Artek and Marimekko just came together for a new collection thats the epitome of Finnish design excellence.
Artek, a furniture company founded in 1935, partnered with the design house and printmaker Marimekko to ring in Artek’s 90th anniversary. The collaboration takes three of Arteks most iconic designsthe Stool 60, Bench 153B, and Table 90Dand pairs them with equally iconic Marimekko prints, transforming Arteks minimal birchwood surfaces into a kind of art canvas. The stool, bench, and table retail for $550, $1,240, and $1,255, respectively, and are available for a limited time on both retailers websites and through select dealers.
The collection brings together the two legacy Finnish brands decades of expertise in their fields, serving as an example of how both are leveraging collaborations to reach new audiences.
[Photo: Elizabeth Helttoft/Artek]
Leveraging brand collaborations
For both Artek and Marimekko, brand collaborations have served as a lever for tapping new customers both outside of Finland and among a younger generation of design enthusiasts.
In recent years, Marimekko has expanded its reach through partnerships with brands ranging from Crocs and Target to Uniqlo and the Finnish jeweler Kalevala. Artek, meanwhile, has worked with the English fashion designer Paul Smith and, as another branch of its 90-year celebration, is teaming up with the beloved childrens brand Moomin.
[Photo: Elizabeth Helttoft/Artek]
In a press release, Marianna Goebl, Arteks managing director, shared that Marimekko and Artek are an obvious matchbut that the collaborations outcome is anything but.
We have woven together our respective identities, creative visions, and core expertise to create something truly unexpected, Goebl said. The collection is one of bold yet subtle beauty.
[Photo: Elizabeth Helttoft/Artek]
A truly unexpected collection
Artek and Marimekko have existed within each others creative orbits since the mid-20th century. In fact, the companies founders knew each other personally: In 1975, Marimekko founder Armi Ratia wrote to Artek founder Alvar Aalto to share, I will always be proud of you here in Finland and also in the outside world. Despite a long relationship, this is the first time the brands have come together on a line of co-created products.
We are both brands with bold and distinct identities that have been shaped by architecture, nature, and human-centric pragmatism, said Rebekka Bay, Marimekkos creative director. To me, this collaboration really highlights our shared values and celebrates the most distilled parts of our respective crafts while also bringing something surprising and unexpected to our customers.
For the furniture launch, Artek used three prints from Marimekkos Arkkitehti series, a collection of bold patterns that Ratia commissioned from designer Maija Isola between 1959 and 1964. The prints (called Lokki, Kivet, and Seireeni) feature curving, organic patterns that Isola sourced from nature.
Where Marimekkos work typically uses high-octane color to bring patterns to life, Artek has employed a marquetry technique to emboss them onto its most recognizable bentwood furniture piecesallowing the Finnish birch itself to illuminate the shapes.
For Marimekko, the dress acts as the canvas for our art of printmaking, and in our collaboration with Artek, the birchwood furniture became the canvas for our prints, Bay said.
The product is a series of furniture that manages to strike a balance between Arteks sleek minimalism and Marimekkos loud, joyful aesthetic.
Alo Yoga is getting into luxury bags, but it doesn’t appear it’s looking to sell many of them.
The brand’s first bag collection, unveiled September 9, features responsibly sourced leather and suede designs priced from $2,000 to $3,600. The limited collection features the Voyage Duffel, which Katie Holmes was spotted toting without a pair of Alo leggings or branded hoodie in sight. Other styles include the bowler-shaped Odyssey; the Balance Bucket, which can be worn as a cross-body bag; and the Tranquility Tote. Each comes with an “intention crystal,” a one-of-a-kind crystal that Alo says “carries the resonance of your intentions throughout your day.”
View this post on Instagram A post shared by ALO (@alo)
Priced like a Prada, this isn’t exactly the type of bag made for holding your sweaty gym clothes and throwing in a locker. It’s meant to push Alo beyond athleisure and into luxury. The collection marks an effort by the brand to level up through a premium offering with limited availability. Throw in a complementary crystal, and you manage to drawn in affluent woo woo Erewhon influencers and MAHA moms.
“When it comes to bags, people want to carry something that reflects who they are,” Summer Nacewicz, Alo Yoga’s EVP of marketing and creative, tells Fast Company. “Our customer is incredibly loyal and looks to Alo for products that fit seamlessly into her lifestyle. These bags are built with the same craftsmanship and attention to detail you would expect from heritage houses, but designed with versatility and wellness in mind. At first, some might be surprised to see Alo in this spacebut once they touch and feel the product and experience the quality of the bags, theyll see why it makes sense. This is the future of luxury wellness.”
View this post on Instagram A post shared by ALO (@alo)
Aside from press images, the bags are, in actuality, both hard to get and hard to see. The collection is on display at just two Alo locations: its SoHo flagship store in New York City, and Beverly Hills flagship store in California. The brand will also display the bags in a showroom during New York Fashion Week. The collection can’t b purchased with a click online, either. Should you be interested, there’s an extra hoop to jump through: To view the collection in person or receive more information through “private client specialists,” the apparel brand requires an email address.
This strategy does give Alo some benefit, if not mass sales. It allows the premium athleisure brand to build a mailing list of customers who have money to burn on a pricy luxury bag, while also providing face time with customers and turning the purchase process into an experience.
A private company based in Los Angeles, Alo Yoga was valued at $10 billion as part of talks for a deal for development capital in 2023 that was ultimately canceled, according to PitchBook. Founders Danny Harris and Marco DeGeorge started the brand in 2007 and named it for the words air, land, and ocean. Though Alo launched with a focus on yoga apparel, the company was perfectly positioned for the pandemic boom in athleisure that helped other activewear and yoga brands grow their customer base. Alo aims to differentiate itself from sportswear competitors like On and Nike by leaning into the luxury market.
By building a client base of top spenders for exclusive products and experiences, Alo is also hoping the love of luxe rubs off on the rest of the brand. A couple grand on a bag might be out of reach for most of Alo’s customers, but suddenly $128 leggings don’t seem so expensive.
This is an excerpt from Consumed: How Big Brands Got Us Hooked on Plastic.
An odd symbol, made up of three arrows arranged in a triangle, began showing up on plastic containers across America in the fall of 1988. Inside it was a number.
The idea to put codes on plastic containers came from the Society of the Plastics Industry. By 1987, Lewis Freeman, the trade bodys head of government affairs, had begun hearing that the fledgling plastics recycling industry was struggling to make sense of the dozens of different types of plastics they were receiving. The plastics had different melting points and other properties, which meant they couldnt just be mixed together for recycling.
“Plastics is not really one material; its umpteen materials,” explains Freeman. “While plastics share a similar molecular structure and most are made from oil or natural gas, theyre otherwise quite different from one another.”
Before he joined SPI in 1979, Freeman worked as a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, fighting Senator Ted Kennedys push to break up big oil companies. At SPI, where he stayed for more than 20 years, Freeman dealt with anything that could pose a reputational risk to the plastics industry. He spent much of his time convincing companies to make changes that would forestall the risk of regulation.
When it emerged that dozens of babies each year were dying by drowning in large plastic bucketsat five gallons, the buckets were so heavy that if an infant fell into them, they didnt tip overFreeman was the man who rallied the industry to hand out warning stickers to parents buying the buckets. The companies, he remembers, didnt want to add permanent labels, which made the buckets a few cents more expensive. Eventually, they capitulated when it became apparent their legal liability was enormous.
“Companies are essentially all the same regardless of industry,” says Freeman. “They dont like to be told by someone else that they need to do something, period.”
A symbol to aid recyclersnot consumers
Back in 1987, Freeman took the complaints he was hearing about recycling to SPIs public affairs committee. Since the industry saw recycling as a tool to mitigate reputational damage, the public affairs group, consisting of men from big packaging makers like Owens-Illinois and the American Can Company, was the natural place to discuss it.
The dizzying array of plastics on the market was hardly the only issue plaguing recycling. Plastics popularity came down to it being light, cheap, versatile, and robust. But being light and cheap hurt on the other end. Haulers, who were paid by the ton to collect recycling, made far more money filling their trucks with heavier aluminum or cardboard than with lightweight plastic.
Things were worse for some plastics than others. Polystyrene foam was economically unviable because it was mostly air. Plastic bags, wraps, and films also had to be collected separately, or they gummed up sorting machinery. Packaging makers preferred virgin over recycled plastic since it was better quality and usually cheaper. If there were no buyers, it didnt matter how technically recyclable something wasit wasnt going to be recycled. Back in the late 1980s, only containers made from PETthe plastic used in single-use drink bottlesand HDPEcommonly used to make milk jugs and detergent containerswere being recycled in any significant volume. (The situation remains the same today.)
These plastics werent turned into new soda bottles or milk jugs, but instead downcycled into lower-grade construction material that was just one step removed from the landfill. All the other kinds of plastics went straight to landfills or incinerators, if they werent littered.
Slapping a code on the bottom of plastic containers wouldnt fix most of these problems. But at least it would help recyclers know what they were dealing with, Freeman told SPIs public affairs committee.
Many plastic resin producers in the room were against the idea. They feared that including a code would encourage consumer goods makers to spurn plastics that werent being recycled.
Even the makers of recyclable PET and HDPE containers didnt embrace Freemans proposal. Freeman compares them to the bucket makers who preferred to sit on their hands until they had a legislative gun pointing at their heads. “The bottle manufacturers opposed it because it required them to do something,” he says.
Freeman eventually prevailed. He insisted the code was a way to forestall mandatory regulation that could be far more expensive and onerous. For plastics that werent currently being recycled, the code was the first step towards enabling this, he added, since it meant they could be more easily sorted.
And so the “resin identification code,” as the industry called it, was created in 1988. While there were dozens of different types and subtypes of plastics, SPIlooking to keep costs and complexity lowgrouped them into seven broad categories, which still stand today.
They are:
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), used for soda and water bottles
High-density polyethylene (HDPE), used for milk jugs, detergent containers, and shopping bags
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC), used for credit cards and pill packs
Low-density polyethylene (LDPE), used for disposable gloves, trash bags, and dry-cleaning bags
Polypropylene (PP), used for yogurt tubs, takeaway boxes, and butter containers
Polystyrene (PS): the solid kind is used to make disposable cutlery and cups, while the expanded kind (EPS) is used for foam egg cartons, meat trays, and fast-food containers
Other plastics: a catch-all for remaining plastics including multilayer packages like pet food pouches and ketchup sachets that incorporate different types of plastic, as well as bioplastics
“It was a marketing tool”
To separate the number from other descriptors used on containers, SPI enclosed it in the chasing arrows symbol.
It was a strange choice, one that would cast doubts over the plastics industrys motives for decades to come.
Back in 1970, Gary Anderson, a 23-year-old architecture student at the University of Southern California, had seen an enormous wall-sized poster advertising a design competition. Sponsored by Container Corp., a paper packaging maker that was also the largest paper recycler in the U.S., the competition required participants to design a symbol “for the love of earth” to “symbolize the recycling process.”
Andersons designfeaturing three arrows twisting and returning into themselveswon. He got a $2,500 tuition grant and a trip to Chicago in September 1970 to attend a press conference at Container Corp.s headquarters.
“I was kind of an arrogant little punk student, and I thought the whole thing was kind of silly, actually,” recalls Anderson, who back then sported a goatee and wore his red hairbleached blond by the California sunin curtains parted slightly to the side.
Through the 1960s, the paper industrymuch like plastics would laterhad faced mounting criticism about how its disposable products were flowing to landfills. Container Corp. made the new chasing arrows symbol available to the entire paper industry for use on shipping containers and folding cartons, saying it hoped the symbol would spread awareness about the importance of pape recycling.
“It was a marketing tool,” explains Anderson.
Despite this, in 1988, when the Society of the Plastics Industry decided to use the chasing arrows on plastic containers, its executives insisted the resin identification code was not meant to indicate recyclability. It also said the code was not aimed at consumers.
Freeman says SPI chose the chasing arrows to distinguish the numbers from any others that might be found on containers, and that it was only meant to help recyclers sort plastic resins from one another. “It was not an attempt to deceive people that because an item had the code on it, it was recyclable,” he says.
But, looking back, Freeman acknowledges that recyclability is exactly what people took the code to mean. “That ended up being the presumption people drewand still draw until this day.”
What does “please recycle” really mean?
Within a few months of its inception in 1988, the SPI code began catching on across the US. Colgate put it on its bottles for Palmolive and Ajax dishwashing liquids. P&G slapped it on Jif peanut butter jars, bottles of Crisco oil, Tide and Cheer laundry detergent bottles and tubs, and even on its plastic detergent measuring cups.
Including the chasing arrows symbol together with the resin identification code on products that couldnt be recycled gave consumers the impression that they could. “They are made from polystyrene,” a P&G executive told reporters about the plastic detergent measuring cups, which he claimed were recyclable. “Thats number 6 on the plastic recycling code.” But local facilities didnt accept the cups, and they were not recycled.
By the early 1990s, at the urging of SPI, 39 states had enshrined the code as law on rigid plastic containers. Companies eagerly embraced the law, but also started putting the code on flexible plastic wrappers for everything from pantyhose to Subway sandwiches.
Some brands had begun to use the exhortation “Please Recycle” alongside the chasing arrows symbol on plastic products and packaging that couldnt be recycled, claiming this was an educational effort. Surveys showed that the majority of consumers thought that “Please Recycle” meant consumers could recycle those products in all or most communities in the U.S..
“Over time, even companies who initially opposed developing the code grabbed on to it and started putting it on everything,” says Freeman. “Companies decided it was in their interest to look green, and they ran with it. They ran with it until the cows came home.”
Excerpted with permission from Consumed: How Big Brands Got Us Hooked on Plastic by Saabira Chaudhuri. Published by arrangement with Blink Publishing, an imprint of Bonnier Books UK. Copyright 2025 Saabira Chaudhuri.
Forget the ping-pong tables and kombucha on tap. The real workplace perks, if you are a working parent, arent glitzy. They are functional. And, in an era of record burnout and extreme scarcity of childcare, knowing how to identify a genuinely parent-friendly workplace could make or break your careerand your sanity.
Green flags
Whether you are in job-hunting mode, negotiating a new role, or taking stock of your current company, heres what to look for and what might be pure performance.
1. True Flexibility (Not Just ‘Work from Anywhere’)
Try to find a position with a predictable level of flexibility. That means clear expectations about hours and deliverables that allow you to manage your day, not just your location.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2015\/08\/erikaaslogo.png","headline":"Girl, Listen: A Guide to What Really Matters","description":"Ericka dives into the heat of modern motherhood, challenging the notion that personal identity must be sacrificed at the altar of parenting. ","substackDomain":"https:\/\/erickasouter.substack.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
2. People in Power Who Actually Take Parental Benefits
A major green flag is a leader who makes use of parental leave and talks about it publicly. It creates an environment where everyone can do the same without fear of being judged or sidelined in their career.
3. Meeting Culture That Respects Quitting Time
Are meetings packed at the end of the day? Are you expected to be there at 6 p.m.? If the work calendar is chaos, chances are your home life will be too.
4. Paid Leave That Doesnt Come with a Guilt Trip
Ask if expecting parents typically use parental leave, not just whats in the employee handbook. Culture matters more than policy.
5. Support Beyond the Baby Stage
Good companies dont end support as soon as your baby hits 1-year-old. Look for long-term flexibility, back-to-school understanding, summer childcare solutions, or even parenting employee resource groups (ERGs).
6. Caregiving Is Part of the Conversation, Not a Burden
Do people feel safe talking about sick kids, school closings, or mental health struggles without worrying they will be perceived as less committed? Thats the culture you want.
7. Promotion Paths That Dont Punish Caregivers
Look at whos getting promoted. Are parents climbing up or are their careers stalling? A truly parent-friendly company allows for upward mobility and family values.
Red flags
What about signs to watch out for? Here are four:
Promises of some vague work-life balance with no specific details
Unlimited PTO policies that people dont feel comfortable using
Celebrating employees that exceed expectations. Make sure that isnt code for overworking to the point of burnout
Not a single reference to caregiving or diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
Bonus advice
While you’re being interviewed, interview the company too. Ask about their approach to flexibility, caregiving, and how theyve supported employees during school closures or emergencies (like COVID-19). The response will tell you everything you need to know.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2015\/08\/erikaaslogo.png","headline":"Girl, Listen: A Guide to What Really Matters","description":"Ericka dives into the heat of modern motherhood, challenging the notion that personal identity must be sacrificed at the altar of parenting. ","substackDomain":"https:\/\/erickasouter.substack.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
James Barrat is an author and documentary filmmaker who has written and produced for National Geographic, Discovery, PBS, and many other broadcasters.
Whats the big idea?
The Intelligence Explosion: When AI Beats Humans at Everything [Photo: St. Martin’s Press]
Artificial intelligence could reshape our world for the better or threaten our very existence. Todays chatbots are just the beginning. We could be heading for a future in which artificial superintelligence challenges human dominance. To keep our grip on the reins of progress when faced with an intelligence explosion, we need to set clear standards and precautions for AI development.
Below, James shares five key insights from his new book, The Intelligence Explosion: When AI Beats Humans at Everything. Listen to the audio versionread by James himselfbelow, or in the Next Big Idea App.
1. The rise of generative AI is impressive, but not without problems.
Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT and Dall-E, have taken the world by storm, demonstrating their ability to write, draw, and even compose music in ways that seem almost human. Generative means they generate or create things. But these abilities come with some steep downsides. These systems can easily create fake news, bogus documents, or deepfake photos and videos that appear and sound authentic. Even the AI experts who build these models dont fully understand how they come up with their answers. Generative AI is a black box system, meaning you can see the data the model is trained on and the words or pictures it puts out, but even the designers cannot explain what happens on the inside.
Stuart Russell, coauthor of Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, said this about generative AI, We have absolutely no idea how it works, and we are releasing it to hundreds of millions of people. We give it credit cards, bank accounts, social media accounts. Were doing everything we can to make sure that it can take over the world.
Generative AI hallucinates, meaning the models sometimes spit out stuff that sounds believable but is wrong or nonsensical. This makes them risky for important tasks. When asked about a specific academic paper, a generative AI might confidently respond, The 2019 study by Dr. Leah Wolfe at Stanford University found that 73% of people who eat chocolate daily have improved memory function, as published in the Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, Volume 12, Issue 4. This sounds completely plausible and authoritative, but many details are made up: There is no Dr. Leah Wolfe at Stanford, no such study from 2019, and the 73% statistic is fiction.
Generative AI hallucinates, meaning the models sometimes spit out stuff that sounds believable but is wrong or nonsensical.
The hallucination is particularly problematic because its presented with such confidence and specificity that it seems legitimate. Users might cite this nonexistent research or make decisions based on completely false information.
On top of that, as generative AI models get bigger, they start picking up surprise skillslike translating languages and writing codeeven though nobody programmed them to do that. These unpredictable outcomes are called emergent properties. They hint at even bigger challenges as AI continues to advance and grow larger.
2. The push for artificial general intelligence (AGI).
The next big goal in AI is something called AGI, or artificial general intelligence. This means creating an AI that can perform nearly any task a human can, in any field. Tech companies and governments are racing to build AGI because the potential payoff is huge. AGI could automate all sorts of knowledge work, making us way more productive and innovative. Whoever gets there first could dominate global industries and set the rules for everyone else.
Some believe that AGI could help us tackle massive problems, such as climate change, disease, and poverty. Its also seen as a game-changer for national security. However, the unpredictability were already seeing will only intensify as we approach AGI, which raises the stakes.
3. From AGI to something way smarter.
If we ever reach AGI, things could escalate quickly. This is where the concept of the intelligence explosion comes into play. The idea was first put forward by I. J. Good. Good was a brilliant British mathematician and codebreaker who worked alongside Alan Turing at Bletchley Park during World War II. Together, they were crucial in breaking German codes and laying the foundations for modern computing.
An intelligence explosion would come with incredible upsides.
Drawing on this experience, Good realized that if we built a machine that was as smart as a human, it might soon be able to make itself even smarter. Once it started improving itself, it could get caught in a kind of feedback loop, rapidly building smarter and smarter versionsway beyond anything humans could keep up with. This runaway process could lead to artificial superintelligence, also known as ASI.
An intelligence explosion would come with incredible upsides. Superintelligent AI could solve problems weve never been able to crack, such as curing diseases, reversing aging, or mitigating climate change. It could push science and technology forward at lightning speed, automate all kinds of work, and help us make smarter decisions by analyzing information in ways people simply cannot.
4. The dangers of an intelligence explosion.
Is ASI dangerous? You bet. In an interview, sci-fi great Arthur C. Clark told me, We umans steer the future not because were the fastest or strongest creature, but the most intelligent. If we share the planet with something more intelligent than we are, they will steer the future.
The same qualities that could make superintelligent AI so helpful also make it dangerous. If its goals arent perfectly lined up with whats good for humansa problem called alignmentit could end up doing things that are catastrophic for us. For example, a superintelligent AI might use up all the planets resources to complete its assigned mission, leaving nothing left for humans. Nick Bostrom, a Swedish philosopher at the University of Oxford, created a thought experiment called the paperclip maximizer. If a superintelligent AI were asked to make paperclips, without very careful instructions, it would turn all the matter in the universe into paperclipsincluding you and me.
Whoever controls this kind of AI could also end up with an unprecedented level of power over the rest of the world. Plus, the speed and unpredictability of an intelligence explosion could throw global economies and societies into complete chaos before we have time to react.
5. How AI could overpower humanity.
These dangers can play out in very real ways. A misaligned superintelligence could pursue a badly worded goal, causing disaster. Suppose you asked the AI to eliminate cancer; it could do that by eliminating people. Common sense is not something AI has ever demonstrated.
AI-controlled weapons could escalate conflicts faster than humans can intervene, making war more likely and more deadly. In May 2010, a flash crash occurred on the stock exchange, triggered by high-frequency trading algorithms. Stocks were purchased and sold at a pace humans could not keep up with, costing investors tens of millions of dollars.
A misaligned superintelligence could pursue a badly worded goal, causing disaster.
Advanced AI could take over essential infrastructuresuch as power grids or financial systemsmaking us entirely dependent and vulnerable.
As AI gets more complex, it might develop strange new motivations that its creators never imagined, and those could be dangerous.
Bad actors, like authoritarian regimes or extremist groups, could use AI for mass surveillance, propaganda, cyberattacks, or worse, giving them unprecedented new tools to control or harm people. We are seeing surveillance systems morph into enhanced weapons systems in Gaza right now. In Western China, surveillance systems keep track of tens of millions of people in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. AI-enhanced surveillance systems keep track of who is crossing Americas border with Mexico.
Todays unpredictable, sometimes baffling AI is just a preview of the much bigger risks and rewards that could come from AGI and superintelligence. As we rush to create smarter machines, we must remember that these systems could bring both incredible benefits and existential dangers. If we want to stay in control, we need to move forward with strong oversight, regulations, and a commitment to transparency.
This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.
Long before she left the corporate world to advise others on career advancement, Tabatha Jones didn’t get a promotion in a way she says felt completely unexpected.
She was, after all, the person at the major telecom company her colleagues would consider the natural successor to her then-boss, who was getting ready to vacate the director-level role.
I was her next person on the bench. I was sitting in the room when it was announced it was someone else. And it was very hard to contain my emotions, Jones recalls. After the meeting, Jones just looked at her and said, Im not feeling very well. Im going home. And when she came back the next day, she had a very honest conversation with her about how hard I had worked, my accomplishments, and why I felt I deserved that job.
Difficult as it was, Jones is glad that she handled it the way she did. As she would later learn, her boss hadnt really snubbed her at all.
In this piece, premium subscribers will learn:
What you can learn from the viral response to Duolingo’s social impresario and her move to DoorDash
How to manage ‘your story’ and avoid a victim mentality
Why you need to take this moment to engage with your boss, not withdraw
What I didnt know at the time was that the role was temporary, Jones says. She explains that just a few months later, the company underwent a major reorganization that eliminated the position. Had she put me in that role, I very likely would have become unemployed, or gone through a demotion. Which would have been even harder.
Instead, Jones landed a senior manager role at the company, and negotiated a generous pay increase. Ten months later, the organization underwent yet another reorganization. Jones was finally hired for a director-level rolewhich she might not have gotten if she overreacted to getting passed over previously. Only this time, the opportunity wasnt temporary.
You dont want to be too salty, says Jones. (She has since written a book about her experience called Promotion Ready in 3 Months.) Be very careful, because people talk. You want to make sure your brand is intact, so when the next promotion comes up, youre thought of in the right way.
Taking the high road is easier said than done in the emotional aftermath of a devastating snub. Sometimes, throwing a little shade may feel warranted, and could even earn public praise. Take Zaria Parvez, who recently wrote a now-viral LinkedIn post that took a jab at Duolingo, heavily intimating that she had been overlooked for a position as its director of social.
The companys former social media manager was responsible for killing the Duolingo owl in what became one of the years most successful viral campaigns. In her LinkedIn post, she even posted an original illustration of herself sitting atop the dead mascot, reading a notification from her new employer, DoorDash: Your career upgrade has arrived!
It clearly struck a chord, receiving over 17,000 reactions and 700 comments. At the same time, career experts say that for most in that situation, your saltiness could come back to bite youand that the best approach is keeping a level head. (At least for those not in the business of going viral.)
Taking the high road
When someone else gets the nod for a promotion, its common to feel resentful, jealous, sad, angry, undervalued and underappreciated, says Monster career expert Vicki Salemi.
People may feel like, I’m just going to do the bare minimum, because they don’t care. They don’t appreciate all my hard work, she says. Some may just start looking for a new job immediately. They may be thinking, Why am I going to work hard if it doesn’t matter anyway?
Tempting as it may be to withdraw out of spite, Salemi says it wont do you any favors in the long run, especially if you plan to stick around at that company.
If you act like you don’t care, and you don’t have a conversation about it, then next time there is a promotion, your boss may say, Well, I thought you were content where you were. We havent really developed your skills, so you’re not ready, she says.
Though it never hurts to have an up-to-date résumé on hand and an eye on the job market, Salemi advises against burning bridges with existing or former employers, especially on social media. In a high-profile case like Parvezs, in which the former employee publicly insinuates they left after not being considered for a more senior title, its all up to the person and what they feel theyre most comfortable with, says Salemi. They may be upset and they want to show they landed on their feet and theyre doing really well. But there may also be a reason to tread carefully when throwing some shade at your former bosses.
Its a small world, she says. You never know when your paths will cross again.
Manage your emotions even if youre on the way out
That doesnt mean you have to hide your disappointment, says Justin Hale, an author and course designer at Crucial Learning, a leadership and development training provider.
Speak up in a way that shows your disappointment and shows that you’re mature, you’re accountable, you’re responsible. Those are the kinds of qualities that a leader is going to look for, he says.
And then, rather than using it as an excuse to do less, Hale says to use the snub as motivation to accomplish more. Even if its for someone else.
“Manage what we call your story, he says. In this case: “The story I’m telling myself is that, I was qualified, and for some reason, they passed me up.
After identifying why being snubbed bothered you, you can then backtrack one more step and say, what are the facts? What did I actually see or hear that led me to that story? Separating fact from story, Hale explains, helps people overcome a victim mentality that can cloud their decision-making, and lead to reactions you could end up regretting later.
And if nothing elseyou can transfer the energy youre putting into being salty into finding your next gig.
Maybe your organization is being unfair to you, and the solution is to go find something else, he says. He adds that even if you decide to leave, theres value in having an honest and open dialogue with your boss.
Even if your manager shares some things with you that make you think, okay, this place isn’t a fit for meisn’t it valuable to get their perspective before you head out?
Youre in a meeting, the slides are rolling, people are nodding, others are fiddling on their phones, and then it happens. You have a question. You want to be seen as engaged, so you open your mouth, and words start to tumble out . . .and the room goes still. Silence.
Weve all been told there are no dumb questions. But if youve ever watched a room collectively glaze over while someone tries to stitch a stream of consciousness into something coherent, you know dumb questions are alive and well.
At their core, questions are about curiosity. And while curiosity may have killed the cat, in your career questions can be pure rocket fuel. When done right, curiosity makes you look sharp, collaborative, and strategic. However, haphazard curiosity may lead to you finding yourself metaphorically under a conference table wishing for a 13 Going on 30 moment where you magically reappear as 30, flirty, and thriving, just anywhere but in that meeting.
So how do you harness curiosity as career capital instead of career sabotage? Thats a smart question. And in this five-part playbook well dive into practical (and slightly cheeky) ways to do it.
1. Timing is everything: Ask early, but not TOO early
When youre new to a project, your brain lights up with questions like a big ol neon sign. Resist the urge to fire them all off at once. Half will answer themselves as you absorb context. The other half will get sharper the longer they simmer.
Try this: Start a secret doc, dump all your questions in, and revisit after 48 hours. Cross off the ones that solved themselves, and reframe the ones worth asking. Now youre not blurting. Youre curating like a purveyor of art.
2. Make it about the work, not about you
Curiosity should sharpen the team, not sound like a personal confession. Theres a big difference between I dont get slide 7 and Can we talk about how slide 7 connects to the project goal? The first highlights your gap (and unlike the London Tube, you should definitely mind that gap). The second elevates collective clarity.
Try this: Swap I dont understand for Can we walk through. Same curiosity, different energy. Suddenly, youre not lost. Instead, youre leading alignment.
3. Use the after-action window
Right after a big meeting or decision, the team takes a collective exhale. Thats your sweet spot. People are reflective, not defensive. A question in this window is constructive. (Cue Angela Bassett walking away from the burning car in Waiting to Exhale. Big exhale. Big release. Right timing.)
Try this: Send a quick note: Great discussion today. One thing Im still noodling on: how does this decision ripple out six months from now? Thats not nitpicking, its being future-focused. And leadership loves a forward thinker.
4. Model Curiosity
If youre running a meeting, the best way to spark smart curiosity is to show your own. Leaders who frame questions strategically demonstrate how to ask questions in ways that move work forward and dont suck air out of the room.
Try this: Instead of ending a meeting with the standard Any questions?which usually results in blank stares because everyones already at lunchmodel the kind of curiosity you want from the team. For example: This was a great discussion. What perspectives might we still be missing? That shows curiosity as a tool to sharpen impact, not poke holes.
5. Aim for impact
Curiosity is about impact, not volume. Not every question deserves airtime. Theres a fine line between thoughtful and time-wasting. The fastest way to tank your reputation is asking something Google couldve quickly answered, or a question that only benefits yourself. Talking doesnt always equal contributing. Sometimes adding value means being a great active listener.
Try this: Before speaking, ask yourself if the answer is easily searchable on your own and if the answer will benefit more than just you. If the answer is yes to either, park it. After the meeting, conduct the search or find a way to bring it up privately (either in a 1:1 or a Slack) and protect the groups momentum and keep your credibility. Nobody wants to be the human embodiment of this meeting couldve been an email. No one likes that person. Sorry, not sorry.
Questions dont just reveal what you dont know, they reveal how you think. Curate them with care, and you wont just be asking questions. Youll be shaping the conversation.
The labor market may be weaker than previously reported. According to newly revised Bureau and Labor Statistics (BLS) data, the U.S. added nearly a million fewer jobs than it had said earlier.
On Tuesday, a press release explained that 911,000 fewer jobs (-0.6%) were added to the U.S. economy over the last year, in a period that ended in March. The new data reveals that only an estimated 70,000 jobs were added each month, instead of 147,000. Overall, only 850,000 were added to the market over the past year, less than half of what was previously reported.
The new report is significant, as it marks the largest preliminary revision of BLS data since the year 2000. The data also represents the largest number of jobs lost since the 2009 financial crisis. The official report will come in February 2026.
The new data comes weeks after Trump fired the BLS’s top official, Erika McEntarfer, who was confirmed last year. McEntarfer’s firing followed another string of data revisions, which also pointed to job losses and weak hiring. We need accurate Jobs Numbers. I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY, Trump posted on Truth Social.
The post continued: Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate; they cant be manipulated for political purposes, the president wrote. McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months. Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative.
Trump, who has been highly critical of the Labor Department in the past, most notably for its data revisions, has continuously insisted that the economy is strong. But experts say the new report is a sign that the labor market is slowing down.“Today’s data suggests that cooling in the labor market is more dramatic than previously thought,” Elizabeth Renter, senior economist at NerdWallet, told CBS. “This strengthens the likelihood that the Fed will cut rates next week, as it’s additional evidence that the labor market side of the dual mandate needs some attention.”
While the president is pushing back against claims that job growth is stalled, employees seem to be feeling the pressure to keep their current jobs. Likewise, anxiety about the economy is high as workers worry about mass layoffs.
In 2003, when the New York Times asked Steve Jobs why the iPod became an overnight success, he didnt talk about its storage capacity, hardware specs, or marketing campaign. He said, simply: Design.
People think it’s this veneer, he added. That the designers are handed this box and told, Make it look good! That’s not what we think design is. Its not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.
He was talking about music players. But he couldve been talking about healthcare.
Because today, in 2025, American healthcare is still stuck in its MS-DOS era. The systems might be powerful, but the interface is broken.
You feel it the moment you try to understand your lab results. Instead of something you can scan and absorb, you get a dense, clinical PDF full of acronyms and numbers, usually without any explanation of what they mean or what to do next). No context. No clarity. Its like receiving an email in binary code and needing a doctor to translate.
Most people dont go back to their doctor for clarity. According to a new national survey from my firm Cactus, 71% of patients turn to WebMD after a diagnosis. Nearly half now use AI tools like ChatGPT to make sense of their care. One in four say those tools help them understand their health better than their own doctor does.
Thats not just a curiosity. Its a crisis. A comprehension crisis. One that affects everyone: Patients, providers, and the health systems trying to keep up.
TRUST ISNT THE ISSUE. COMPREHENSION IS.
Heres the paradox: 78% of Americans say they trust their doctor. But more than 1 in 4 walk out of appointments more confused than when they walked in.
Why? Because the system still communicates like its running on a command line system where users literally need to learn a new language to ask their questions. Your health and care answers are there, but its buried in jargon, fragmented across systems, and delivered in ways that overwhelm or alienate.
Patients arent given context, only data. No wonder they forget what was said. No wonder they turn to Google. Weve built a $4.5 trillion industry on clinical excellence but wrapped it in a user experience from the 1980s.
This isnt just a communication problem. Its an interface problem. And its costing us dearly.
THE COST OF CONFUSION
Poor communication doesnt just frustrate patients. It drives worse outcomes, higher costs, and missed opportunities for connection and care.
According to Cactus survey, 20% of Americans believe miscommunication with a doctor has led to worse health outcomes. That number isnt theoretical. It shows up in delayed diagnoses, unnecessary ER visits, and care plans that never get follow-through.
Even more concerning, 30% of Americans are currently sitting on a specific, known health concern that they havent brought up with a medical professional. The reasons: They dont know how to start, fear its not serious enough, or feel they wont be understood.
The cost of silence is high.
Yet, many providers are missing the signal patients are sending. Those patients dont just want better communication; theyre willing to pay for it.
Nearly half of Americans say theyd pay out-of-pocket for more personalized, ongoing care. Thats not just dissatisfaction. Its demand. Its a market signal for a better-designed experienceone that prioritizes clarity, empathy, and usability alongside clinical excellence.
TIME TO UPGRADE THE INTERFACE
When I was 11, my family brought home our first Apple computer, the Apple II. It was a revelation. Not because the machine was so advanced, but because for the first time, I could use it without a teacher guiding me. I designed a birthday banner. I clicked instead of typed. The same underlying machine had become exponentially more useful, simply because it was designed with the user in mind.
Now imagine if your next doctors visit was designed that way.
Instead of cryptic PDFs, your lab results live on an interactive health dashboard. Biomarkers are plotted on a bell curve that shows whats optimal and where you stand. Explanations are written in plain language. Click a number and you get verified insights from your care team. Time spent with clinicians is engrossing and educational. Time spent with digital tools is satisfying and motivating.
Thats not a future fantasy. Its possible right now. But only if we bring design to the table earlier and stop treating it as cosmetic.
DESIGN ISNT DECORATION. ITS INFRASTRUCTURE.
In healthcare, communication isnt a soft skill. Its a system function. When patients dont understand, outcomes suffer. When doctors cant easily share information or collaborate across teams, outcomes suffer. That isnt a design detail. Its a product flaw.
In most industries, design is how people get from input to impact. Its how they navigate complexity, make decisions, and take action. From airports to financial apps, good design anticipates human needs. It removes friction. It builds trust.
Healthcare deserves the same standard.
Instead of treating design as something to layer on at the end, we need to treat comprehension as infrastructure. We need systems that explain, not just record. Tools that coordinate, not just collect. Interfaces that feel intuitive and human, even in high-stakes, high-stress moments.
What patients are asking for isnt unreasonable. They want care that feels clear. Tools that help them follow through and communication that builds confidence.
Design can deliver that. But only if we prioritize understanding as a core part of the system, not an afterthought.
Noah Waxman is CEO and cofounder at Cactus.
The explosive rise of GLP-1 medicationssuch as Mounjaro, Ozempic, and Wegovyhas ignited more than just headlines. It has fundamentally shifted how Americans access and pay for medications, driving innovation in affordability models, and fueling a dramatic increase in direct-to-consumer (DTC) healthcare platforms.
Originally approved for type 2 diabetes, GLP-1s have surged in popularity due to their effectiveness in treating obesity and other cardiometabolic conditions. Yet their high list prices and limited insurance coverage have exposed critical gaps in the traditional pharmacy system.
Today, more than 19 million people in the U.S. do not have coverage for GLP-1s prescribed for weight loss. Others face complicated, time-consuming restrictions such as step therapy or prior authorizations before they can begin GLP-1 treatment.
As demand has soared, so has the urgency for new access models that bypass conventional barriers.
In response, a new generation of direct-to-consumer (DTC) healthcare platforms has emerged. From telehealth companies to digital pharmacies, these companies are reshaping how patients engage with care. Many now offer bundled GLP-1 programs that include virtual consultations, lab testing, prescription delivery, and coachingall for a cash price. These models circumvent insurance entirely and appeal to patients seeking affordability, convenience, and transparency.
Simultaneously, pharmaceutical manufacturers have responded with creative pricing partnerships, cash pay programs, and manufacturer savings cards. For example, Novo Nordisk just launched a new program with GoodRx to offer Ozempic and Wegovy for $499 per month to eligible patients at over 70,000 pharmacies nationwide. These efforts improve access and affordability by breaking down the cost barrier to care, making previously unaffordable treatments more attainable to consumers with valid prescriptions.
GLP-1 manufacturers and patients alike are seeing success with this model. Earlier this year, Eli Lilly reported that roughly 100,000 people buy Zepbound each month directly through the companys LillyDirect platform. Its a case study illustrating the demand for these DTC platforms, which make affordability and access more widely available to the consumers who need these medications.
GLP-1s have become more than a class of breakthrough medicationstheyve become a catalyst for redefining how Americans experience pharmacy care. They are rewiring the infrastructure of U.S. drug access, with implications that extend far beyond weight loss. This shift is laying the groundwork for a broader rethinking of affordability models for high-impact medications, especially those where cost and coverage are often barriers to care.
Other high-cost conditions, from cancer to autoimmune diseases to womens health, can significantly benefit from this model. Beyond the cost hurdles, the DTC approach can offer greater convenience for consumers struggling with a debilitating condition that requires specific, non-generic medications.
Mental health is a great example of this given demand for services often far surpasses what the existing healthcare infrastructure can supportnot unlike the obesity epidemic. As a result, experts predict well begin to see more DTC options come to market to improve access to medications and treatments within the mental health space.
The government is contributing to this change, too. With significant pressure on manufacturers to deliver on most-favored-nation pricing for US-based consumers, offering a DTC distribution model is one of the requested actions. In my role, Im actively working with leaders in pharma to share how GoodRx can be leveraged to create exclusive affordable cash price programs or integrate existing DTC offerings into our platform, which is used by nearly 30 million consumers and over one million healthcare professionals each year.
In this reimagined landscape, the system can work better for everyone. Consumers gain more control and options regarding their treatment choices. Healthcare professionals and pharmacists are presented with fewer administrative burdens. Pharma manufacturers can establish a more direct relationship with their end users, enhancing brand trust and patient satisfaction. And insurance companies might be pushed to reconsider their coverage strategies due to the competitive alternatives arising in the patient pay marketplace.
The GLP-1 revolution has shown that demand for effective treatment can outpace the system’s ability to deliver it equitably. In the process, it has accelerated experimentation with new pricing structures, affordability partnerships, and technology-driven delivery channels. If this momentum continues, we can create a future where equitable, affordable access to high-impact medications is the normnot the exception.
Laura Jensen is chief commercial officer and president of pharma solutions for GoodRx.
