 |
|
|
|||||
Honestly, I dont even remember the 2014 situation. It just seems like its asking a lot of the employees. Whys it on us? Gen Z Market Basket employee, June 2025 Ten years ago, Market Basketa New England-based grocery chainbecame a national symbol of grassroots worker solidarity. Thousands of nonunion employees staged a dramatic walkout to protest the ousting of their CEO, Arthur T. Demoulas. Customers followed suit, boycotting stores. Shelves emptied. The message was clear: people, not just profits, mattered. And it worked. Demoulas was reinstated, and Market Baskets culture of loyalty was hailed as a case study in bottom-up leadership. Now, in 2025, Demoulas has been placed on administrative leave, and tensions are beginning to stir again. But something feels different. The energy is quieter. The loyalty less certain. And for good reason: the workforce has changed. A different kind of commitment Most of Market Baskets current front-line employees are millennials or Gen Z. Many of them werent even in high school in 2014. And unlike the prior generation, they didnt come up in a workplace culture that promised stability, pensions, or upward mobility. They came of age during mass layoffs, the pandemic, and a decade of seeing essential workers celebrated rhetoricallybut often left unsupported. When I spoke with a Gen Z employee this week, their perspective was both honest and revealing. Theres no way I really care about the long-term health of the company. Im not going to work here for life. However, I do care about the people I work withand the affordable prices. Im torn. The comment wasnt true apathy, but a different kind of commitment. Fairness, clarity, and a voice As a leadership researcher and business school lecturer who focuses on generational dynamics, Ive seen this mindset across industries. Gen Z doesnt reject work ethicbut they do reject blind loyalty. They want to contribute, but they also want fairness, clarity, and a sense that their voice matters. Theyre less likely to organize around a charismatic executive and more likely to organize around shared values or people in their immediate circle. When I asked this employee what empathy looks like to them at a moment like this, their answer wasnt about the companyit was about the customer. We have a lot of people who are elderly and cant afford to go anywhere else. That actually makes it harder, because we can stay open for themor walk out and hope that we can keep MB the way it is long term. That response reflects a major evolution in how younger workers see the workplace. Its not about company man cultureits about whats humane, whats sustainable, and whos affected. Why this matters to leaders In 2014, Market Baskets walkout became iconic because it was so rare: a coordinated labor action without a union, driven by a deep emotional connection to leadership. It represented a kind of institutional loyalty thats becoming less commonnot just at grocery stores, but across industries. Today, were seeing a different dynamic. Gen Z workers are still willing to take a standbut its not always the kind of stand companies expect. Some may walk out. Others may opt for quiet quitting, high turnover, or organizing through digital platforms instead of picket lines. Their actions are no less meaningful, but theyre often less visibleand that can leave organizations flat-footed if theyre not paying attention. In my research and classroom discussions, I see Gen Z define loyalty not as longevity, but as values alignment. They will go to bat for coworkers. Theyll support customers and communities. But they expect the same in return from leadership. And if they dont get it, they wont stick aroundespecially not to fix systems they didnt break. That creates a new challenge for employers: building workplace cultures that dont rely on legacy loyalty, but earn trust in real time. The risk of expecting too much The 2014 Market Basket strike succeeded because workers and customers felt united. But this time around, younger workers are more skepticalnot just of leadership, but of the idea that change depends solely on their willingness to sacrifice. Whys it on us? the employee asked. Thats the generational rift in a single sentence. Many younger employees have watched companies brand themselves as family until times get tough. Theyve seen layoffs announced over email, burnout go unacknowledged, and corporate promises ring hollow. So, when theyre asked to do the right thing for an employer, they askreasonablywhat the company is doing for them. And yet, they still care. They care about fairness. They care about their team. They care about the elderly shopper who relies on affordable produce. That tension is exactly where Gen Z sits: morally aware, emotionally intelligent, and structurally exhausted. What comes next If a walkout happens again at Market Basket, it wont look like 2014. It might not even be a walkout. It might be subtler: shifts in morale, early exits, a lack of buy-in. But it will still matter. Because the real story here isnt about one grocery chainits about a generational shift in how workers define loyalty and leadership. And as companies across industries wrestle with engagement, retention, and trust, this moment is a reminder: culture isnt inherited. Its builtand rebuiltby every generation that shows up to work. Gen Z may not be in it for life. But they are in it for something. And if leaders want to keep them around, they need to stop asking for blind loyaltyand start delivering earned respect.
Category:
E-Commerce
I was at a conference on, of all things, male allyship when the notice popped up on my phone. Taylor Swift had successfully purchased back all her early masters and related material. For an alleged cost of around $360 million, the artist now fully owned everything she had ever created including her first six albums, their videos, and all their related art and album covers. Her community of friends and fans, the Swifties, erupted with elated joy and messages of encouragement online. News outlets rushed to cover the story. Within 24 hours, her early albums hit the top ten on streaming charts with Reputation, the album most anticipated as a rerelease, coming in at No. 1 as fans exercised their economic might. It seemed the universe was celebrating. Even savvy businesses got on the celebratory train. Delta Airlines posted, Fly like a jet stream, high above the whole scene. Keep Climbing Taylor . Starbucks said, and in a cafe on a Friday, we watched it begin again . . . congrats Taylor . And, to no surprise to anyone, the crafty social media gurus at the Empire State Building sent out a message, We love you Taylor, above a picture of Taylor from the top overlooking New York. Mesmerizing Taylor has mesmerized us. Antagonists might argue she has aligned all her hex cruces. It reminded me of the Hulu series The Handmaids Tale. I had recently watched seasons four and five to catch up for the season six release. These later seasons have been criticized. The audience seemed bored of the mistreatment of fertile women and then confused when these same women sought plots for angry hot revenge. Is this what Taylor has metaphorically done, used the allies around her and her anger to fuel a strategic masterminding of a long game just like June, the protagonist of The Handmaids Tale? As if sending a signal, Taylors song, Look What You Made Me Do (Taylors Version), became the anthem for season six days before she announced buying back her early art. Piles of money Taylor has acquired piles of money, enhanced by the success of the Eras Tour. She had become financially powerful enough to buy back her name and reputation, leaving those who crossed her in some metaphorical no-mans-land. She didn’t do it alone, and she isn’t the first. For decades, centuries, and, perhaps, even since the beginning of time, underdogs have fought to be seen, heard, accurately estimated, and risen from the ashes to reclaim that which was theirs. For example, half a century ago, Dolly Parton moved past he entertainment industry dominance that minimized womens empowerment and claimed her own space driven by her talents. In 1974, Parton walked into Porter Wagoners office and told him she was leaving the show bearing his namesake that had given her a rise to stardom. She sang him a goodbye song titled, I Will Always Love You, as a sign of respect to Porter for being her mentor. Dolly had outgrown her sidekick role alongside Porter, but it took effort, strategy, and bravery for her to break free. Porter sued her, a tactic commonly employed by those in power, but through discussions, compassion, and a large sum of money (reportedly around $1 million), Dolly settled the case. Independence How have a select set of women throughout history acquired enough resources to buy their independence? Some look all the way back to the early 20th century and the suffrage movement. Even that, however, involved womens collaboration with men. In August 1920, a conservative Tennessee legislator, Harry T. Burn, cast the deciding vote for the suffrage movements proposed 19th Amendment, giving women the right to vote. In his pocket, Harry carried a letter from his mother, Febb E. Burn, in which she asked him to be a good boy and vote for the amendment. This legislation, decided by Harry’s unexpected vote, has driven women’s economic agency and freedom over the past century. Throughout history, women and underdogs have been harnessing their positions to mastermind their way into influence, power, and self-determination. At a moment in time where human rights are being challenged, whether through challenges to the right to due process, reproductive freedoms, or just the right of children to not be separated from their parents, Taylor has once again shown us a way, that by harnessing our best talents deep within our souls, we can move mountains. We can speak deep into the souls of others, nudging them into a movementa desire to be a part of something bigger than themselves. Something with meaning and grit and soul. And, just as I learned from the conference I was attending at John Hopkins University, working with unexpected partners forging allyships has real and meaningful benefits. Hope and power We root for Taylor Swift because we see ourselves in her. And, just like underdogs in any fight, through her, we see hope, and that hope is seeded in harnessing our talents and masterminding it into economic powera power that can move mountains and, apparently, also shamrocks.
Category:
E-Commerce
A fresh glimpse at our AI-filled future arrived this week, in the form of an unmemorable ad by a company most people have never heard of. The ad is kind of flat and will probably scan as goofy to everyone outside its target demo, but don’t write it off just yet: It could signal the beginning of some very big (and scary) changes. The upstart fintech company Coign claims to be a “conservative credit card company,” a distinction that boils down to the founders pledge to never donate to liberal causes and candidates. And while that self-definition raises some questions, it pales in comparison to the actual ad. The 30-second clip is a patriotic parade of red-blooded, red-voting Americans boasting about recent Coign-fueled purchases such as deer-hunting gear, a stack of cartoonish gold bars, and the “biggest American flag” available. But here’s the most striking thing about the ad: All of those situations, and all of the actors, were created by AI. There’s something a little off about Coigns ad, to be clear. The pacing of the phony satisfied customers movements feels too jittery at times, and theres an eagle at the end that is not exactly natural looking. While the ad is spiritually the same AI slop as Shrimp Jesus, it doesnt carry the same overtly synthetic visuals. In that regard, its a lot more casually AI-generated than many of its predecessor ads. When Coca-Cola released an AI-generated holiday spot last fall, it sparked an uproar. Creatives were livid about such a monumentally successful company neglecting to splash out on an all-human production, and even casual observers noticed the glaring flaws in the video: The trucks tires glided over the ground without spinning, Santas hand was bizarrely out of proportion with the Coke bottle it gripped, and the entire ad sat squarely in the “uncanny valley.” The same goes for the ad Toys R Us released last year using OpenAIs text-to-video tool Sora: The kindest thing one could say is that its human characters looked marginally more lifelike than the unsettling, motion-captured Tom Hanks from The Polar Express two decades earlier. So far, AI-generated ads have been rare enough and mostly the domain of heavy-hitter companies, making them lightning rods for attention and backlash just about every time a new one is released. The simple fact that they were AI-made has been enough to generate headlines, even before factoring in the slop. But maybe not for much longer. If the Coign ad is any indication, there may be an entire class of AI ads coming that will be subject to far less attentionand far less scrutiny. Were at a precarious moment with AI, collectively feeling out its least objectionable uses through trial and error. So far, uncanny ads from massive companies have triggered backlash, but when lesser-known brands dabbleespecially without obvious visual glitchesthey often escape notice. Advertising legend David Droga once noted the existence of a “mediocre middle” in marketing and entertainment, and that may be exactly where AI quietly thrives: in ads from companies too small to spark outrage. Advertising, after all, is already the most disposable and least emotionally protected form of mediaexpensive to make, widely avoided, and largely unloved. That makes it the perfect Trojan horse for AIslipping past scrutiny not because its good, but because few people care enough to notice. On a moral and economic level, the advertising industry should not be diving headlong into a technology that makes large swaths of professional workers expendable. And on an aesthetic level, just because AI technically can create an ad doesnt mean it can create a good one. Once a seemingly harmless use case eases peoples minds about a given technological breakthrough, its only a matter of time before the more flagrantly objectionable use cases take hold. The facial recognition tech that first allowed Facebook users to tag their friends in photos was eventually used to strengthen the surveillance state and threaten privacy everywhere. Todays drones that make aerial photography easier become tomorrows drones that mistakenly blow up weddings in other countries and threaten to displace delivery workers. Obviously, AI is going to play some role in humanitys future. The size of that role, however, is not yet set in stone. As machine learning creeps into all creative fields, workers need regulations to ensure the technology doesnt spread too far too fast. The good news is that a majority of Americans seem to want AI regulation. Although the House of Representatives recently passed a major tax and spending bill with a provision forbidding state governments to regulate AI over the next 10 years, that clause is getting bipartisan blowback. According to a recent poll, 81% of voters agree that “advances in AI are exciting but also bring risks, and in such fast-moving times, we shouldn’t force states to sit on the sidelines for a full decade.” Even the CEO of generative AI company Anthropic is a full-throated advocate for stricter AI regulation. The people have spoken. Whether they are listened to is another matter altogether. A single, silly credit card ad may seem an unlikely step toward a dystopian future of unfettered AI and full unemployment, but if we laugh it off now, the bill may still come due later.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||