 |
|
|
|||||
Soon after Zohran Mamdani secured the Democratic nomination for New York City mayor, Amanda Litman posted a video selfie on TikTok. The dinosaurs of the past, the boomers, the hostile managers, the assholesthey are behind us, she preached to the camera. If viewers felt inspired to run to take on the status quo, they should head to her organizations website and register. Though Mamdani is not affiliated with Litmans eight-year-old nonprofit, Run for Something, his generational fight aligns with its purpose: to encourage young and underrepresented people to run for political office, including hyperlocal positions like city council and school boards. Litman says that Mamdanis win sparked the organizations biggest-ever candidate recruitment surge, with 5,000 sign-ups in five days. That follows the previous record: 10,000 sign-ups within two weeks of Trumps (second) election. A total of nearly 250,000 people have reached out to express interest in running for local races. About 10% of them have pursued office in 50 states and D.C. Litman believes that Run for Something has the largest candidate pipeline on either side of the political aisle. If Litmans nonprofit were a business, it would be booming. But when you depend entirely on donations, and you operate in the fickle realm of politics, income is always precarious. There are ebbs and flows. In 2022, Run for Something raised $17 million; in 2023, after successful midterms, the figure dropped to $8 million; in 2024, it reached $12 million. This year, it is tracking slightly downward again. Democratic donors are capricious, Litman says. Year over year youre hoping that they havent changed their minds about everything they believe. As Alexandra Acker-Lyons, a Denver-based Democratic donor adviser and longtime Run for Something funder, puts it, Republicans have a 40-year plan, and if were lucky, we have a four-year plan. And backers often give nonprofits less leeway than they would businesses, even when the backers are wealthy enough to weather economic stressors. If you were investing in a company, you would give them five years of runway, 40% of their budget, and would say, Lets talk in two years, Acker-Lyons says. That is just not how it works in nonprofits. But todaywith DEI in a tailspin, the cost of living causing anxiety, and democracy erodingfunding has felt a bit more stable. Litman says the most active donors right now are those disillusioned with the Democratic party and those more interested in building long-term power than merely scoring a cocktail party invitation and a photo with a future senator to put on your fridge. Litman began her career as an email writer for Obamas 2012 campaign; she then headed up Hillary Clintons email outreach in 2016. She cofounded Run for Something in 2017, on the day of Trumps first inauguration. In each year of that presidential term, 15,000 prospective local candidates signed up, eager for the organizations help with everything that newbies need, from collecting signatures to hiring staff. Run for Something has raised funds from major foundations and entities including George Soross Open Society Foundations, eBay founder Pierre Omidyars Democracy Fund, and crypto investor Mike Novogratz, as well as many individuals giving $500 or less. In 2022, it had about 24 people employed, on its way to a planned total staff of 80. But after Democrats exceeded expectations in the 2022 midterms and attention turned to 2024, donations began to fall. In November 2023, there were more than 60 people on payroll, but in January 2024 Litman and her cofounder, Ross Morales Rocketto, had to begin laying off staffers. Every part of it sucked, Litman says. [But] it was the right thing to do, because if we had not, we would not exist in this moment. Among the 30 employees remaining are a trio of engineers who have built tools that are helping Run for Something handle its current growth. Its a small group, but very few organizations in our space have full-fledged tech teams at all, says chief technology officer Jordan Haines, who joined in 2023 after building an edtech startup. One tech platform they built looks for matches between the roughly 500,000 open elected positions in the country and the 250,000 potential candidates in the pipeline. Run for Something can score viable candidates dynamically based on various factors, including what Haines calls some gnarly pieces of data like age, issue leanings, renter status, and geography, which Litman says can get really messy quickly because elected-office districts dont map easily onto zip codes. Another toola CRM where the C stands for candidate, Haines saysis a custom-built platform to manage the 1,000 or so candidates farther along the pipeline who have applied for Run for Somethings endorsement since 2024. Interested candidates typically sign up online, where they gain access to resources including conference calls, webinars, and an app for connecting with past candidates and mentors. But once candidates file to be on a ballot, they may apply for Run for Somethings nod, and they have about a 50% chance of securing it. Criteria include running as a Democrat or an independent for the first, second, or third time; being born after 1984; and other subjective criteria, such as running a grassroots campaign with heart and hustle and being what it calls a hell yeah! candidate. One reason that Run for Somethings pipeline is growing so fast is a new partnership with Bernie Sanders. As part of his ongoing Fighting Oligarchy tour with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Vermont senator is recruiting progressive candidates, particularly from working-class backgrounds, who are then filtered into one of three candidate-supporting organizations. Hes said the whole time that the goal isnt to just pop into a state and do a rally, says Jeremy Slevin, Sanderss senior adviser. So far, more than 7,000 prospective candidates have signed up with Sanders, with more than 3,000 onboarded with Run for Something. The Sanders allyship may be surprising, given Litmans association with the historically more moderate Clinton; the acrimony between the former rivals, particularly from Clintons side, is hardly a secret. Centrist Democrats argue that deferring to the partys left resulted in Trumps victories and that the Mamdani playbook is not widely translatable. But progressives invert that narrative and are bent on challenging a lackadaisical establishment. What Im not seeing is a willingness to do deep reflection, Acker-Lyons says of current Democratic leadership. We lost to a monster twice, and we need to take a really hard look in the mirror as to why. Nearly half of Sanderss registrants are running as independents. I am very much supportive of [that] in places where the Democratic brand is so dismal that they cant win. Run for Somethings win rate stands somewhere around 54%, though Litman stresses that she doesnt think victory is the best success metric. The organization wants to be competing in contested races in purple and even red districts. If we had a 70% or 80% win rate, those are folk that probably didnt need that much help to begin with, she says. For instance, former pastor Justin Douglas won his race for commissioner of Dauphin County, which includes Hershey, Pennsylvania, by 184 votes in 2023, flipping control of the commission for the first time in more than a century. Many successful Run for Something candidates are now seeking even higher office, such as Anna Eskamani, who flipped a Florida House seat in 2018 and is now running for mayor of Orlando. Frankness from Litman is part of her brand. Shes outspoken on social media, where her praise for Mamdani was accompanied by scorn for Andrew Cuomo. She has proudly expressed support for divisive figures like David Hogg, who departed as DNC co-vice chair after planning to support primary challenges by younger leaders against older Democrats. Shes transparent in her Substack newsletter about being disappointed that her recent book, When Were in Charge, was absent from the major bestsellers lists. (Even though I said I didnt care, obviously I cared. Sigh.) When asked if its smart for the head of an organization that represents a wide range of candidates to be so vocal about her own opinions, she says, Ultimately, I speak for the organization. Also, I dont know any other way to be. She thinks its important for her to inspire others to be their own authentic selves. Litman knows that her work will only get harder as expectations for Run for Something rise, particularly leading up to the midterms and 2028 presidential election. Theres a perpetual tension, she says. Even if nonprofits have substantial money, theres always more they could be doing. But right now, shes optimistic. I know what it feels like when things are going bad, Litman says. I do not feel that way this year.
Category:
E-Commerce
Mita Mallick shares five key insights from her new book, The Devil Emails at Midnight: What Good Leaders Can Learn From Bad Bosses. Mallick is a corporate changemaker who, with an extensive career as a marketing and human resources executive, has advised Fortune 500 companies and startups alike. She is a LinkedIn Top Voice and was named to the 2025 Thinkers50 Radar list. She is a contributor to Harvard Business Review, Fast Company, Adweek, and Entrepreneur. Whats the big idea? The silver lining that comes from working for several bad bosses? You can learn what not to do as a leader. From every bad boss comes a valuable lesson about how to manage teams and contribute to a companys success. 1. Stop normalizing emailing at midnight. I was so excited to meet my new boss. Apparently, the feeling wasnt mutual. This was a former boss I nicknamed the Devil. She was the boss who never had any time for me during the day, but did have time to consistently send me emails between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. I started responding to her emails in the early morning hours. I was so desperate to impress her. I would wait to bump into her at the office, trying to get a smile, a wave, hello, thank you, or anything to make me feel like she saw me and I was appreciated. I was like a golden retriever pacing around the Devils office. I even tried to chase her out of the building one evening, but she was too quick for me. Years later, the question I continue to ponder is, Why didnt she have time for me? One of the biggest complaints we hear when it comes to relationships is You never have time for me. As a leader, if you cant make time for your teams during the day to coach, guide, and teach them, you have to ask yourself, Why are you leading in the first place? I challenge everyone to treat calendars like decluttering a wardrobe: Focus on high-value meetings, remove meetings that are no longer needed, and delegate meetings to others. Find time to connect with your teams during the day. Lets stop normalizing emailing at midnight. Im not ashamed to say that on most evenings Im asleep at midnight. It doesnt mean there arent periods of my life when Im working incredibly hard and constantly burning the midnight oil, but that isnt sustainable. The foundation of good leadership is taking care of yourself by getting enough sleep, eating well, and exercising so that you can be in service to others and fend off bad boss behaviors. 2. Silence can fuel bullies. My full name is Madhumita Mallick. For most of my life, my name has evoked a swirl of emotions for me, including anxiety and joy. I started going by just Mita and stopped bothering trying to teach people how to say my full name. When I graduated from business school and rejoined corporate America, I attempted to reclaim my full name. I was used to having my name mispronounced, misspelled, or mistaken as the name of the only other brown woman on my team. I wanted to reclaim my name as a source of pride. My former boss, who I nicknamed the Sheriff, was popular and a bully. When it came to my name, the Sheriff decided to completely rename me because he didnt want to learn how to pronounce it. He called me Muhammad because he could and wanted to. Im embarrassed to admit that for many weeks, I responded to a name that was not my own. Years later, I still wonder why no one around us ever said anything. Microaggressions like the one I experienced repeatedly can become a manifestation of bullying. They deplete our energy, chip away at our confidence, and make us question our contributions. Our collective silence can fuel those bullies. The burden shouldnt be placed on the target to speak out and stop this behavior. If you see someone being targeted in the workplace, intervene. First, you can give the bully a dose of their own medicine. In my case, someone could have said to the Sheriff, Oh, I just thought of the best name for you. Do you want to hear it? You can use this approach to be a mirror that shows them how they are behaving. Humor can also distract and deflect attention away from the person being targeted. Second, you can address them directly. You can let them know, calmly and firmly, that this behavior is not okay. They might say, Oh, its just a joke. In return, you can emphasize that it isnt funny. This reinforces that you wont allow them to discredit your response and reaction. Third, plan to intervene later. Power dynamics at work can impact our ability to speak up in the moment. We can be afraid of retaliation during or after an incident. Check in with the person being targeted. Help them document what has been happening and find someone else you trust to help with a plan of action. We spend too much time at work not to look out for each other. 3. Find the courage to help people move on. A former boss I called the Napper literally slept on the job. He dozed off in meetingslarge or small. I presented our annual brand plan while watching him nap. I saw him doze off dozens of times during our quarterly town hall meetings. Once, he closed his eyes for several minutes at our VPs monthly meeting, and she angrily shouted his name, then asked him a question. He was startled but not embarrassed. He mumbled a response that had nothing to do with the question and then started looking at his phone. The Napper came and went as he pleased, gossiped loudly, and enlisted others to talk about how much it sucked to work here. He even started interviewing for jobs in the cubicle next to mine, for all to hear. Years later, I still wonder why my former boss was allowed to repeatedly nap and be disengaged at work without any consequences. Disengagement can spread. It can become contagious, erode trust on the team, and negatively affect productivity. More of us need to intervene when we witness disengagement. Start by becoming a mirror. Take your team member to lunch or coffee. Remind them of their behavior. Focus on the facts and not your feelings. Next, allow space for the individual to reveal whats going on. You may or may not agree with what is shared, and you dont have to respond to everything. You can ask open-ended follow-up questions or simply thank them for sharing, letting them know that youre processing the information and will get back to them. Finally, ask them what must change. Professor Michael Murphy of Harvard University offers this powerful question for us to ask: What could change at work for you to be excited again about working here? You likely wont be able to change what they have revealed about the past, which may have led to their disengagement. But you can offer to help them move forward if they choose to recommit to their jobs. As leaders, we must have the courage to stop this downward spiral and help people move on to what theyre meant to do next. 4. Fear is a short-term motivator that leads to burnout in the long run. No one in my life had ever screamed at menot my parents, my brother, my husband, or my friendsuntil I worked for Medusa. Medusa ruled with fear. You could hear her from her office, down the hall, across the loor, and sometimes through the elevators as you were coming up. She would tell us, to our faces, that we were stupid. She would scream, curse, and aggressively point her fingers at people during meetings. I had never heard a boss drop so many F-bombs. She even hurled one of her Chanel shoes at my colleague, though thankfully it missed her head. I watched people run into conference rooms, slide down in their chairs, or wait around corners to hide from her wrath. Leaders like Medusa drive strong results in the short term. Many of us will show up to work scared. According to one study, more than a third of leaders at U.S. companies lead through fear. Nearly 40% of fear-based leaders said they strongly believe that stress can be positively harnessed, and yet these fear-based leaders made two other observations: 90% witnessed declines in productivity, and 60% acknowledged their workers arent happy. Creating workplace cultures based on fear costs the economy approximately $36 billion each year in lost productivity. Showing up scared to work every day is exhausting. Fear kills communication, isolates team members, inhibits creativity and innovation, and leads to burnout. Creating a culture where everyone is treated with respect shouldnt be a luxury. Workers dont want another free meditation app, an endless supply of fancy snacks, happy hours, and definitely not another oversize hoodie. They want to be respected and valued. 5. Unwavering loyalty no longer exists in the workplace. One former boss, nicknamed Tony Soprano, expected loyalty at all costs. With one swift phone call, he could kill someones career. Tony found out someone on our team was interviewing externally. By that same afternoon, this team members role had been eliminated, he was escorted out by security, and that external offer had vanished because Tony got a hold of the hiring manager at the other company. Tony told me I was going to do a one-year assignment on his team and Id be promoted at the end of that assignment. When the year mark was approaching, I started networking within the organization to figure out what I wanted to do next. When he found this out, he told me the assignment would actually last two to four years because I had not even begun to make an impact in this role. He told me that he decides when I can leave. Leaders like Tony believe they own our careers. They decide and dictate who gets to leave their team, when, and why. If you challenge their authority, they have serious doubts about your commitment to them and to the company. To them, your paycheck is the price in exchange for your loyalty, no questions asked. But unwavering loyalty no longer exists in our workplaces. Long gone are the days of pensions, guaranteed job security, and receiving a shiny gold Rolex after 30 years of service. The corporate social contract that employers once provided is now broken. We can no longer expect loyalty from our employees at all costs. We must redefine what loyalty looks like in our workplaces. As leaders, we must stop hoarding and holding on to talent. We must be honest and up front about career opportunities. We must communicate often and clearly about the changing needs and health of the business. Finally, when an employee wants to pursue a different opportunity, we let them go. We dont throw a tantrum when they resign. We wish them well and hope to get to work with them again someday. Loyalty isnt guaranteed, and it certainly is not built overnight. We cant demand loyalty from our employees. Good leaders understand that loyalty must be earned over time. This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission.
Category:
E-Commerce
A CEOs canoodling with his companys human resources chiefcaught on the kiss cam at a Coldplay concertmade global headlines this summer. Beyond the memes and tabloid fodder, personal lives were shattered and a company was left in turmoil after its leaders sudden exit. The case, involving the AI firm Astronomer, may be the most visible of recent CEO personal scandalsthink sex affairs, drug abuse, or embarrassing behaviorbut its not an isolated incident. Just weeks following the Coldplay kiss cam incident, the CEO of Nestlé was shown the door for similar behavior involving a relationship with a subordinate. Personal scandals have been the top cause of CEO terminations in recent years. How do these scandals stack up to other corporate indiscretions, such as financial fraud? As a management professor, I knew that theres lots of research on CEOs financial crimes, but surprisingly little on personal misdeeds. So my colleagues and I examined nearly 400 CEO scandals involving either financial or personal misconduct. In this research, published in August 2025 in the journal Strategic Organization, we found that not all CEO scandals are treated equally: The type makes all the difference. Personal scandals are harder to survive For most people, personal indiscretionssuch as having an extramarital affair or abusing drugsare a private matter. But for CEOs, even scandals unrelated to business create doubt about their judgment, integrity, and leadership. The result is usually career-ending for the CEO, research shows, and can create lasting harm for the company. We found that CEOs overwhelmingly exit in the wake of personal scandalsfive times as often as CEOs who commit financial misconduct do, in fact. And strong business performance doesnt tend to offer protection. For example, Hewlett-Packards Mark Hurd, whos widely credited with turning around HP in the mid-2000s, was ousted following a very visible personal misconduct scandal 15 years ago. The fallout was swift: The companys stock fell nearly 10% immediately after the announcement, and with leadership in a tailspin, it dropped more than 40% within a year. Why bad numbers come with better odds Companies are also routinely accused of cooking the books. In recent months, several firms have been forced to restate their earnings after their financial statements did not add up. These scandals shake investor trust, trigger sharp drops in company stock, and often lead to the chief financial officers departurewith some CEOs following suit. However, while cooking the books is considered a severe form of corporate misconduct, our research suggests that it has fewer job-ending repercussions for CEOs than personal scandals do. Roughly half of all CEOs implicated in financial scandals survive, we foundbecause, unlike in personal scandals, CEOs can often shift blame. We also found that CEOs dismissed due to financial scandals tend to be replaced with outside candidates, which has been shown to stabilize a companys stock price and lead to stronger long-term performance. It might be surprising to learn that a CEOs personal misconduct can come at a greater costboth to the business and the executivethan outright financial fraud. Is corporate America overestimating the importance of CEOs private behavior? Or is it underestimating the importance of cooking the books? While I dont have answers to these questions, I think our findings show the need for more discussionand more research. Michael Nalick is an assistant professor of management at the University of Denver. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||