The YIMBY (yes in my backyard) movement has achieved remarkable growth in the past few years, uniting people across the political spectrum who share a common belief: It should be easy to build more housing. You can find shared interests among unlikely alliances when you step out of political tribes. People who label themselves as socialists and capitalists are standing at town hall podiums to support and promote abundant housing. High fives! Hooray for unity, right?
Insert record scratch. Socialists and capitalists have economic worldviews that are incompatible with each other. There’s definitely consensus about the ends (plenty of homes), but the means will be hotly debated. The clash was inevitable, and the recent book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, Abundance, has keyboard warriors starting to realize there are a host of competing opinions on how to get past the gatekeepers who would have homes remain scarce.
You might think something as apolitical as a townhouse wouldnt be a lightning rod for a populist left-versus-right debate. The reason is economics. Considering the surge in populism in recent years, its worth understanding why economics, not neighborhood character, is at the heart of the argument.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"green","redirectUrl":""}}
The Socialist YIMBY
Socialist YIMBY advocates believe housing should be universally accessible, treated fundamentally as a human right rather than a commodity to be bought and sold for profit. Prominent democratic socialists, like New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and Minneapolis mayoral candidate Omar Fateh, argue for “decommodifying” housing, where the government would guarantee homes. Market forces are not part of the equation. A socialist YIMBY is going to want state-managed housing solutions, price controls, rent freezes, and strict regulations on private ownership. Mamdani even said hed be open to the abolition of private property if it meant getting people places to live.
Socialist YIMBYs build their case on fairness, social justice, and community stability. They argue that a free market creates disparities, displaces vulnerable populations, and commodifies essential human needs. The belief here is that removing profit motives from housing reduces speculation, stabilizes communities, and ensures housing stability and equity, prioritizing human dignity and communal well-being above private gain.
The Capitalist YIMBY
Capitalist YIMBY advocates believe in leveraging market mechanisms. To them, the root cause of housing shortages lies in artificial restrictions imposed by zoning laws, burdensome permitting processes, and other bureaucratic interference. Their economic rationale hinges on the concept of supply and demand, and prices as crucial signals.
Capitalist YIMBYs argue that when the price of a type of home goes up in an area, it signals to developers, investors, and builders that demand is high and supply low. Rather than suppressing these signals through artificial price controls, they propose getting rid of laws that prohibit housing and streamline approval processes in order to spur rapid and flexible housing production. They argue that robust competition among builders and investors inherently leads to diverse housing options, lower overall costs, and more innovation in housing solutions.
The Perplexed YIMBY
A person is standing at the philosophical crossroads to abundant housing and two fellow YIMBYs are giving conflicting directions: We have to go left. No, we have to go right.
Socialists look at capitalist solutions as inherently exploitative, always creating more inequalities, and they believe profit motives are what make homes too expensive. Capitalists look at socialist solutions as inevitably leading to inefficiencies, housing shortages, and stagnation.
When Ive asked people about their take on this conflict, a common response is something like Well have enough homes for everyone if building regulations are relaxed and the government is in charge of low-income housing. I believe thats wishful thinking, since it brings us right back to the fundamental disagreement on economics. A capitalist will say, There is a market for small and modest housing, so get the government out of the way. The socialist will say, We dont believe you.
I truly believe that populists on the left and the right want there to be enough homes for everyone. But its also clear that the populist left and right will forever treat each other like theyre living in a cartoon or comic book. Im the good guy and youre the bad guy. In spite of their shared interest in abundant housing, the socialist YIMBYs and capitalist YIMBYs are never going to agree on the means to the end.
The best first step is something both sides claim to support: getting rid of the local regulatory barriers that are preventing anyone from building a granny flat, a townhouse, a duplex, etc.
Legalize housing and lets see where that takes us.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
Get up. Start work. End work. Eat dinner. Get a few things done. Sleep. Rinse and repeat.
Sometimes it can feel like weeks, months, or even years, fly by without feeling like much has happened.
As a time management coach, I help clients make many tasks in life automatic so that they can accomplish more in less time and with less effort. To optimize our efficiency and effectiveness, routine is a necessary part of our lives. The only issue is when youre so systematized that youre not fully experiencing the joy and meaning in your life. Youre just checking things off the list.
But what if there could be some simple, accessible ways to slow down the passage of time and fully engage in your life? Im here to offer you good news: There are.
With these three simple tricks, you can start to feel like youre experiencing your days instead of speeding through them.
Savor the Little Things
Lifes simple, everyday moments can be incredibly satisfying, if you let them. But so often, were rushing through an activity or multitasking through it so much so that it simply passes us by.
Researchers encourage mindful attention where you take notice of whats happening in familiar experiences to sensitize yourself to the joy they offer.
Ive found that some small, intentional choices can make a big difference in my life. One ritual that Ive incorporated when the weather is nice is to sit outside during lunch and eat without doing anything else in particular. This little break to just stop and notice the grass, the trees, the flowers, the birds, and anything else around me helps me to fully experience the beauty of the season.
Another choice that Ive made is when I hold my daughter at night before bed to keep my phone away from me. Its not a very long timejust about 10 minutesbefore I lay her down in her crib for the night. Although the time is short, I find its some of the moments that I stop and appreciate the gift of her precious life the most. Shes growing so quickly, and I dont want to miss out on enjoying my daughter because Im doing something else while Im with her or always trying to head on to the next activity.
How about you? Is there an area where you could stop multitasking and more fully enjoy the precious moments around you?
Sprinkle in Novelty
Another way to extend the feeling of time is to sprinkle in dashes of the out-of-the-ordinary that break up your routine. When youre only doing your habits, your brain blends together the experiences from day-to-day. But when you do something distinctive, you experience the novelty effect where your brain has a higher state of attention and stores the experience as a separate and distinct memory.
This could look like signing up to attend larger events like going to a new work conference or taking a vacation to explore a different locale. Or you can add in novelty in much smaller ways throughout your weeks to help you feel like life isnt passing by in a blur.
On the professional side, small moments of novelty could look like adding in some networking lunches or events where you connect with new people and see new places. Or it could look like learning a new skill that you havent tried your hand at before. Or it could look like setting up your computer at a new coworking space or coffee shop.
On the personal side, you could attend a local festival instead of watching Netflix, check out a new restaurant in town instead of going to the place where youre a regular, or try out a new workout class instead of going to the one youve attended for years.
Its completely fineand even goodto have routines and do standard things you enjoy. But mixing up your experience every once in a while can help you slow down your subjective experience of time.
Is there some novel experience you could insert in your life this week?
Stop Trying to Keep Up
In a time not so long ago or far away, there were no smartphones, no apps, and no streaming services. And life was well, good.
Another way to slow down time is to take away the pressure that just because you could do something that you should. Just because someone you follow posted something doesnt mean you need to read it. Just because some major world event is happening doesnt mean you need to be an expert on it. Just because a new season of a show came out that you like doesnt mean you need to watch it nowor ever.
Most of the content created in the world is entirely optional for you to read or consume. Letting go of the need to engage 24/7 can dramatically increase your feeling of being relaxed and like you have more time.
In my personal life, Ive placed boundaries on social media use. I dont even have accounts on some social media apps, and for the ones where I do engage, I try to limit myself to a few times a week. When I get the itch to engage more often, I try to pick up a book instead. Its a lot more satisfying to get through a relevant book than to scroll endlessly through a feed.
Do you pressure yourself to keep up on content where you dont have an actual responsibility to engage? If so, how could you lower your standards to open up more time and space to just be?
A lot of life is routine. Thats not a bad thing. But by trying out these strategies, you can slow down your perception of time and experience deeper satisfaction in the moments.
Not long ago, leaders largely steered clear of the rough-and-tumble of politics. They inhabited a culture of impartiality, and for the most part stayed in their lane, rising now and then when called upon to offer observations about their specific sectors.
Those times are over.
We now live in an era of CEO activism, where shareholders, employees, and consumers expect corporate leaders to take a stand on issues far beyond their core industryissues like immigration, DEI, or gender rights.
Whereas before, hardly anyone outside of their industry could pick a chief executives out of a lineup, todays business leaders from Howard Schultz to Bill Gates to Elon Musk are household names, with the ability to influence public discourseand policywith a single tweet.
For a business, there are distinct advantages to taking a political stand. At the same time, there is a fine line between brand enhancement and brand destruction. In this climate, how can a leader be transparent about her or his belief system without alienating anyone?
Rewards and Risks
First, its hard, if not impossible, to reveal your belief system without alienating someone. Its almost a given: audiences and stakeholders these days may demand a political stand, but they can also be thin-skinned and easily offended when they dont agree with that stand.
For the leader, the key is to avoid alienating significant portions of the constituencies and stakeholders responsible for the companys ultimate success: shareholders, employees, and consumers.
When it comes to affiliating openly with a political figure or party, there can be advantages, such as privileged access and perhaps the ability to favorably influence policy direction. That said, there are also risks. Some of them are obvious: political fortunes are volatile, and public opinion is fickle, both of which can spell trouble for an aligned business. Political leaders have many priorities, and can shift their own positions on a dime, leaving a company that has publicly pledged allegiance with a case of whiplash. They are also prone to scandal, leaving aligned brands exposed to public outrage.
Moreover, while there are certainly dangers in speaking out, silence can also have negative consequences in the public eye.
Its important to realize that political parties, personalities, even movements come and go. Leaders are in this for the long haul; they should want their company to prosper for more than one election cycle.
Recent events demonstrate the power of public opinion. The Trump administrations executive orders against diversity and inclusion initiatives split the business communities. Target rushed to align with the new directives, but Costco remained true to its own DEI stance. As a result, consumers punished Target and rewarded Costco.
Staying true to the core
Remember that politicians are paid to be politicians. Executives are not. Leaders are paid to ensure a company grows and prospers far into the future. That might mean rubbing elbows with those in power, or even contributing to campaigns, but it does not have to mean selling the soul of your identity, i.e. politicizing the brand or dragging a companys image (along with you) for the sake of a small short-term advantage. Reputations are hard to rebuild, and customers, once lost, are hard to reclaim.
While a leaders personal beliefs may inform actions both private and professional, there are a few basic principles that can act as guardrails, providing the freedom to be transparent while preventing the leaders viewpoints and actions from creating conflicts and harming the companys fortunes.
1. Focus on values, not politics
Nobody expects an executive and a workforce of thousands to agree on every issue. But a leader can set the tone by emphasizing core organizational values rather than personal political opinions. Companies are strongest when they articulate and consistently adhere to a clear set of valuesregardless of shifting political winds.
2. Tie beliefs to business mission
As a leader, you are a steward of your companys missionnot a political spokesperson. If your personal convictions align with your businesss purpose, express them in a way that supports that mission. If they dont, reflect on whether your current role aligns with your values. A CEO thrives when personal belief and business purpose reinforce one another.
3. Build credibility through consistency
While political trends are fickle, brand trust is built over time. Consumers reward companies that consistently uphold their stated commitmentswhether to sustainability, product quality, or inclusion. Consistency is credibility.
4. Respect dissent, invite dialogue
Foster a culture where respectful disagreement is welcome. Employees should feel safe expressing differing opinions without fear of retaliation. Provide spacesforums, listening sessions, anonymous feedback toolsfor difficult conversations to happen constructively. Diversity of thought is a strength, not a liability.
5. Be strategic
If you choose to speak out, do so with intention. Consult your communications team, evaluate stakeholder impact, and conduct a risk-benefit analysis. As Harvard Business Review contributors Aaron Chatterji and Michael W. Toffel advise: Select issues carefully, reflect on the best times and approaches to get involved, consider the potential for backlash, and measure results.
Whos doing it right?
A number of well-known CEOs have made a point of voicing their beliefs, and have not suffered for it. On the contrary, they have developed a leadership style that manages to be both values-informed and advantageous from a business standpoint.
1. Satya Nadella (Microsoft). Nadella openly discusses empathy and his Hindu faith, speaking often of caring for his son with special needs. He is upfront about his personal values of humility and purpose, but does not impose these upon the firm directly, emphasizing instead organizational culture and customer impact. Under his watch, Microsoft has quadrupled its market capitalization.
2. Dan Schulman (former CEO, PayPal). Schulman has been vocal in support of social justice and economic inclusion, which he links to his personal Jewish ethical values. PayPal pulled out of North Carolina to protest anti-LGBTQ legislation, a move that was criticized by the right but rewarded by stakeholders, with shareholder returns remaining strong.
3. Rose Marcario (former CEO, Patagonia). Markarios Buddhist beliefs and environmental ethics were strongly aligned with Patagonias corporate mission. So when the company sued the Trump administration over its intention to dismantle and sell off national monuments, it mobilized the companys core outdoor audience and strengthened the brand, with increases in both consumer loyalty and profits.
4. Ken Frazier (former CEO, Merck). In 2017, Frazier resigned from President Trumps American Manufacturing Council following the administrations tepid response to the white supremacist marches and ensuing violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. Fraziers action was see as deeply principled, and Mercks shareholder value was not damaged. Other CEOs (UnderArmour, Intel, et al) followed suit, in part because Fraziers action created a public demand for moral leadership.
Finding balance
In the end, leaders must balance their own need to reveal their personal beliefs with the greater good of the organization. This is both an internal and external journey that requires a high degree of reflection as well as an appreciation for the complexity of the company and its role in both the market and society.
Its an extremely challenging time to be a leader, but also an exciting one.
One of the best predictors of your happiness at work is whether you have colleagues that you are close with. You dont necessarily need to be friends with your colleaguesthat is, you may not want to hang out with them outside of workbut you do want to have people you feel you can talk with and share your experiences.
Unfortunately, many people feel like they dont have anyone at work that they know well at all. Workplaces have gotten more efficient, and so there is less time for people to engage in small talk that solidifies their relationships with others. In addition, even at workplaces where everyone is working on-site, there are still many meetings done via videoconference, so it is hard to connect with your colleagues before or after to say a few words.
If youre feeling lonely at work, there are a few things you can do.
Make space and time for relationships
Developing better relationships with your colleagues may seem like a waste of time, but it isnt. Not only does it help to predict workplace satisfaction, but having close colleagues also helps to build trust.
Some amount of trust building involves demonstrating to people that you will carry out tasks that you promised and do your work well. But, a lot of trust is built through relationship development. You tend to trust people you know well. When you let people in on details of your life, youre showing some vulnerability, which also builds trust.
Indeed, when you think about it, the people you are closest to in your life are people you share a lot of your life with. They know what you like, what you want, and what you have done. They have shared good times and bad. That sharing influences trust in the workplace as well, and so it is valuable to set aside some time to build your relationships with others.
Take some initiative
When youre feeling lonely at work, you may also feel rejected by others. You may look around and see other people having conversations and wonder why nobody has talked with you. You might even start to wonder if there is something wrong with you that is preventing other people from wanting to engage with you.
Rather than wallowing in the feeling that you dont deserve to be close to your colleagues, do something about it. Invite a colleague for coffee or lunch. Bring in pictures of your kids, pets, plants, or the products of your hobbies. Create chances for people to get to know you better.
Over the years, I have collected and built a variety of Lego models. I have brought the finished models to my office, and I display them there. They are there in part because I think they are fun. But, they are also here to generate conversations when people come to my office. It creates a light moment to talk about something unrelated to work that builds my relationship with colleagues. It is a small thing, but I think it has an impact.
Build a group
For many people, it can be awkward to try to build relationships with one person at a time. If youre socially awkward, you may not want to have sustained conversations but you would still like to feel that youre part of a team.
In that case, you might want to find or start a group at work that gets together on occasion around an activity to build a community. Use lunch hours once or twice a month to start a book club or take time before or after the workday to do a volunteer effort. A group that has a common goal is a great way to feel connected to your team. That spirit can feed back on the workplace.
Constructing a group like this is different than the traditional team building activity that workplaces often create. Those activities are often forced on a group. They are done once. They may be fun, but they dont create anything sustaining. The groups I am suggesting are intended to persist over time to develop a set of relationships and lay down a collection of memories that ultimately create a more cohesive workplace.
Not willing to be caught idling while Chase and American Express release new premium credit cards, Citi is launching one of its own: the Citi Strata Elite Card.
While Citi has offered a premium credit card in the past (the Prestige Card, which some customers still have and use, but is no longer available to new customers), the Citi Strata Elite Card is the companys return to the pitch in many years. Specifically, the new card is designed to directly compete with Chases Sapphire Reserve card and the Platinum Card from American Expressboth of which have recently announced new features, fees, and revamps.
As for what makes Citi Strata Elite superior to its competitors offerings? Pam Habner, Citis head of U.S. branded cards and lending, says that in the simplest terms, its the best card for premium customers who have a passion for travel and dining.
The card itself boasts an overall value of $1,500 annually, against an annual fee of $595. That includes an annual $300 hotel benefit, $200 splurge credit (for use with certain brands, such as Best Buy or American Airlines), a $200 Blacklane chauffeur credit, and a fee credit for Global Entry or TSA PreCheck.
There are numerous perks associated with American Airlines, too, which has had a long relationship with Citi, including four Admirals Club lounge passes. Card members also multiply their points earnings by 12 when booking hotels, car rentals, or attractions through the cards travel portal, along with a six-times multiplier when booking air travel or ordering from certain restaurants at certain times.
In all, it packs a powerful punch for people who like to travel and eat out. Habner says that compared with competing cards, it is the card with the highest reward potential on the marketit offers travelers more benefits than any other card. And she notes that the top reason premium cardholders opt for high-level or premium cards is for the travel benefits, according to her teams research.
There was a good amount of research, too, that went into the development of the card. While Citis previous premium card was designed for its time, the new card meets the needs of the modern premium customer, Habner says, and it took a good amount of time, data, and research to figure out exactly what those were.
The Strata Elite Cards slate of benefits and perks, she says, reflects Citis findings.
In a world of endless pings, scrolls, and streams, digital burnout has become a modern malaise. Particularly for Gen Z, whose lives have played out almost entirely online, theres now a growing hunger for something more grounded. In fact, 69% of 1824-year-olds now shop in-store weeklya striking shift back to the physical, the real, the tangible.
This isnt a rejection of tech, but a rebalancing. For brands its a fundamental recalibration of what connection really means. Its both a challenge and a golden opportunity to deliver a life-led response to digital fatigue, and to become facilitators of meaningful moments in peoples lives.
So, how can they do it? How can they create physical spaces that help people reconnect with themselves, with each other, and with the world around them?
Retail as a Remedy, Not Just a Transaction
It begins with a recognition that today’s consumers want more than shelves and sales. They want stories. Spaces that reflect their values, spark curiosity, and invite participation. Retail can no longer be passiveit must provoke.
This starts with intentional design. Sustainability isn’t a nice-to-haveits a nonnegotiable. From ethical materials to platforms that elevate underrepresented voices, physical stores are a powerful stage for a brands values to be seen and felt.
Think of Wingstops informal spaces for teenagers, or Raphas cycling clubhousesplaces with a purpose, not just a product.
Community is the New Currency
People arent just buying thingstheyre buying into tribes. And the most successful brands are those creating reasons for people to gather. From cooking classes to craft clubs, physical spaces can be reimagined as community hubs that foster identity and belonging.
The brief? Create spaces where people want to linger, learn, leave their phones alone for five minutes. Maybe even make a friend.
The Offline Club is showing whats possible here. Already established in Amsterdam as a place to disconnect from electronic devices, the concept recently launched in London, and hundreds of people flocked to unwind, engage in creative activities, and form meaningful in-person connections without digital distractions.
Play as Protest, and Joy as Connection
The exact nature of that purpose or community varies by brandsand crucially should feel authentic to that brand. For some this will be about play. In uncertain times, play isnt trivialits transformative. From the Balloon Museum to ball pit bars, were seeing a resurgence of immersive, childlike wonder. But the best examples go deeper, using play to spark connection and creativity.
LEGOs Botanical Truck Tour is a brilliant exampleflorist workshops on wheels, where people can build, share, and display their own Lego floral creations. Its playful, meditative, and deeply social. A brand moment thats not about screensits about presence.
More brands could lean into joy as a design principle, and in doing so, they could create spaces that cant be replicated on a screen.
Mindfulness, but Make it Matter
For others, the focus is on wellness. As with play, wellness cant be bolted onit has to be baked in. Todays consumers are seeking brands that help them feel better, not just look better. That might mean sensory spaces, quiet zones, or experiences that invite reflection and presence.
Take HOKAs Run, Stop, Corner Shopa place for runners to recharge body and mind. Or imagine Urban Outfitters offering mental health workshops for Gen Z. Its not about becoming a wellness brandits about becoming a better human brand.
Post-Digital, Deeply Human
Yes, AI and AR are redefining experience. But the goal isnt to dazzleits to deepen. Virtual try-ons, AI beauty consultations, and frictionless checkout should exist not to replace people, but to enhance their time together.
Sides, a fried chicken brand by YouTube collective The Sidemen, does this beautifully. We designed interiors that feature LED tickers showing live social content, connecting digital community with real-life vibe. This is tech as connective tissue, not wallpaper.The future of retail isnt screen-freeits meaning-full. Its about designing experiences that offer real reasons to return. Spaces that recharge us. Experiences that anchor us.
In the face of digital burnout, people arent running away from tech. Theyre running towards connectionwith themselves, their people, and the planet. The brands that respond with intention, imagination, and integrity? Theyll be the ones shaping not just what we buy, but how we live.
Back in 2008, The Atlantic sparked controversy with a provocative cover story: Is Google Making Us Stupid?
In that 4,000-word essay, later expanded into a book, author Nicholas Carr suggested the answer was yes, arguing that technology such as search engines worsened Americans ability to think deeply and retain knowledge.
At the core of Carrs concern was the idea that people no longer needed to remember or learn facts when they could instantly look them up online. While there might be some truth to this, search engines still require users to use critical thinking to interpret and contextualize the results.
Fast-forward to today, and an even more profound technological shift is taking place. With the rise of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, internet users arent just outsourcing memorythey may be outsourcing thinking itself.
Generative AI tools dont just retrieve information; they can create, analyze, and summarize it. This represents a fundamental shift: Arguably, generative AI is the first technology that could replace human thinking and creativity.
That raises a critical question: Is ChatGPT making us stupid?
As a professor of information systems whos been working with AI for more than two decades, Ive watched this transformation firsthand. And as many people increasingly delegate cognitive tasks to AI, I think its worth considering what exactly were gaining and what we are at risk of losing.
AI and the Dunning-Kruger effect
Generative AI is changing how people access and process information. For many, its replacing the need to sift through sources, compare viewpoints, and wrestle with ambiguity. Instead, AI delivers clear, polished answers within seconds. While those results may or may not be accurate, they are undeniably efficient. This has already led to big changes in how we work and think.
But this convenience may come at a cost. When people rely on AI to complete tasks and think for them, they may be weakening their ability to think critically, solve complex problems, and engage deeply with information. Although research on this point is limited, passively consuming AI-generated content may discourage intellectual curiosity, reduce attention spans and create a dependency that limits long-term cognitive development.
To better understand this risk, consider the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is the phenomenon in which people who are the least knowledgeable and competent tend to be the most confident in their abilities, because they dont know what they dont know. In contrast, more competent people tend to be less confident. This is often because they can recognize the complexities they have yet to master.
This framework can be applied to generative AI use. Some users may rely heavily on tools such as ChatGPT to replace their cognitive effort, while others use it to enhance their capabilities. In the former case, they may mistakenly believe they understand a topic because they can repeat AI-generated content. In this way, AI can artificially inflate ones perceived intelligence while actually reducing cognitive effort.
This creates a divide in how people use AI. Some remain stuck on the peak of Mount Stupid, using AI as a substitute for creativity and thinking. Others use it to enhance their existing cognitive capabilities.
In other words, what matters isnt whether a person uses generative AI, but how. If used uncritically, ChatGPT can lead to intellectual complacency. Users may accept its output without questioning assumptions, seeking alternative viewpoints, or conducting deeper analysis. But when used as an aid, it can become a powerful tool for stimulating curiosity, generating ideas, clarifying complex topics, and provoking intellectual dialogue.
The difference between ChatGPT making us stupid or enhancing our capabilities rests in how we use it. Generative AI should be used to augment human intelligence, not replace it. That means using ChatGPT to support inquiry, not to shortcut it. It means treating AI responses as the beginning of thought, not the end.
AI, thinking, and the future of work
The mass adoption of generative AI, led by the explosive rise of ChatGPT (it reached 100 million users within two months of its release) has, in my view, left internet users at a crossroads. One path leads to intellectual decline: a world where we let AI do the thinking for us. The other offers an opportunity: to expand our brainpower by working in tandem with AI, leveraging its power to enhance our own.
Its often said that AI wont take your job, but someone using AI will. But it seems clear to me that people who use AI to replace their own cognitive abilities will be stuck at the peak of Mount Stupid. These AI users will be the easiest to replace.
Its those who take the augmented approach to AI use who will reach the path of enlightenment, working together with AI to produce results that neither is capable of producing alone. This is where the future of work will eventually go.
This essay started with the question of whether ChatGPT will make us stupid, but Id like to end with a different question: How will we use ChatGPT to make us smarter? The answers to both questions depend not on the tool but on users.
Aaron French is an assistant professor of information systems at Kennesaw State University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
On todays episode, hosts Josh Christensen and Yaz Gagne are joined by journalist and author Megan Greenwell to discuss her new book, ‘Bad Company: Private Equity and the Death of the American Dream.’ Greenwell explores how private equity firms often prioritize profits over the long-term health of businesses and what that means for workers, consumers, and the economy.
If this past weeks headlines are any indication, the U.S. consumer economy is being pulled in every direction at once. Grocery bills are getting heavier, while retail giants and airlines are rewriting some of their most familiar playbooks. At the same time, the housing market is cooling in dozens of major metro areas, Chipotle is feeling the sting of diner belt-tightening, and the late-night TV world is suddenly united in a war of words over CBSs surprise cancellation of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert.
In grocery, one of the countrys quirkiest retailers is on a tear: Trader Joes announced 30 new store openings across 17 states and D.C., pushing the grocer closer to the 600-location mark. Meanwhile, if you were planning to load up on burger patties for the summer, brace yourself. Beef prices have surged to the highest levels on record, and theres no quick fix in sight as the U.S. cattle herd hits its lowest level since 1951.
Elsewhere, big companies are making moves: Target is scaling back its popular price-match policy, Southwest Airlines is ditching open seating in favor of assigned boarding groups, and Chipotles latest earnings reveal that even fast casual isnt immune to shifting consumer spending.
Heres what you need to know from this week in business:
Trader Joes expands with 30 new stores across 17 states
Trader Joes is in growth mode, adding 30 new locations that will push it past 600 stores nationally. The expansionspanning California, Texas, New York, Oklahoma, and moreis a striking contrast to the wave of retail closures hitting other chains. The next to open: Northridge, CA, on July 21.
Beef prices hit record highs
Ground beef now averages $6.12 a pound, with steak prices rising 8% to $11.49 per pound. Persistent droughts, shrinking cattle herds, and new trade disruptions mean grilling season is going to stay expensive for the foreseeable future.
Colbert cancellation spurs late-night revolt
CBSs decision to cancel The Late Show by 2026 has united late-night hosts, who are openly mocking the network and its corporate parent. Many see the timingjust after Colbert criticized a Trump-related settlementas politically charged.
Target scales back price-matching
Starting July 28, Target will only match prices found at other Target locations or on Target.com, ending its longstanding policy of matching major competitors like Amazon and Walmart.
Chipotle feels the pinch as diners spend less
Chipotles stock fell 12% after its second-quarter results revealed slowing comparable sales. The company blames macroeconomic pressures and says low-income diners are prioritizing value.
Housing market cools in 109 metros
More than a third of the nations 300 largest housing markets saw year-over-year price declines in June, with Austin, Tampa, Dallas, Miami, and Phoenix leading the drop.
Southwest Airlines ends open seating
Southwests famed open-seating policy is ending. Starting July 29, passengers will purchase tickets with assigned seats and board using an eight-group system, a major brand shift for the carrier.
McGraw Hill goes public
McGraw Hill, the 137-year-old education publisher known for its textbooks and digital learning platforms, made its debut on the New York Stock Exchange this week under the ticker MH at $17 per share. The IPO raised roughly $386 million, valuing the company at about $3.25 billion as it shifts its focus from print to digital education.
Trumps Big, Beautiful Bill Tax Cuts: Winners and Losers
A new analysis shows the top 20% of earners will receive the biggest benefits under President Trumps new tax bill, with average savings of $12,540 in 2026.
Micromanagement can silently creep into leadership styles, often without conscious awareness. Could you be micromanaging without knowing it? Here, leadership experts share the subtle signs that you might beand how to shift your approach to foster more trust and autonomy within your team.
Shift from Reactive to Intentional Leadership
Micromanagement is a term so overused that it has become shorthand for “bad leadership.” It is also one of those leadership red flags that is easy to spot in others but harder to recognize in ourselves. This is because it does not always show up as controlling behavior. During times of growth or pressure, micromanagement can be a coping mechanisma well-intentioned attempt to maintain quality, move quickly, or avoid mistakes.
As an organizational psychologist and consultant, I see this dynamic play out most often in teams that are scaling fast. A leader suddenly has more direct reports, new stakeholders, and tighter timelines . . . but no added capacity. With so much in motion, it is easy for a leader to slip from delegation into directing. One minute you are offering feedback on an email; the next, you are rewriting the whole thing. Your weekly check-ins become daily status updates. Conversations shift from “How are you doing?” to “What have you done?”
While it is tempting to write off this behavior as controlling leadership, the reality is more nuanced. Leaders under stress are often trying to do the right thing, but without support, structure, or clarity, they default to doing everything.
Here are four ways to shift from reactive micromanagement to intentional leadership rooted in trust and autonomy:
1. Start with Self-Awareness. Before diving into tasks or meetings, pause and reflect: How do I want to show up today? What does success look like for me? Research shows even brief self-reflection helps leaders step out of the current of reactivity and into intentional presence.
2. Build Trust with Small Bets. Trust does not mean handing over the highest-stakes project on Day One. Instead, identify one or two low-risk projects where you can step back and give your team full ownership. Let them make decisions about the approach and own the outcome. Celebrate the process, not just the results.
3. Define Checkpoints, Not Check-Ins. Instead of checking in constantly, cocreate milestones that clarify what success looks like at 10%, 70%, and 100%. This approach gives your team autonomy to work in their own way while ensuring they know when to align, adjust, or escalate.
4. Prioritize the Person Over the Output. People do better work when they feel their leader cares about them. Reinforce this in your 1:1s by leading with questions that center the human behind the task: What’s something going well for you right now?
Sunday Helmerich, Workplace Consultant & Facilitator, The Courage Collective
Replace Constant Oversight with Strategic Checkpoints
In one case, I worked with a CEO who insisted on being CC’d on every email or Slack thread, even those only tangentially related to his responsibilities. He didn’t see it as micromanagement, although he was always burned out. No wonder.
He framed it as “staying in the loop,” but to the team, it signaled, “I don’t trust you to handle this without my oversight.” The unintended consequence became slower decision-making and a creeping “permission culture” where innovation stalled because everyone awaited a thumbs-up.
What did we do? We shifted to trust and autonomy as follows:
We moved from “copy me” to “checkpoint me.” We set explicit outcome-based milestones (e.g., a progress demo every Friday) instead of constant message monitoring. Visibility shifted from activity to results, while the team regained breathing room.
We installed a decision-rights matrix. This meant clarifying who owns, who consults, and who simply informs. Once the matrix was socialized, leaders could step back confidently, knowing the right voices were looped in at the right moments.
We scheduled “office hours,” not pop-ins. A standing slot where the team could surface blockers replaced the leader’s ad-hoc pings. It preserved access without hovering.
It was not an easy process. Letting go and creating the new rituals took three months, but the results were worth it.
Cristina Imre, CSGO ARBOai & Founder Tech Leadership Lab, ARBOai
Resist the Urge to Fill Silence
One subtle but pervasive sign of micromanagement is when leaders frequently send “Just checking in” messages on Slack or Teams. It might seem harmless, just a quick nudge to stay informed, but when it happens too often, it creates a culture of anxiety and hyper-availability.
I’ve seen this unfold quietly in remote and hybrid teams. A manager pings someone at 10:32 a.m., asking, “Any updates on the deck?” Even though the deadline is the end of the day. It may not be intentional, but what it signals is: “I don’t fully trust you to deliver without reminders.”
The impact? Team members feel like they’re under a microscope, leading to a reactive mindset where they prioritize visibility over impact. It chips away at deep work and autonomy.
The shift I recommend is structural and psychological. Set clear expectations for communication: when updates are due, how progress will be tracked, and what level of responsiveness is healthy. Then step back. Make room for trust to grow in the silence.
As leaders, we must resist the urge to fill every gap with a ping. Sometimes, the most powerful thing you can say to your team is nothing at all, and just let them do what you hired them to do.
Anjan Pathak, CTO and Cofounder, Vantage Fit
Empower Decision-Making to Build Trust
One subtle sign of micromanagement that leaders often miss is when team members consistently hesitate to make decisions without explicit approval, even for matters within their scope. This quiet dependency is rarely about a lack of capability; it’s a signal that the leader has unknowingly created an environment where autonomy feels risky.
I’ve seen this happen with high-performing teams led by well-meaning managers who check in “just to help” or request frequent updates “to stay aligned.” Over time, these behaviors, though seemingly supportive, train teams to defer rather than decide. The result is a slowdown in execution, a dip in morale, and a loss of ownership.
To shift this dynamic, leaders must audit their behavior. Start by asking, “Am I giving direction or asking for input?” “Do I solve problems too quickly instead of coaching my team through them?” Then, take intentional steps to signal trust. That means delegating with clarity, encouraging independent thinking, and celebrating decisions made without your hand-holding.
Trust isn’t built through absence but through empowerment. When leaders resist the urge to overmanage and instead coach for capability, teams step up. Autonomy flourishes no in the absence of leadership but in the presence of confidence in others.
Rhett Power, CEO and Cofounder, Accountability Inc.
Rethink Unnecessary Alignment Meetings
One of the more subtle (but incredibly common) signs of micromanagement is the recurring “alignment meeting” that didn’t need to exist. On the surface, it looks like a leader trying to stay engaged. But to the team? It often signals something else: “I don’t fully trust you to move this forward without my input.”
The kicker? Most managers who do this don’t think they’re micromanaging. They believe they’re offering support, but when quick updates that could’ve lived in an email morph into standing 30-minute check-ins, autonomy doesn’t grow. It withers. Over time, this kind of hand-holding can train even high performers to second-guess themselves or, worse, wait for approval before taking initiative.
The better play is to shift from control to clarity. That means moving toward a Results-Oriented Work Environment, where expectations are clearly defined up front. When people know what they’re responsible forand by whenthey’re far more likely to raise their hand when something blocks progress, rather than hiding issues until a last-minute scramble.
Another trust-builder? Ownership without nitpicking. If you assign someone a deliverable, give them full license to get it done their way (within reason). Resist the urge to rewrite their email copy or “suggest” a different font on the presentation. It may seem small, but those little interventions send the message: “I don’t trust your judgment.”
And if you must check in, swap out “Did you finish that yet?” for something like “How’s it going on your end?” One prompts anxiety. The other opens the door for dialogue. Big difference.
Micromanagement isn’t always loud. Sometimes it whispers through excessive oversight, unnecessary meetings, or hovering phrasing that erodes trust. The fix? Less managing. More leading.
Let people surprise you. They usually do.
Jim Stroud, HR Influencer, JimStroud.com
Allow Team Members to Own Their Work
One subtle sign of micromanagement I’ve observed (and caught myself doing early in my career) is when a leader consistently feels the need to “reword” or “tweak” their team’s work before it’s released. While it might seem harmless or like you’re simply helping to polish things, over time, it sends the message that their work isn’t quite “good enough” without your final touch. This erodes confidence and slows down decision-making.
The shift? Begin by asking yourself, “Is this feedback about improving clarity, or about making it sound like me?” If it’s the latter, let it go. Encourage ownership by allowing team members to sign off on their own work. Autonomy isn’t just about delegating tasksit’s about trusting outcomes, even when they don’t exactly match how you would have done them. This builds more confidence than any rephrased headline ever could.
Miruna Dragomir, CMO, Planable
Communicate Expectations Early to Avoid Panic
The problem with micromanagement is how quickly it cascades through an organization, and sometimes that cascade kicks off with simple questions from the “boss” that come a little too late. I learned this the hard way.
For 20 years, I was an executive inside a multibillion-dollar company. I sat between the CEO and my 200-person team. One day, I was in a meeting, and my boss asked about a project my team had been working on for several months. I didn’t have all the answers to his questions, so when I left the meeting, I called the director and asked for an update. No big deal. Well, it turned into a big deal.
I learned that when you ask a question too close to rollout, it can cause a team to panic. The questions I was asking revealed gaps in the plan and frustrated the team. They felt micromanaged, which was not my intent. I simply needed an update. So, how do you solve this? Both sides need to meet in the middle and agree on a process that allows for more proactive communication. The team wants respect and autonomy, and the leader wants alignment and information.
I should have communicated the company’s requirements more effectively and outlined the key areas that needed to be considered, so that the team could incorporate them into the plan. The team should have proactively and consistently communicated the project status and given me a chance to weigh in, not because I knew better, but because I might have had a perspective that could help improve the result.
As leaders, we need to stop waiting until the 11th hour to set expectations and ask questions because this can be perceived as micromanagement. As employees, we need to proactively share our progress so that when we get feedback, it’s not difficult to incorporate. The more we communicate, collaborate, and align early on, the less leaders will feel frustrated, the less teams will feel micromanaged, and the higher the likelihood we will build a solution that makes everyone proud.
Pam Nemec, CEO, Pam Nemec Consulting Inc.
Address Underlying Fears Driving Control
A subtle sign of unintentional micromanagement is when leaders repeatedly ask for unnecessary status updates while claiming they’re “just checking in.” This often stems from unacknowledged anxiety or a silent heartache around control that the leader hasn’t recognized within themselves.
This pattern reveals a misalignment between what the leader says they value (trust and autonomy) and how they behave (constant monitoring). The heart and mind are operating on different frequencies.
To shift this pattern, leaders should first connect with their own heart intelligence, examining what fears or past experiences might be driving their need for control. Are they projecting their own perfectionism? Is there a deeper insecurity about their leadership capabilities?
This approach involves establishing clear objectives while deliberately creating space for team creativity. Practice heart-centered check-ins that focus on supporting team members’ growth rather than monitoring their activities. When you find yourself wanting to intervene, pause and ask: “Am I responding to a genuine need, or am I acting from my own unexamined anxiety?”
True leadership presence emerges when we lead from trust rather than fear, allowing both the leader and team to align purpose with action. To do so creates cultures of psychological safety, where talent naturally thrives.
Hema Vyas, Psychologist
Take Responsibility for Poor Outcomes
Micromanagement is not always loud or obvious. Sometimes, it hides in leadership behaviors that appear decisive on the surface but quietly erodetrust underneath. One of the most damaging forms is when a leader refuses to take responsibility for poor outcomes and shifts blame onto the team.
Many leaders are micromanagers without realizing it. Micromanagement is not just about controlling tasks. It is also about controlling outcomes, perception, and accountability, often to protect the leader’s ego or reputation.
I have seen this unfold when a team follows direct instructions, only to be blamed when results fall short. In extreme cases, entire teams are let go to protect the leader’s image. This is not accountability. It is misdirection.
This kind of leadership creates a culture of fear. It discourages initiative, silences feedback, and stifles innovation. People become hesitant to lead, question, or take risks, because they know they will be held responsible for outcomes they could not influence.
The shift starts when leaders ask different questions. Not “Who is at fault?” but “What did I over-control, under-communicate, or fail to clarify?” True accountability requires reflection, not retribution.
So while this may look like a blame game or a leadership failure on the surface, at its core, it is a deeply embedded form of micromanagement. The leader controls without accountability. That is what makes it so damaging, and so hard to detect early.
Great leadership is not about being right. It is about being responsible. When leaders take ownership of both direction and outcome, they build a foundation of trust. And when trust exists, people step up. They take initiative. They learn from failure. They grow.
Accountability is not about blame. It is about integrity. And it begins at the top.
Florence Idowu, Chief Talent Strategist, Bavarde Consulting & Management
Trust Your Team to Innovate and Grow
We’ve all worked for “that boss”the one who needs to control every decision, approve every move, and rewrite every email. While it might come from a place of good intentions, micromanagement is one of the fastest ways to drain the life from a team.
In my experience, this kind of behavior usually stems from insecurity or inexperience. The leader either doesn’t trust their team, or they don’t trust themselves. Regardless of the root cause, the outcome is always the same: creativity gets crushed, motivation disappears, and innovation grinds to a halt. By controlling every detail, they rob their teams of the chance to rise, to learn, to lead. True leadership requires something much harder than control. It demands trust, humility, and patience.
Having dealt with my fair share of micromanagers, I vowed to do things differently when I became a leader. I recognized the importance of giving my team the freedom to perform. My role was not to impose my way of doing things but to ensure a creative space where people could thrive. Even if my approach was more efficient due to years of experience, it didn’t mean it was the best or only way to get the job done.
As I progressed in my career, I sometimes fell into the trap of steering others toward my preferred method. It took time to realize that I was stifling their ability to innovate by insisting on my way. They were being paid to be creative and resourceful, yet I was unknowingly molding them into replicas of myself. When I allowed my team members to experiment and learn through trial and error, they often came up with solutions far superior to mine. The act of letting go and trusting my team was not only liberating for them but also transformative for me as a leader.
Gina Osborn, Leadership Advisor, Podcast Host & Keynote Speaker, Gina L. Osborn & Associates
Let Go of Control to Foster Team Development
I used to have to approve every single marketing video before it went out.
It didn’t matter if it was a 15-second teaser or a full brand story. I’d watch it, rewatch it, and give it the green light before it hit the client’s inbox. I thought my eyes needed to be on everything. I thought that was what a good leader didprotect the brand, avoid mistakes, keep clients happy.
Then one day, my mentor called me out.
He asked, “Why do you have to approve them all?”
I said, “Because if my team misses something and the client gets mad, that’s on me.”
He looked at me and said, “Have you ever missed something before?”
I paused. “Yeah, I have.”
“Okay, so let them. That’s how they learn.”
That moment hit me.
I realized I was micromanaging. Not in the obvious way, but in a quiet, constant-control way. I thought I was being responsible. But I was actually getting in the way of my team growing.
So I let go.
Not overnight, but slowly. I started handing off approvals. I trusted my team to catch errors and deliver great work. And you know what? They stepped up. They caught things I might’ve missed. They got faster, more confident, and more invested.
We still mess up sometimes. And that’s okay. We fix it. We move on. And we grow from it.
Letting go wasn’t easy. But it’s one of the best things I’ve ever done as a leader.
Trust builds teams. Control holds them back.
Trevor Rappleye, CEO & Storyteller, FranchiseFilming
Build Strong Relationships to Prevent Micromanagement
I believe there are two potential situations when this kind of micromanagement occurs:
1. A manager (often new or junior) focuses on prescribing and monitoring “how” things are done instead of clearly articulating desired outcomes and then either providing guidance and assistance or simply getting out of the way of the employee. Why does the manager do this? Likely because they’ve been conditioned to do so (often a sign of insufficient leadership development). My advice to the manager in this situation is to be curious and ask lots of questions (and resist the temptation to offer advice). Questions along the lines of: “What is your approach to this problem?” and “What does success look like for you?” or “How best can I support you on this problem/project?”
2. An employee who feels like their manager doesn’t trust them. Even if the manager isn’t micromanaging the employee, it might feel like it. Since humans judge themselves by their intentions while judging others by their actions, I suggest a conversation about personal values and beliefs as a starting point to developing the trust that begins through vulnerability but is also nuanced into four categories: Ability, Believability, Competence, and Dependability.
An employee who feels connected to their manager is less likely to feel like they are being mismanaged, much less micromanaged. Assuming the “micromanaging” is more likely a perception, I suggest making the investment in building a strong and trusting relationship as the foundation for all work relationships.
Brian Stinson, Culture Engineer, The PEAK Fleet
