at work? Many people have heard that neurodiversity refers to ADHD or dyslexia, or they equate it with cognitive diversitydifferent ways of thinking or processing information. However, these interpretations are narrowand insufficient for supporting neurologically friendly environments.
Neurodiversity is neurological diversity: the full range of ways human nervous systems can be wired. It encompasses cognition, emotion, sensory processing, motor coordination, speech, and crucially, circadian regulation: how our nervous systems manage sleep-wake timing, energy fluctuations, and daily rhythms. But the latter is rarely discussed in the context of talent processes in organizationsand hardly ever in the context of neurodiversity.
Neurodiversity and chronodiversity are as central to human life as biodiversity to life on Earth. Maximizing the thriving of human talent at work requires understanding of many ways diversity manifests itself and impacts the ways we work.
Normativity and Its Enforcement
The parallel between neurodiversity and chronodiversity is that societies and cultures treat forms of neurological wiring and time orientation as normative, and others as aberrant. While neurodiversity and chronodiversity are biological facts, neuronormativity and chrononormativity are the social enforcement of what is deemed to be “normal.”
Chrononormativity expresses itself in workplace assumptions and behaviors that are rarely questioned:
Early arrival is equated with ambition and commitment
Morning responsiveness is read as professionalism
Meetings default to early hours those with more power prefer
Leadership visibility clusters in morning time
Performance reviews implicitly reward temporal conformity
Just as neurodivergent individuals often feel pressure to mask, performing neurotypicality to appear “normal,” chronodivergent individuals simulate morningness with sheer grit and coffee.
This comes at a cost.
The Current Reality: The Difference Tax
Most organizations are yet to achieve meaningful neurological inclusion. The few that have begun addressing neurodiversity typically focus narrowly on its cognitive aspects or communication styles. And most organizations continue to operate as if everyone’s internal clock were identical.
The timing structures of modern workearly meetings, fixed hours, morning-centric performance expectationswere inherited from agricultural and industrial time systems. But they were never designed for biological realityand those whose bodies do not fit cultural models pay a significant price not only in fatigue, but in mental (e.g., depression) and physical health (cardiovascular risks, metabolic dysfunction). The healthcare cost of this preventable damage also adds up.
Population-scale research reveals that chronotype follows a normal distribution, with approximately 30% early chronotypes, 30% intermediate types, and 40% late chronotypes. Among specific populations, the distribution skews laterstudies of young adults consistently find the prevalence of evening types.
The chronic misalignment between biological and social timesocial jet lag that most of us feelproduces accumulating sleep debt, cognitive function loss, and increased health risks. Chrononormativity produces what might be called the chronodiversity paradox: a biological majority is treated as a cultural minority. When late chronotypes struggle with early starts, they are labeled unmotivated and lazy, while mismatches with the system are ignored.
Neurodivergent populations are disproportionately impacted. Research consistently demonstrates that adults with ADHD exhibit delayed circadian rhythm phase, with up to 7578% showing significantly later timing of physiological sleep readiness and preferred sleep-wake schedules compared to neurotypical peers. Autistic individuals also frequently experience irregular or delayed sleep-wake patterns.
These are not poor behavioral choices or signs of insufficient discipline. They are neurological realities stemming from genetic, neurological, and hormonal processes.
A Holistic Inclusion Framework: Where Chronodiversity Fits
Early-morning meetings exclude late chronotypes from social participation. Fixed schedules ignore cognitive performance variations across the day. Forcing temporal conformity produces emotional exhaustion. Misaligned timing creates physical stress through chronic sleep disruption.
Early risers can suffer from misalignment too – night shifts, late-night email expectations, commutes that devour their best creative time. Without attention to chronodiversity, everyone suffers.
A workplace that insists everyone perform on the same schedule harms people and limits the expression of their full talent. But applying the holistic and intersectional inclusion principles developed in Ludmilas book, The Canary Code: A Guide to Neurodiversity, Dignity, and Intersectional Belonging at Work, can make much difference. Here are some suggestions for what this might look like:
Participation: Include employees in designing schedules rather than imposing “flexibility” designed by morning-normative managers. Those who experienced social jet lag firsthand understand the impact a 9 a.m. “optional” meeting has on the rest of their day. Designig for people without their input produces policies that look inclusive on paper while excluding in practice. Even when shift work is required, having a choice makes all the difference.
Focus on Outcomes: For most jobs, productivity has no timestamp. If an employee delivers exceptional analysis submitted at 3 a.m., does it matter they weren’t visible at 8 a.m.? When performance evaluations reward “responsiveness” measured by morning email reply speed, or when “commitment” is assessed by early arrival, we evaluate temporal style rather than substance. Review your criteria: do they measure what gets accomplished, or when someone is seen accomplishing it?
Flexibility: Remove arbitrary temporal barriers. Genuine flexibility means examining every time-bound requirement: Must this meeting be synchronous? Must it be morning? Must everyone attend the same session? Expanding flexibility to include schedule self-determination supports the vast majority of employees. Both larks and owls can thrive when design is thoughtful and work is aligned around meaning.
Organizational Justice: Examine schedules and policies from the justice perspective. Are scheduling procedures applied consistently, or do senior leaders get flexibility denied to others? Are decisions free from bias, or do early risers receive more favorable evaluations? Are parking, food, and workspaces available for people of later chronotypes?
Transparency: Make temporal expectations explicit. Many organizations claim flexibility while maintaining hidden norms: the unspoken understanding that “real players” attend the 8 a.m. leadership meeting, that promotion requires visibility during executive hours, that working remotely in the afternoon signals lower commitment. Make expectations explicitand make them job-relevant.
Valid Tools: Stop using temporal proxies for personal qualities. Early arrival doesn’t indicate dedication. Visible presence during specific hours doesn’t measure performance. These shortcuts embed chronotype bias into talent decisions. Valid assessment examines what someone produces, not when they produce it.
Moving toward chrono-inclusive practice requires organizations to recognize that morningness is cultural, not biological, and remove stigma around biological timing differences. Normalizing chronotype differences can help develop systems that offer meaningful flexibility and create infrastructureparking, food access, workspace availability, and chronoleadership approaches developed by Camillato address temporal bias.
Talent thrives when organizations practice holistic inclusion. And holistic inclusion requires neurological and time rhythm inclusionneither is optional if relying on coffee, alarm clocks, and fumes to function is to stop being a default.
Corporate America likes to believe its moved past bias. But it still has a very specific idea of what authority looks like, and its deeply masculine. This is a complex issue most men contend withand its even murkier for gay men. Especially for those who are out at work.
For gay men, workplace success has always been contingent on performing the right kind of gayness. The palatable kind; one that blends easily into existing leadership culture: Clean-cut, composed, confident without being expressive, and careful never to appear too gay in how one speaks, dresses, or leads. In short, masculine.
This dynamic is shaped by unstated cultural hierarchies of sexuality. These hierarchies are informal, powerful ideas about which kinds of gayness are seen as professional, authoritative, or leadership-ready, and which arent. Recent DEI program rollbacks, rising anti-LGBTQ sentiment, and record levels of hostile legislation exacerbate this existing tension.
Being openly gay is a complicated minority experiencelargely because many people arent openly out. Experts estimate that 83% of those who identify on the LGBTQ spectrum keep their orientation hidden.
Being out at work is even more complex. If you’re out, you’re more likely to be discriminated against than you’re not outabout three times more, says Brad Sears, distinguished scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles and founder of its School of Law Williams Institute, which researches policy around sexuality and gender. Research from 2024 reports that nearly half of LGBTQ employees are not out to supervisors, and that 47% of LGBTQ workers have experienced harassment or discrimination of some sort because of their sexuality.
The type of discrimination hes talking about isnt often overt homophobia. Its a subtle barrier known as the gay glass ceiling: the unseen force that limits advancement for out gay men, quietly favoring those who perform the right kind of masculinity.
Implicit Bias in Action
This past summer, Jerry was up for a managerial promotion at what he thought was a progressive tech company, where he still currently works. After several years, strong reviews, and a good rapport with leadership, he assumed hed be a shoo-in. Instead, a younger colleague who had been there only two months became his manager. (Jerry spoke to Fast Company under a pseudonym to protect against potential retaliation.)
Jerry did get a promotion of his own soon after, along with higher pay and responsibilities, but organizationally it was a lateral move, which was disappointing. I was excited to finally get some managerial experience, Jerry says.
He suspects this choice was due to his sexuality. He doesnt identify as particularly feminine, but assumes others see him that way. Im what youd call flamboyant, he deadpans. People know Im gay when I open my mouth.
Jerrys a self-assured man whos exactly what were told we should beourselvesbut has since worried this means people dont take him seriously.
That concern was validated when a C-suite leader told Jerrys colleague, Laura (also a pseudonym), that while they all liked Jerry and valued his contributions, they wanted someone more authoritative. Laura has worked closely with Jerry for four years. Hes a strong, decisive leader, she tells me.
Unfortunately, research supports Jerrys hypothesis. A 2023 study published in the journal Sex Roles found that both heterosexual and gay men prefer masculine-presenting men, regardless of their sexuality, for leadership positions. That probably shouldnt be surprising, especially in our current society, which increasingly prizes a very narrow view of traditional masculinity.
Society seems to assume that a higher degree of masculinity equates to a leader, says Ryan Federo, a lecturer at Universitat Autnoma de Barcelona in Spain, who has studied LGBTQ related topics in the upper echelons of business.
Gay men aren’t the only LGBTQ+ workers running into a similar roadblock at work, either. Federo published a blog in July 2024 identifying a rainbow glass ceiling that prevents LGBTQ individuals from reaching top corporate positions, including board membership. He pointed out how in 2023, out-LGBTQ+ individuals occupied less than 1% of available board seats.
The Trickle-Down of Acceptable Gayness
In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Bostock v. Clayton County that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects LGBTQ employees from workplace discrimination. On paper, the question of whether gay men can work without bias is settled. But theres a concept in play here called hegemonic sexuality: the dominant, idealized, and often unquestioned norms for sexual orientation, behavior, and identity within a culture.
If youve ever heard someone described as being too gay, you already understand the concept of hegemonic sexuality, explains sociologist Travis Speice, who studies sexuality and gender.
This hierarchy is entirely subjective, yet over repeated interactions, groups of people come to agreeoften implicitlyon which forms of sexuality are socially desirable. Gay men and straight men police one another. Whether theyre consciously aware of it is almost beside the point. The key thing is that it happens.
It shows up in vague performance feedbacksomeone being told theyre not quite leadership material, that they lack gravitas, or that they should be more polished, without anyone ever naming what, exactly, needs to change.
Because research shows that ideas about professionalism and masculinity often go hand in hand, he says, expressions that are seen as too gay are also more likely to be labeled unprofessional. This is precisely what Jerry believes happened to him, even at a progressive company that hasnt rolled back its DEI programs.
We’ve often looked to the federal government as a strong protector for workers’ rights to be free from discrimination and harassment, says Sears. But that has shifted significantly in the first year of the Trump administration.
When President Donald Trump came into office for his second term, one of his first executive orders was rescinding Obama-era Executive Order 13672, which had explicitly prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity for federal employees and contractors.
Still, there seems to be somewhat of a concerted effort from the administration to paint itself as LGBif not necessarily LGBTQfriendly. A New York Times feature ntitled Donald Trumps Big Gay Government highlights the gay men who have successfully climbed the administrations corporate ladder. At first glance, it telegraphs that you can be gay and successful. Upon closer inspection, the pattern is striking: they are overwhelmingly white, conventionally masculine, and visually coded as authoritative.
Close cropped haircuts. Windowpane suits. Golf shorts, the article states. Theyre not the type to be telling anyone their pronouns or using the word queer.
Its the corporate version of masc-for-masc: you can be gay, as long as youre still reliably a man.
Individual Success Doesnt Equal Structural Equity
I asked many gay men on social media and in professional groups whether being gay had hindered their careers. Some, like Jerry, said yes. Others insisted that success is about performance, not sexualitythat being gay doesnt matter as long as you deliver results.
On the surface, that belief is sincere: it reflects some mens individual lived experiences of advancement and resilience. But, as Speice explained to me, it can also obscure broader patterns. Job performance is often measured against traditionally masculine normsauthority, restraint, and credibilitythat shape whose work is taken seriously in the first place.
Its often easier to embrace the American bootstraps success story than to acknowledge the historical and structural barriers that shape peoples opportunities, he says.
I think this becomes clearer if we replace the word gay with another marginalized identity, Speice continues. Saying Im successful despite being gay starts to sound a lot like Im successful despite being a woman, or despite being Black, or despite having a disability. An individual person can absolutely succeed, but the broader pattern still shows that these identities are treated as obstacles rather than neutral or valued traits.
This made me think back to a 2014 Time magazine piece, written by an executive who said being gay hadnt held him backbut he also acknowledged his advantages: a supportive family, coastal geography, being male, and being white. But he also looked the part: conventionally masculine, composed, and culturally legible in a way that made his sexuality unlikely to challenge authority. The headshot reinforced the point: a conventionally masculine visage that doesnt ruffle any feathers.
Broadening Masculinity . . . and Leadership
When advancement depends on performing the right kind of gaynessshaped by hegemonic sexual normsorganizations dont just hamper individual workers. They also limit the range of leadership styles available to them. They trade collaboration, creativity, and psychological safety for a more rigid exercise of authority.
But awareness matters. Understanding how these implicit machinations, cultural expectations, and political currents shape perceptions of leadership can help us challenge them. It can invite us to value diverse expressions of masculinity, create space for diverse voices, and recognize that anyone can wield authority effectively, so long as they have the right skill set.
Employers should ensure that all workers feel a genuine sense of belonging in the workplace. Conducting annual staff surveys can help surface how employees experience their work environment. But leaders must be prepared to truly listen and make responsive changes based on what they hear, Speice says.
He also suggested auditing company policies to see whether they require workers to fit into narrow boxes or unintentionally marginalize some team members, as well as examining how bias can creep into hiring and promotion practices. This goes beyond what is written in policy documents, Speice says. Talking the talk without walking the walk does not cultivate belonging.
The question isnt whether gay men can succeed at work. Many do.
The question is whether we can broaden our definitions of successand allow a broader range of people, perspectives, and leadership styles to thrive.
A lawyer for the immigration officer who shot and killed Renee Good dropped out of the Minnesota governor race Monday, breaking with many fellow Republicans and calling President Donald Trumps immigration operation in the state an unmitigated disaster.
Chris Madel’s surprise move comes amid growing calls from Republicans to investigate federal immigration tactics in Minnesota after a U.S. Border Patrol agent fatally shot Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday.
Madel went a step further than most Republicans in his video, saying that while he supports the goal of deporting the worst of the worst from Minnesota, he thinks the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operation in the Twin Cities has gone too far.
I cannot support the national Republicans stated retribution on the citizens of our state, Madel said. Nor can I count myself a member of a party that would do so.
Madel said that U.S. citizens, particularly those of color, live in fear.
United States citizens are carrying papers to prove their citizenship,” Madel said. “Thats wrong.
Madel said he personally had heard from local Asian and Hispanic law enforcement officers who had been pulled over by ICE.
I have read about and I have spoken to help countless United States citizens who have been detained in Minnesota due to the color of their skin, Madel said.
He also said it was unconstitutional and wrong for federal officers to raid homes using a civil warrant, rather than one issued by a judge.
Madel was among a large group of candidates seeking to replace Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, who dropped his reelection bid earlier this month. Other Republican candidates include MyPillow founder and chief executive Mike Lindell, an election denier who is close to Trump; Minnesota House Speaker Lisa Demuth; Dr. Scott Jensen, a former state senator who was the partys 2022 gubernatorial candidate; and state Rep. Kristin Robbins.
Democratic U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar has filed paperwork to run, but has yet to publicly launch a campaign to succeed Walz.
Madel, in his Monday video posted on the social platform X, described himself as a pragmatist, and said national Republicans have made it nearly impossible for a Republican to win a statewide election in Minnesota.
Madel did not immediately return a text message seeking comment.
Madel, 59, was a political newcomer making his first run for public office. He got into the race on Dec. 1.
Madel brought 30 years of experience as an attorney to the race, including cases taking on corporate corruption. Madel also defended law enforcement officers, including the 2024 case of a Minnesota state trooper who fatally shot a Black man after a traffic stop. Prosecutors dropped charges against Trooper Ryan Londregan in the killing of Ricky Cobb II, saying the case would have been difficult to prove.
Madel often referenced that victory in his brief campaign for governor, including in his video dropping out.
Republicans were expecting the race for governor to be focused on Walz, who at the time was seeking a third term amid questions about how his administration handled welfare fraud. But the race shifted dramatically on Jan. 5 when Walz dropped out.
That same week, the Trump administration sent thousands of federal officers to Minnesota. ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot and killed Good in Minneapolis two days later on Jan. 7.
Madel agreed to offer pro bono legal advice to Ross, although no criminal charges or civil lawsuits have been filed. Madel said he was honored to help Ross, particularly during a gubernatorial campaign.
Justice requires excellent legal representation, Madel said.
Madel announced his decision ending his candidacy two days after a Border Patrol officer shot and killed Pretti on Saturday in Minneapolis.
By Scott Bauer, Associated Press
For todays young people, online content isnt a backdrop to daily lifeit is daily life. Streaming platforms, short-form video, and social media dont just entertain; they influence how young people see themselves, their health, and what behaviors are seen as normal or aspirational. Movies, television, and streaming content still have influence, but as the digital ecosystem expands, so does its power to shape choicesfor better and for worse.
Take smoking, for example. The notion of cigarette nostalgia has unwittingly sparked a slew of recent news stories about the perceived increase in smoking on screens. The impact of that imagery? Tangible.
While celebrities like Charlie XCX and Jeremy Allen White may not fully grasp the influence that their content is having on young viewers, research shows that when smoking is glamorized, it directly shapes youth attitudes and behaviors around nicotine, ultimately putting young audiences at heightened risk of addiction.
IMAGERY MATTERS
Our recent report offers that out of the top films in 2024, more than half include tobacco imageryan increase of 10% over the year prior. And nearly 17 million young people were exposed to tobacco imagery through popular streaming shows just in 2023.
This imagery isnt without consequence. It can triple a young persons likelihood of starting to vape and make it harder for those already addicted to nicotine to quit successfully.
Often dubbed the JUUL Generation, e-cigarette use is greatest among 18-24 year-olds. For Gen Z, the stakes are high, with one in five now risking long-term addiction.
THE SCALE OF MEDIA CHANGED
One thing that makes this moment different from past media eras is scale. Streaming platforms release entire seasons at once. Algorithms surface content repeatedly. Scenes dont disappear after a weekly airing. Instead, they live on through clips, memes, and edits that circulate far beyond their original context. A single portrayal can echo across platforms and get amplified in ways that creators or producers never anticipated.
The impact isnt just for substances like nicotine, either. Similar outcomes have been seen among this generation when it comes to topics like body image and eating behaviors, violence, mental health narratives, and gambling or sports betting. Exposure to the portrayal of these issues can increase the likelihood of imitation and the effect can be life-altering.
WE PLAY A ROLE
The takeaway is that digital platforms, entertainment companies, and creators all have a role to play in protecting young audiences. The influence they wield on culture can shape norms on a population level. With that influence comes opportunity.
Society has seen tremendous success by putting warnings on content containing domestic violence or suicide references, while making resources available to viewers. These practices should be used for tobacco tooincluding offering resources to help young people quit. Creators should not be unpaid spokespersons for the tobacco industry, or any other issue they are inadvertently promoting. Equally, platforms should have content that reflects reality: Addiction isnt beautiful, and quitting is difficult, but more achievable with support.
Today’s youth are shaped by scrolling, streaming, and sharing. The question isnt whether online content influences behavior, but whether were willing to use that influence intentionally.
This next generation deserves stories that inspire, transparency on issues that matter, and solution-forward thinking. At the end of the day, they deserve a digital landscape that takes ownership of the imagery it puts forward. And it should be done in a way that advances the healthier futures the next generation says they want, but also one mindful of the vision for the future that theyre being offered.
Kathy Crosby is president and CEO of Truth Initiative.
We have been taught to segment people into neat design personas: young versus old, able-bodied versus disabled, patient versus caregiver. Those categories may help on a spreadsheet, but they rarely reflect real life. Ability is not a fixed identity. It is a state that shifts across hours, seasons, and decades.
Most people are not disabled or able bodied. They are navigating a continuum. A parent carrying a toddler, a traveler pulling luggage, a cook with wet hands, someone recovering from surgery, a person with arthritis on a cold morning, an older adult managing fatigue at the end of the day. These are not edge cases. They are the mainstream experience of modern life.
If design is meant to serve people, then the next step is clear: Stop designing for categories and start designing for fluidity.
FLUIDITY IS THE NEW ACCESSIBILITY
Accessibility is often framed as a feature set for a specific group. That framing keeps it stuck in the margins. A better lens is to treat accessibility as the practical reality of everyday variability. Peoples abilities change with context. Lighting changes. Noise changes. Energy changes. Hands get full. Attention splits. Stress rises. Injuries happen. Bodies age. Life intervenes.
Once you design for that reality, the business case becomes obvious. Products that work across more conditions work for more people. They become relevant in more moments, which increases adoption, satisfaction, and repeat use.
DESIGN FOR ABILITY STATES, NOT DEMOGRAPHICS
A useful shift is to map ability states instead of user categories. Ask not only who the user is, but the condition they are in when they use the product.
Consider a few common states that literally affect every body:
One-handed use, because the other hand is full.
Low vision use, due to glare, darkness, or fatigue.
Low dexterity use, due to cold, arthritis, injury, or stress.
Limited mobility use, due to pregnancy, pain, aging, or recovery.
Cognitive load, because the user is rushed, distracted, or overwhelmed.
These states are not rare. They recur daily. Designing for them creates better products for everyone without forcing people into a label.
MAKE ADAPTABILITY FEEL INVISIBLE
One risk is that designing for everyone can become code for complicated. The goal is not to add settings and switches. The goal is to build adaptability into the form and interaction so it feels natural.
Good examples are usually quiet:
A handle that invites multiple grips without looking specialized.
Controls that are intuitive without requiring instruction.
Packaging that opens cleanly without brute force.
A product that communicates how to use it through shape and touch.
The best inclusive design feels obvious, not assistive.
THE STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE
Fluidity is also a brand strategy. When customers feel a product keeps up with them, it earns trust. It becomes the object they rely on through different phases of life. That is a deeper form of loyalty than preference. It is dependency in the best sense of the word.
The future of inclusive design is not about creating more categories. It is about removing the need for categories altogether. If products are designed for life in motion, they will work for every body, more often, and for longer.
Ben Wintner is CEO of Michael Graves Design.
The enterprise world is awash in AI optimism. Boardrooms buzz with talk of transformation, and budgets swell to accommodate the latest platforms and AI assistants.
Today, nearly three-quarters of companies report using generative AI regularly in a core business activity, according to recent McKinsey & Company research. But if you look past the headlines, a familiar pattern has emerged that reminds me of the dot-com era, when companies rebranded overnight, and investors chased the next big thing, often with little regard for a tangible way forward.
Today, talk of an AI bubble isnt just a matter of market speculation or start-up hype. Its unfolding inside organizations, where the pressure to do something with AI drives rapid procurement and internal investment. The fear of missing out (FOMO) is palpable. Leaders, wary of being left behind, greenlight projects that promise automation, insight, and competitive advantage.
But heres the sobering reality: Most AI initiatives fail to deliver meaningful results, and the graveyard of underutilized tools and proofs of concept or pilots that dont pan out is growing.
THE ANATOMY OF THE AI BUBBLE
The pitfalls are easy to spot, especially in hindsight. Companies rush to build bespoke AI solutions, convinced their needs are unique, only to watch those features become commoditized by vendors months later.
Others buy off-the-shelf platforms, expecting plug-and-play magic, but end up mired in costly customization and integration. Some grant AI agents sweeping permission, only to recoil at the risks when their chief information security officers (CISOs) push back.
While its completely speculative, if the bubble bursts, it will be driven by a flood of AI projects without clear use cases that fail to generate revenue, productivity gains, or measurable cost savings. That doesnt mean every AI project is doomed, or that companies should stop investing in AI. It just means you need to tweak your approach.
THE PRAGMATIC PLAYBOOK
What separates the AI survivors from the casualties is discipline. The most successful organizations approach AI with a pragmatic, four-step framework.
1. Assess with brutal honesty
Is the problem unique, or is it a feature waiting to be bundled into next years subscription? The build versus buy decision is not just technical; its existential. Too much building leads to wasted effort; too much buying without adaptation leads to disappointment.
Leaders need to ask themselves if their processes are so distinctive that custom development is warranted, or if a trusted third party is likely to deliver the needed capability as a feature in one of their offerings.
2. Pilot before you leap
Small-scale experiments, tightly scoped, reveal both the functional and business value of a solution. Pilots arent proof of concept. Theyre proof of value.
Ive seen instances where the value looked to be there in the pilot but disappeared in a larger scope. So, resist the urge to roll out enterprise-wide until the groundwork is solid. Use pilots to continue to verify the value and readjust as needed as you scale the project.
3. Verify real impact
Does the AI do what was promised? More importantly, does it make or save money?
Functional success is meaningless without business impact. Continual verification means demanding evidence that the solution delivers measurable value. Ensure it remains a part of the process even after you roll out your AI, because bolting on the need to continually verify wont end well.
4. Scale with caution
Prioritize quick wins and expand with measured steps. Only after value is proven does scaling make sense. Organizations that scale AI use prematurely often find themselves burdened with tools that fail to deliver on their promise.
AVOID THE COMMON PITFALLS
All too often, I see my peers fall into the same traps. Heres my advice:
Dont overestimate AIs ability to automate complex workflows. Many projects fail because organizations expect too much, too soon.
Beware of internal FOMO because rash decisions driven by fear of being left behind often lead to wasted investments.
Recognize the value of traditional AI. Not all innovations are generative or agentic. Mature, proven AI solutions can deliver immediate value.
Guard against giving AI agents more autonomy than is reasonable. The risks are real, and your CISO is justified in being overly cautious.
THE DISCIPLINE TO THRIVE
AI is not a panacea, nor is it a guaranteed path to transformation. Its power lies in the hands of organizations that approach it with rigor, clarity, and strategic intent. The bubble will burst for those who chase hype over substance, mistake activity for progress, or fail to align investments with business strategy.
The leaders who will thrive are those who move deliberately and rationalize every decision, demand real value at every turn, and recognize both the limitations and the possibilities of AI. Success comes from understanding where AI can deliver immediate, tangible benefits and where it remains a work in progress. It means balancing ambition with pragmatism, and performance with transformation.
Much like the dot-com boom, opportunity will outlive the initial hype and early failures of AI. Every company needs to lean into the potential, but every opportunity also needs the right framework to thrive and grow. That means setting the right foundation: modernizing your data estate, determining where your data should livewhether in the cloud, on premises, or a hybrid of bothand then ensuring your networking, compute, storage, and security infrastructure can support it all.
Equally important is recognizing the growing role of the edge. Whether its a retail floor, remote offices, a factory, or the device in an end users hand, every edge has the potential to drive AI use cases from cloud-connected services to local inference.
The future belongs not to those who move fastest, but to those who move smartest. Step back, challenge assumptions, and invest in AI with discipline and foundational purpose. In doing so, your next AI initiative will be the one that outlasts the hype to deliver lasting value for your business.
Juan Orlandini is the CTO, North America for Insight Enterprises
Aiming to shake up the Golden State’s media landscape, the California Post launched on Monday with a new tabloid newspaper and news site that brings a brash, cheeky, and conservative-friendly fixture of the Big Apple to the West Coast.
The Los Angeles outpost of the New York Post will be digital first with social media accounts and video and audio pieces but for $3.75 readers can also purchase a daily print publication featuring the paper’s famously splashy front-page headlines. Perhaps most memorably: 1983s Headless Body in Topless Bar.
The most iconic thing about the New York Post, and now the California Post, is that front page, said Nick Papps, editor-in-chief of the LA newsroom. “It has a unique wit, and is our calling card, if you like.”
Mondays inaugural edition goes straight at Hollywood during awards season with the full-page headline: Oscar Wild – Shocking truth behind director Safdie brothers’ mystery split.
Page Six gets a Hollywood edition
Papps declined last week to reveal what stories his reporters were chasing and what bombs the political columnists will throw in its first editions. But he promised the growing staff of between 80 and 100 will focus on issues important to everyday, hardworking Californians, including homelessness, affordability, technology, and law and order.
Of course, the Post’s infamous gossip column will get a Tinseltown version, Page Six Hollywood, that will keep a snarky eye on red carpets and celebrity culture. And sports fans can expect comprehensive coverage of the state’s major league teams, as well as the upcoming World Cup and Olympic Games in Los Angeles, Papps said.
No matter what your politics are, sports is the great connector, he said.
Adding another title to Rupert Murdoch ‘s media empire, the California Post will draw from and build on the venerable New York paper’s national coverage, which is known for its relentless and skewering approach to reporting and its facility with sensational or racy subject matter.
There is no doubt that the Post will play a crucial role in engaging and enlightening readers, who are starved of serious reporting and puckish wit, Robert Thomson, chief executive of Post corporate parent News Corp., said in a statement last year announcing the move. In typically punchy Post fashion, he portrayed California as plagued by jaundiced, jaded journalism.”
Journalism or clickbait?
The California Post could make an impact with its combative style and conservative stance, said Gabriel Kahn, professor at the University of Southern Californias Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, who added our statewide press is boring as bathwater,” especially when it comes to politics. He expects a major target to be Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has possible presidential aspirations and has become a Republican boogeyman.
Readers shouldn’t anticipate that the new publication will become known for breaking big stories through old-fashioned journalism, Kahn said.
Theres a crass cleverness in the way that tabloids present news that actually works well on social media, he said. It could be entertaining.
Kahn doesn’t expect the California Post will turn a profit. He points out that the New York Post isn’t a big moneymaker for News Corp., but rather it serves another purpose, which is to bludgeon its enemies and curry favor with people in power on the right.
Nonetheless, the corporation’s New York Post Media Group, which includes several media properties, is a player in both local and national politics. It routinely pushes on culture-war pressure points, and it has broken such political stories as the Hunter Biden laptop saga. The Post has an avid reader in President Donald Trump, who gave its Pod Force One podcast an interview last summer.
It launches at a volatile moment for the industry
However bold its intentions, the venture is being launched into a turbulent atmosphere for the news business, particularly print papers. More than 3,200 of them have closed nationwide since 2005, according to figures kept by Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism. The online world spawned new information sources and influencers, changed news consumers’ tastes and habits, and upended the advertising market on which newspapers relied.
California, with a population of nearly 40 million, still has dozens of newspapers, including dailies in and around Los Angeles and other major cities. But the nations second-most-populous city hasnt had a dedicated tabloid focused on regional issues in recent memory. Meanwhile, venerable institutions like the Los Angeles Times have been hit with major layoffs.
The launch of a paper edition of the Post defies logic” as news outlets in major metro areas are rapidly shrinking their print footprint, said Ted Johnson, a media and politics editor for Deadline in Washington, D.C., who reported in Los Angeles for 28 years.
But Rupert Murdoch, his first love is print, Johnson said.
Christopher Weber, Associated Press
From family-run cafes to retail giants, businesses are increasingly coming into the crosshairs of President Donald Trumps mass deportation campaign, whether it’s public pressure for them to speak out against aggressive immigration enforcement or becoming the sites for such arrests themselves.
In Minneapolis, where the Department of Homeland Security says its carrying out its largest operation ever, hotels, restaurants, and other businesses have temporarily closed their doors or stopped accepting reservations amid widespread protests.
On Sunday, after the U.S. Border Patrol shot and killed Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, more than 60 CEOs of Minnesota-based companies, including Target, Best Buy, and UnitedHealth, signed an open letter calling for “an immediate deescalation of tensions and for state, local and federal officials to work together to find real solutions.
Still, that letter didnt name immigration enforcement directly, or point to recent arrests at businesses. Earlier this month, widely-circulated videos showed federal agents detaining two Target employees in Minnesota. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has rounded up day laborers in Home Depot parking lots and delivery workers on the street nationwide. And last year, federal agents detained 475 people during a raid at a Hyundai plant in Georgia.
Here’s what we know about immigration enforcement in businesses.
What ICE is allowed to do
Anyone including ICE can enter public areas of a business as they wish. This can include restaurant dining sections, open parking lots, office lobbies and shopping aisles.
The general public can go into a store for purposes of shopping, right? And so can law enforcement agents without a warrant, said Jessie Hahn, senior counsel for labor and employment policy at the National Immigration Law Center, an advocacy nonprofit. As a result, immigration officials may try to question people, seize information and even make arrests in public-facing parts of a business.
But to enter areas with a reasonable expectation of privacy like a back office or a closed-off kitchen ICE is supposed to have a judicial warrant, which must be signed by a judge from a specified court, and can be limited to certain days or parts of the business.
Judicial warrants should not be confused with administrative warrants, which are signed by immigration officers.
But in an internal memo obtained by The Associated Press, ICE leadership stated administrative warrants were sufficient for federal officers to forcibly enter people’s homes if theres a final order of removal. Hahn and other immigration rights lawyers say this upends years of precedent for federal agents authority in private spaces and violates bedrock principles of the U.S. Constitution.
Still, the easiest way for ICE to enter private spaces in businesses without a warrant is through consent from an employer, which could be as simple as letting an agent into certain parts of the property. The agency may also cite other exigent circumstances, Hahn notes, such as if theyre in hot pursuit of a certain individual.
Other actions ICE can take against employers
Beyond more sweeping workplace raids, enforcement against employers can also take the form of I-9 audits, which focus on verifying employees’ authorization to work in the U.S.
Since the start of Trumps second term, attorneys have pointed to an uptick in instances of ICE physically showing up at a place of business to initiate an I-9 audit. ICE has the authority to do this but it marks a shift from prior enforcement, when audits more often began through writing like mailed notices.
David Jones, a regional managing partner at labor and employment law firm Fisher Phillips in Memphis, said he’s also seen immigration agents approach these audits with the same approach as recent raids.
ICE is still showing up in their full tactical gear without identifying themselves necessarily, just to do things like serve a notice of inspection, Jones said. Employers have three days to respond to an I-9 audit, but agents behaving aggressively might make some businesses think they need to act more immediately.
The rights of businesses
If ICE shows up without a warrant, businesses can ask agents to leave or potentially refuse service based on their own company policy, perhaps citing safety concerns or other disruptions caused by agents’ presence. But there’s no guarantee immigration officials will comply, especially in public spaces.
Thats not what were seeing here in Minnesota. What were seeing is they still conduct the activity, said John Medeiros, who leads corporate immigration practice at Minneapolis-based law firm Nilan Johnson Lewis.
Because of this, Medeiros said, the question for many businesses becomes less about getting ICE to leave their property and more about what to do if ICE violates consent and other legal requirements.
In Minneapolis and other cities that have seen immigration enforcement surges, including Chicago and Los Angeles some businesses have put up signs to label private spaces and set wider protocols for what to do when ICE arrives.
Vanessa Matsis-McCready, associate general counsel and vice president of HR at Engage PEO, says she’s also seen a nationwide uptick in interest for I-9 self-audits across sectors and additional emergency preparation.
How the public is responding
ICE’s increased presence and forceful arrests at businesses has sparked public outcry, some of it directed at the companies themselves for not taking a strong enough stand.
Some employers, particularly smaller business owners, are speaking out about ICE’s impacts on their workers and customers. But a handful of bigger corporations have stayed largely silent, at least publicly, about enforcement making itsway to their storefronts.
Minneapolis-based Target has not commented on videos of federal agents detaining two of its employees earlier this month although its incoming chief executive, Michael Fiddelke, sent a video message to the company’s over 400,000 workers Monday calling recent violence incredibly painful, without directly mentioning immigration enforcement. He said Target was doing everything we can to manage whats in our control. Fiddelke also signed the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce’s letter calling for broader de-escalation, which got support from the Business Roundtable, a lobbying group of CEOs from more than 200 companies.
Target is among companies that organizers with ICE Out of Minnesota have asked to take stronger public stances over ICE’s presence in the state. Others include Home Depot, whose parking lots have become a known site of ICE raids over the last year, and Hilton, which protestors said was among brands of Twin City-area hotels that have housed federal agents.
Hilton and Home Depot didn’t respond to comment requests over the activists’ calls. Home Depot previously denied being involved in immigration operations.
Several worker groups have been more outspoken. Ted Pappageorge, secretary-treasurer for a chapter of the Culinary Union in Las Vegas, said members were shocked by a widening pattern of unlawful ICE behavior and recognize that anti-immigrant policies hurt tourism, business, and their families. United Auto Workers also expressed solidarity with Minneapolis residents “fighting back against the federal governments abuses and attacks on the working class.
Hahn of the National Immigration Law Center noted some businesses are communicating through industry associations to avoid direct exposure to possible retaliation. Still, she stressed the importance of speaking publicly about the impacts of immigration enforcement overall.
We know that the raids are contributing to things like labor shortages and reduced foot traffic, Hahn said, adding that fears to push back on this abuse of power from Trump could ultimately land us in a very different looking economy.
By Wyatte Grantham-Philips, AP business writer
Associated Press Writers Rio Yamat and Anne D’Innocenzio contributed to this report.
Every month, around two billion people see AI Overviews, Googles AI-powered search feature that generates summaries to users queries. Now, a new study is revealing a concerning pattern among some of these responses: When asked health-related questions, AI Overviews appears to turn to YouTube significantly more often than trusted medical sites.
Since its inception, AI Overviews has faced its fair share of controversies, from early reports of the product spewing nonsensical answers to a series of lawsuits from businesses and publisher groups alleging that the feature is damaging to organic traffic patterns. The most recent concern with AI Overviews emerged via an investigation from The Guardian on January 2, which alleged that the tool has a tendency to provide users with false, misleading, and potentially dangerous health guidance. At the time, Google refuted those claims.
Now, a new study from the AI SEO tool SE Ranking, published on January 14, has revealed that AI Overviews is two to three times more likely to cite YouTube videos than “trusted medical sites” in response to health queriesbut Google says that’s not the full picture.
“From the AIs point of view, all of this content exists in the same pool.
To understand how AI Overviews collects its health guidance on the web, researchers at SE Ranking analyzed more than 50,000 health-related Google searches from German users. That location was chosen, per the studys authors, for its strictly regulated healthcare system.
If AI systems rely heavily on non-medical or non-authoritative sources even in such an environment, the authors wrote in a published report, it suggests the issue may extend beyond any single country.
SE Ranking found that, of all the AI Overview results, only about 34% came from “trusted medical sources” (which it defines as sites like medical institutions, academic journals, government institutions, and more), while the other 66% originated from “general or non-expert sources” (like commercial sites or blogs).
In fact, YouTube was the leading source for all health-related inquiries; accounting for 4.43% of all AI Overviews citations. According to the report, thats 3.5 times more citations than netdoktor.de, one of Germanys largest consumer health portals, and more than twice the citations of MSD Manuals, a well-established medical reference. In total, 20,621 out of 465,823 AI Overviews results cited YouTube.
This matters because YouTube is not a medical publisher, the report reads. It is a general-purpose video platform. Anyone can upload content there (e.g., board-certified physicians, hospital channels, but also wellness influencers, life coaches, and creators with no medical training at all). From the AIs point of view, all of this content exists in the same pool.
In a statement to Fast Company, Google refuted SE Ranking’s findings. The company said the study’s definition of a trustworthy source is “flawed and overly simplistic,” adding that, “it classifies nearly two-thirds of sources as ‘less reliable’ by lumping together everything from commercial sites to multi-topic blogs. This ignores the reality that an expert-written article on a “multi-topic blog” can be a high-quality source.”
Google noted that a close look at the report’s top 10 most-cited domainswhich, alongside YouTube, include the German Heart Foundation and the country’s second-largest health insurerreveals that they are “virtually all respected, authoritative sources for information, which directly contradicts the report’s central narrative.”
Further, it added, the claim that AI Overviews turns to YouTube two to three times more than trusted medical sites “ignores the fact that a wide variety of credible health authorities and licensed medical professionals create content on YouTube.” Google pointed to the fact that, per the study’s own findings, 24 of the 25 most-cited YouTube videos came from medical-related channels like hospitals, clinics, and health organizations. (Though, SE Ranking’s researchers note in the report, those 25 videos are “just a tiny slice” of all YouTube videos that AI Overviews actually links).
In all, a spokesperson said, “The implication that AI Overviews provide unreliable information is refuted by the report’s own data, which shows that the most-cited domains in AI Overviews are reputable websites. And from what we’ve seen in the published findings, AI Overviews cite expert YouTube content from hospitals and clinics.”
CEOs of Minnesotas biggest companies signed a public letter calling for immediate de-escalation of tensions after weeks of silence following Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) descending upon the state, which has led to civilian deaths, abductions, economic stand-stills and a profound disruption of daily life.
On Sunday, chief executives of more than 60 major corporations like Target, Best Buy, 3M and General Mills, called for “immediate de-escalation of tensions” in Minnesota. The letter came following federal agents shooting and killing Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old VA ICU nurse while he was on the ground. Weeks earlier, Renee Good, was also shot and killed by ICE agents while in her vehicle.
The letter marks a shift for major companies headquartered in Minnesota, many of which put out public statements in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd, but were quiet on the chaos swirling around ICEs presence in their state. (Earlier this month, Fast Companys Joe Berkowitz received no reply from any major Minnesota company when asked to comment about ICE.)
The letter reads, in part: In this difficult moment for our community, we call for peace and focused cooperation among local, state and federal leaders to achieve a swift and durable solution that enables families, businesses, our employees, and communities across Minnesota to resume our work to build a bright and prosperous future.”
But experts think the call for peace fell short of criticizing the illegal actions that have been increasingly taken by federal immigration agents in recent weeks.
Weak leadership just makes workers more anxious
While the organization has been operating largely without warrants, and have been caught on video violently detaining people (even U.S. citizens), the letter stayed away from any criticism of either the Trump administration’s direction or ICE agents themselves. Thats been common during President Trumps second term: many organizations havent pushed back on the administrations rollbacks on DEI efforts, for example.
Instead, the letter stuck to neutral language, such as “the recent challenges facing our state” to describe the situation.
The letter has received criticism: On social media, some commenters call it a pseudo-statement, spineless and mealy-mouthed.
Sonia Daniels, a consultant and organizational systems expert who studies how people, power, and institutional behavior intersect, tells Fast Company that the letters clear display of neutrality was intentionaland also, she believes, the wrong call.
“Leaders often reach for language about calm and deescalation when they are actually trying to manage risks, not reality, she says, and adds that while this instinct feels responsible, it isn’t. She explains how failing to accurately speak about a situation of such magnitude has the potential to even cause more damage.
“When leaders refuse to name the source of harm, they shift the burden to the employees,” Daniels says. “When that happens, workers are left to absorb fear, confusion, and moral tension while leadership stays abstract and polite, which erodes trust fast.”
Actions speak louder than words
Instead of staying neutral to avoid any potential blowback, Daniels says CEOs should tell the truth about where they stand, as well as offer resources to their workforce who will undoubtedly be affected by ICE’s ongoing raidsand are, in many cases, afraid to go to work.
“Statements alone do not stabilize people, Daniels explains. Unless action follows.
While the open letter stated that companies’ efforts have included “close communication with the Governor, the White House, the Vice President and local mayors”, many agree that doesn’t feel like enough.
Cameron Kolb, a CEO adviser, tells Fast Company that fairly neutral-sounding open letters like this one “are disconnected from the employees and community, especially residents, from the current realities.” Kolb says that leaders in Minnesota should be openly talking about the impact ICE operations have had on the community, as well as providing support for de-escalation efforts”including backing community investigations.”“True leadership, especially in times of crisis, involves more than preaching for unity. It involves an alignment of the public position with demonstrated support for the most affected, Kolb says.
Community leadership
Meanwhile, as top business leaders stay relatively neutral-sounding, the citizen leaders of Minnesota are taking action.
On Friday, community leaders, along with citizens, faith leaders, and labor unions organized a day of action where over 75,000 took to the streets to stand against ICE and hundreds of thousands participated in an economic blackout.
ICE continues to make everyone less safe, and Minnesotas Labor Movement repeats and amplifies our call for them to leave our state immediately, said Bernie Burnham, Minnesota AFL-CIO President, in a statement following the killing of Alex Pretti.
Minnesotas Labor Movement will continue to actively support and stand in solidarity with every worker who has been unlawfully detained. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our fellow Minnesotans in the face of a hostile federal government.
