Want more housing market stories from Lance Lamberts ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter.
Back in 2023, this single-family home at 19374 Rizzuto St. in Venice, FL (34293 ZIP Code) was purchased for $565,000. By the time the transaction closed, the housing market had already begun to enter a period of cyclical coolingwith Florida seeing a sharper power swing to buyers and some pockets of Southwest Florida moving into what ResiClub considers correction mode.
By February 2025, the homeowner listed the property above for sale at $519,000. After 4 subsequent price cuts and a brief delisting, the home finally sold in December 2025 for $455,000or -19.5% below its 2023 sales price. While thats certainly a material home price correction from its Pandemic Housing Boom peak, we should note that the December 2025 sales price ($455K) was still +38.7% above the $328,000 price the same property fetched in 2017.
As weve closely documented for ResiClub readers for the past few years (heres our past feature on just Punta Gorda), Southwest Florida has been one of the two weakest regional chunks of the U.S. housing market. Among major U.S. metros, only Austin, Texas metro area (-27.3% since its 2022 peak) has seen a larger overall price drop this cycle than metros in Punta Gorda, FL (-25.3% from its 2022 peak), Cape Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL (-18.8% from its 2022 peak), and North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL (-17.4% from its 2022 peak). The North Port-Sarasota metro is where the home highlighted above is located.
Pulling from the ResiClub Terminal, single-family home prices in the ZIP Code highlighted in todays article (34293) are down -11.3% year-over-year.
Pulling from the ResiClub Terminal, single-family home prices in the highlighted ZIP Code (34293) are down -21.5% from their 2022 peak. Thats broadly in line with the -19.5% decline at which the highlighted property sold relative to its 2023 price.
Pulling from the ResiClub Terminal, single-family home prices in the highlighted ZIP Code (34293) are still up +37.3% above March 2020 levels. Thats broadly similar to the +38.7% increase the highlighted property sold for in December 2025 relative to its pre-pandemic sale in 2017 ($328,000).
Again, todays ResiClub article is not about a property in a market performing anywhere near the U.S. average right now. Instead, it highlights a market that has been among the weakest since the Pandemic Housing Boom fizzled out. Indeed, U.S. home prices, as measured by the Zillow Home Value Index, entered 2026 at +1.9% above their July 2022 levels. Meanwhile, home prices in the North PortSarasota metrowhere the home in the 34293 ZIP Code is locatedentered 2026 at -17.4% below their July 2022 levels.
Click here to view an interactive of the chart below
There are several factors that have come together to tilt the supply-demand balance in Southwest Florida more decisively toward homebuyers since the Pandemic Housing Boom ended.
One key factor is that home prices in Southwest Florida rose too far, too faststretching housing fundamentals well beyond what local incomes could reasonably support in a region that also happened to have relatively lower building costs and ample entitled land. When the Pandemic Housing Booms domestic migration surgeparticularly the influx of retirees and near-retireesbegan to decelerate, the Southwest Florida market experienced an even bigger demand shock. With fewer in-migrants, Southwest Florida increasingly had to rely on local incomes to support pricesin a market that already had strained fundamentals.
At the same time, as market conditions shifted, elevated levels of new single-family andmultifamily supply came online across parts of Southwest Florida. Builders and landlords were forced to offer larger incentives to move product, which pulled some marginal demand away from the resale market and added another layer of cooling.
Put more simply: Pockets of Southwest Florida had overshot, and the market needed a period of mean reversion.
Click here to view an interactive of the chart below
There are other factors, of course.
Following the Surfside condo collapse in June 2021, which killed 98 people, Florida passed new structural safety rules, requiring more inspections and additional funds for repairs to be set aside by the end of 2024. That has led to Florida HOAs issuing sky-high special assessments and monthly HOA fee increases to cover these costs. This has had a greater impact on older coastal Florida condo buildings.
Looking ahead, one big question is whether home prices in markets like Punta Gorda and Cape Coral (and metro area Austin, TX) have fallen enough to recapture the attention of homebuyers, mom-and-pop single-family investors, and single-family acquisition capital?
Its worth noting that while many pockets of Southwest Florida still have inventory/months of supply levels above the national average, the pace of inventory growth has slowed significantly over the past yearand some areas in SWFL have even begun to see modest year-over-year declines in active listings.
Back in spring 2022, while working at Fortune, I suggested that pockets of Southwest Florida could be at greater risk of a home price correction. At the time, Moodys Analytics model believed Punta Gorda, for example, was overvalued by 57.8%.
The correction Punta Gorda has gone through since thencoupled with additional income gainsmeans the market is now only overvalued by 9.0%, according to Moodys model. In other words, the ongoing correction in Southwest Florida has significantly reduced downside risk going forward relative to where things stood a few years ago.
In the early 20th century, sociologist Max Weber noted that sweeping industrialization would transform how societies worked. As small, informal operations gave way to large, complex organizations with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, leaders would need to rely less on tradition and charisma, and more on organization and rationality.
He also foresaw that jobs would need to be broken down into specialized tasks and governed by a system of hierarchy, authority, and responsibility. This would require a more formal mode of organizationa bureaucracyin which roles and responsibilities were clearly defined. Power would be entrusted to institutions, not individuals.
Yet today, according to Gallup, our faith in institutions has been shattered. From political institutions to schools to big business, support has fallen precipitously, and now only the military and small business enjoy majority support. In essence, the process Weber described has been reversed: weve discarded institutions and embraced individuals. It is not serving us well.
How Institutions Shape Societies
In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations. Today, regarded as the seminal work of capitalism, it wasnt seen that way at the time (the term did not exist in common usage). Rather, it was a powerful critique of mercantilism, the dominant economic model at the time, which sought to accumulate a countrys resources through promoting exports and minimizing imports.
Yet Smith pointed out that the wealth of a nation lies in what it produces, not what it can sock away in vaults. Moreover, he argued that when wealthy merchants have the opportunity, they tend to corrupt political systems in order to extract more wealth for themselves, and that free markets are the most effective way to allocate resources productively.
More recently, economists Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson build on Smiths ideas in Why Nations Fail. They explain why the fate of nations rests less on innate factors such as geography, culture, or climate and more on the quality and types of institutions they build: inclusive institutions or extractive institutions.
Inclusive institutions protect property rights broadly across society, establish fair competition, and reward innovation. Extractive institutions, on the other hand, concentrate wealth in the hands of a small elite who exploit the broader population. These elites control resources and use state power to enrich themselves at societys expense.
In other words, the wealth of nations is linked to the well-being of their people and this is largely a function of institutions. We depend on schools to educate, corporations to produce, governments to serve, and the media to inform. The health of a society is inextricably tied up in the health of its institutions.
Institution Building And Institutional Capture
Great leaders are remembered for the institutions they create. Napoleon is remembered for his civic code as much as for his military victories. Franklin Roosevelt will always be associated with the New Deal and Lyndon Johnson with the Great Society. We recognize great industrialists like Walt Disney not just for their individual deeds, but for the organizations they left behind.
Autocrats understand that their power is directly a function of their ability to control or influence institutions. Many of these, of course, are political institutions, such as ministries, parliaments, and courts. Many others, such as corporations, religious organizations, educational institutions, and the media, are not.
Thats why when Vladimir Putin assumed the presidency in Russia, he moved quickly to consolidate private media under Gazprom, install his own oligarchs and cultivate a close partnership with the Orthodox Church. Power is never monolithic, but distributed across institutions. To control a society, you need to control its institutions.
Pro-democracy activists often employ a similar strategy. They target institutions that are important to the regime. For example, the Serbian activist group Otpor targeted the police with an elaborate strategy that both hampered their efforts and gradually recruited them to join the cause. When major protests broke out after an attempt to steal an election, the key security forces defected and joined the protestors.
As Dostoevsky explained in The Grand Inquisitor, there will always be a conflict between churches and their messiahs. If people truly love the messiah, they wont need priests to provide mystery and authority. They would be free to pursue truth for themselves.
The Erosion of Institutional Authority
In his first inaugural address, Ronald Reagan declared, Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem, and vowed to unleash the private sector. What followed was not a renaissance of institutional strength, but a steady erosion of it. His deregulation led to the Savings and Loan crisis. Then came the dot-com bubble and crash, two long and destructive wars, the Great Financial Crisis, and the Covid pandemic.
Each time there was a villain to execrate: Big Business, Wall Street, Neocons, the Military-Industrial Complex, Big Banks, Big Pharma, the media, and of course, nameless government bureaucrats (sometimes also known as public servants). As the Gallup dat clearly shows, we no longer trust our institutions.
It is, in a strange sort of way, like The Grand Inquisitor in reverse. With no more churches to worship, weve gone in search of messiahs: demagogues, tech billionaires, podcast hosts, and many others. Were not craving altars. We seek parasocial relationships, hoping that our personal saviors will free us from institutional authority.
The difference today is that we are often interacting with institutions without even knowing it. As the Filipino activist Maria Ressa has long documented, nation states are fighting an active information war, seeding our conversations on social media with divisive messaging, then amplifying the response with massive bot farms. Those tech oligarchs and podcast hosts arent just passive observers, but often actively pursuing an agenda for their own benefit.
What were left with is the worst of both worlds: less freedom and less prosperity.
The End Of History All Over Again
In the 1990s, Western-style liberal democracy was triumphant. The Berlin Wall had fallen and the Cold War had been won. Teams of diplomats and consultants rushed to spread the Washington Consensus, an agreed-upon set of reforms that poor countries were pressured to undertake by their richer brethren.
Francis Fukuyama noted at the time that we had reached an endpoint in history, when one model had achieved dominance over all others. Yet even as he laid out the rational case, he invoked the ancient Greek concept of thymos, or spiritedness, to warn that even at the end of history, some would insist on going their own way, no matter the consequences.
The truth is that every revolution inspires its own counterrevolution and the pendulum will continue to swing until there can be some agreement about shared values and how to move forward. Today, we can see the consequences. Populists arent so much anti-elite as they are anti-institution, and todays media environment rewards those who attack them. The result is a world that feels far more divided and dangerous than it did even during the Cold War.
Our mistake was that we were far too triumphant about a unipolar world to recognize that we needed to redesign our institutions to adapt to a new era. We are still largely living in a society governed by postwar institutions designed for how the world was nearly 80 years agono Internet, no cheap air travel, global GDP roughly five percent of what it is today.
Today, much like after World War II and in 1989, we are in the midst of a fundamental realignment. To build a different future, we need to rethink our institutionswhat values we want to embed in them and what our relationship to them should be. How should schools educate? Corporations produce? Governments serve? And the media inform?
We dont need saviors or messiahs. We need to redesign and rebuild institutions that can serve and sustain us for the 21st century.
Over the past two decades, the concept of mindfulness has become hugely popular around the world. An increasingly ubiquitous part of society, its taught everywhere from workplaces and schools to sports programs and the military.
On social media, television, and wellness apps, mindfulness is often shown as one simple thingstaying calm and paying attention to the moment.
Large companies like Google use mindfulness programs to help employees stay focused and less stressed. Hospitals use it to help people manage pain and improve mental health. Millions of people now use mindfulness apps that promise everything from lowering stress to sleeping better.
But as a professor of religious studies who has spent years examining how mindfulness is defined and practiced across different traditions and historical periods, Ive noticed a surprising problem beneath the current surge of enthusiasm: Scientists, clinicians, and educators still dont agree on what mindfulness actually isor how to measure it.
Because different researchers measure different things under the label mindfulness, two studies can give very different pictures of what the practice actually does. For someone choosing a meditation app or program based on research findings, this matters.
The study youre relying on may be testing a skill like attention, emotional calm, or self-kindness that isnt the one youre hoping to develop. This makes it harder to compare results and can leave people unsure about which approach will genuinely help them in daily life.
From ancient traditions to modern science
Mindfulness has deep roots in Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Sikh, and other Asian contemplative lineages. The Buddhist Satipatthana Sutta: The Foundations of Mindfulness emphasizes moment-to-moment observation of body and mind.
The Hindu concept of dhyna, or contemplation, cultivates steady focus on the breath or a mantra; Jain samayika, or practice of equanimity, develops calm balance toward all beings; and Sikh simran, or continuous remembrance, dissolves self-centered thought into a deeper awareness of the underlying reality in each moment.
In the late 20th century, teachers and clinicians began adapting these techniques for secular settings, most notably through mindfulness-based stress reduction and other therapeutic programs. Since then, mindfulness has migrated into psychology, medicine, education, and even corporate wellness.
It has become a widely usedthough often differently definedtool across scientific and professional fields.
Why scientists disagree about mindfulness
In discussing the modern application of mindfulness in fields like psychology, the definitional challenge is front and center. Indeed, different researchers focus on different things and then design their tests around those ideas.
Some scientists see mindfulness mainly in terms of emphasizing attention and paying close attention to whats happening right now.
Other researchers define the concept in terms of emotional management and staying calm when things get stressful.
Another cohort of mindfulness studies emphasizes self-compassion, meaning being kind to yourself when you make mistakes.
And still others focus on moral awareness, the idea that mindfulness should help people make wiser, more ethical choices.
These differences become obvious when you look at the tests researchers use to measure mindfulness. The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, or MAAS, asks about how well someone stays focused on the present moment. The Freiburg Mindfulness InventoryFMIasks whether a person can notice thoughts and feelings as they come and accept them without judgment. The Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness ExperiencesCHIMEadds something most other tests leave out: questions about ethical awareness and making wise, moral choices.
As a result, comparative research can be tricky, and it can also be confusing for people who want to be more mindful but arent sure which path to take. Different programs may rely on different definitions of mindfulness, so the skills they teach and the benefits they promise can vary a lot.
This means that someone choosing a mindfulness course or app might end up learning something very different from what they expected unless they understand how that particular program defines and measures mindfulness.
Why different scales measure different things
John Dunne, a Buddhist philosophy scholar at the University of WisconsinMadison, offers a helpful explanation if youve ever wondered why everyone seems to talk about mindfulness in a different way. Dunne says mindfulness isnt one single thing, but a family of related practices shaped by different traditions, purposes, and cultural backgrounds.
This explains why scientists and people trying to be mindful often end up talking past each other. If one study measures attention and another measures compassion, their results wont line up. And if youre trying to practice mindfulness, it matters whether youre following a path that focuses on calming your mind, being kind to yourself, or making ethically aware choices.
Why this matters
Because mindfulness isnt just one thing, that affects how its studied, practiced and taught. Thats important both at the institutional and individual level.
Whether for places like schools and health care, a mindfulness program designed to reduce stress will look very different from one that teaches compassion or ethical awareness.
Without clarity, teachers, doctors, and counselors may not know which approach works best for their goals. The same rough idea applies in business for organizational effectiveness and stress management.
Despite the disagreements, research does show that different forms of mindfulness can produce different kinds of benefits. Practices that sharpen attention to the moment are associated with improved focus and workplace performance.
Approaches oriented towards acceptance tend to help people better manage stress, anxiety, and chronic pain. A focus on compassion-based methods can support emotional resilience. Programs that emphasize ethical awareness may promote more thoughtful, prosocial behavior.
These varied outcomes help explain why researchers continue to debate which definition of mindfulness should guide scientific study.
For anyone practicing minfulness as an individual, this is a reminder to choose practices that fit your needs.
Ronald S. Green is a professor and chair of the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Coastal Carolina University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The goal is to become disgustingly educated, dozens of videos have proclaimed across social media over the new year.
On platforms like TikTok and Instagram, instead of sharing clothing hauls or skincare routines, creators are sharing their book stacks or media diets promising to make their viewers disgustingly educated in a matter of minutes. For further optimization potential, take note of these brain hacks to improve memory (so that your time cracking open Platos Republic wont go to waste).
While this trend that champions being erudite is marketed as an antidote to braintrot content, its origins on the internet date back as far back as 2022: I have two aspirations in life: to be beautiful and to be disgustingly overeducated, a viral X post read.
Since then, subreddits like r/booksuggestions and r/selfimprovement started to fill with questions and answers on different ways to become disgustingly educatedfrom reading the classics to consuming video summaries of various topics. (Maybe even just consuming video summaries of the classics.)
The trend has since found its way to TikTok, where it mirrors other self-improvement trends that crop up on the platform like clockwork every couple months. Last year, it was the curriculum trend, in which creators came up with monthly curricula based on new skills they want to learn, creative projects they want to tackle, and books on subjects they want to focus on for the month. After all, self-development is one of social medias favorite subjects.
In an era where many are outsourcing their brains to artificial intelligence, its encouraging, of course, to see people embrace a trend that reclaims curiosity and engages with learning just for fun. Especially since its widely documented that social media does have a real deleterious impact on our memory, focus, and attention spans, which are all key tools in the pursuit of becoming disgustingly educated.
Still, scratch beneath the surface, and the pursuit of education for educations sakeand the pursuit of education to appear educated to othersare two very different things.
As Substack becomes the new social media platform in vogue, and intellectualism becomes another aesthetic to be sold, any trend that hopes to hook you with promises of lower screen time, while simultaneously keeping you on the algorithmic hamster wheel, should be taken with a pinch of salt.
In many ways, the disgustingly educated trend is yet another example of the intelligence Olympics online. But what is the internet, if not a bunch of people on their soap boxes, lecturing others on topics they are underqualified to speak on?
And with America sliding towards anti-intellectualism, as the current administration wages war on the arts, science, and the nature of truth, pseudointellectualism is the lesser evil here.
If the most insufferable person you know has taken it upon themselves to become disgustingly educated in 2026 . . . honestly, more power to them.
Biographies of exceptional achievers tend to explain their success through personality traits, highlighting the killer psychological weapons that made them great. So, Steve Jobss abrasiveness is reframed as visionary perfectionism, Elon Musks impulsivity as bold risk-taking, and Jeff Bezoss relentlessness as uncompromising customer obsession. The same retrospective alchemy applies to women: Oprah Winfreys emotional intensity becomes radical empathy and authenticity; Indra Nooyis discipline and conscientiousness are recast as values-driven, long-term strategic leadership; and Diane Hendrickss toughness and impatience with incompetence are celebrated as decisive execution and operational rigor. In every case, traits that might once have seemed problematic are retrofitted into virtues once success makes the story worth telling.
The reality, as always, is a lot more nuanced than our limited patience and attention span appears to tolerate these days, namely all human traits or behavioral patterns can be both good and bad depending on the context, level, or outcome examined. So, for instance, confidence is generally good but when its decoupled from actual competence or extremely high, it may impede learning, make people look foolish and arrogant, and lead to significant underestimation of risks, delusional grandiosity, and reality distortion. To add yet another caveat: this is more likely in certain cultures (collectivistic, self-critical, humble) than others (individualistic, optimistic, and arrogant).
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
All things in moderation
This is why Aristotle wisely argued (as did Confucius before him) that virtue lies in moderation: the sweet midpoint between two equally problematic extremes. Courage, for example, sits between cowardice and recklessness; generosity between stinginess and wastefulness; ambition between apathy and obsession. Modern science quietly (because few people seem to listen or be interested in grasping this) agrees with him: too little of a good thing leaves potential unrealized, but too much turns strength into liability.
One of the traits that illustrates this nicely is perfectionism, which evokes both positives and negatives in the general publicso much so, that its often suggested as a universal answer to the dreaded (and not very useful) whats your biggest weakness job interview question. At low levels, perfectionism may reflect carelessness or disengagement. At moderate levels, it can signal high standards, diligence, and pride in ones work. But once it crosses a certain threshold, perfectionism stops being about excellence and becomes about fear: fear of mistakes, fear of judgment, fear of falling short. At that point, it no longer improves performance. Instead, it fuels anxiety, indecision, micromanagement, burnout, and strained relationships.
The challenge for organizations is that perfectionism often looks like commitment, especially in cultures that reward overwork, self-criticism, and constant busyness. But the real leadership task is not to eliminate high standards, but to prevent standards from hardening into self-punishment or control over others. Thus, as with confidence, ambition, or drive, the goal is not more or less, but enough (or the right amount), and knowing when enough has tipped into too much.
A new approach
In line, a new academic review synthesizes decades of research into perfectionism, defined as a stable tendency to set excessively high standards for oneself or others, combined with overly critical self-evaluation and a chronic concern with mistakes, evaluation, and failure. This research distinguishes between striving for excellence and being driven by fear of imperfection; a distinction that helps explain why perfectionism so often undermines well-being and collaboration while delivering only fragile or short-lived performance gains.
More specifically, the review highlights both the pros and cons of being a perfectionist, evaluating its broad impact on individuals, teams, leadership, and organizations.
Three pros (when its the right kind)
Higher engagement and goal attainment (under narrow conditions)Perfectionistic strivings (high personal standards driven internally) are associated with greater work engagement, persistence, goal achievement, and satisfaction, especially in structured, predictable roles where quality and precision matter. This can translate into diligence and follow-through rather than brilliance.
Attention to detail and decision thoroughness in leadersLeaders high in self-oriented perfectionism tend to pay closer attention to detail and, in some contexts, make more comprehensive strategic decisions. In relatively stable environments, this has been linked to better decision quality and organizational resilience.
Short-term performance signaling and credibilityPerfectionism can function as a reputational signal, conveying conscientiousness, reliability, and seriousness, particularly early in careers or in performance-pressured environments. This may support initial career progression, even if the advantages fade over time.
Three cons (and these are generally more robust)
Worse well-being with little performance payoffAcross studies and meta-analyses, perfectionism shows weak or no association with job performance, but moderate to strong associations with burnout, stress, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, and poor recovery. In short, it reliably depletes people without reliably improving output.
Workahoism, rumination, and inability to switch offPerfectionistic concerns are consistently linked to overcommitment, presenteeism, procrastination, and difficulty psychologically detaching from work. Even breaks become cognitively exhausting because perfectionists continue to ruminate about mistakes and unfinished tasks.
Toxic leadership and downstream harm to othersWhen perfectionism shows up as socially prescribed or other-oriented (imposing flawlessness on others), leaders are more likely to micromanage, punish mistakes, undermine psychological safety, trigger deviance, and reduce creativity and well-being in followers. This is one of the strongest and most consistent findings in the leadership section of the review.
Try excellencism instead
In short, perfectionism is not a performance or self-presentational strategy, but a personality trait linked to a fragile motivational style that works under limited conditions; at worst, it is a scalable mechanism for burnout, toxic leadership, and self-sabotage. The authors explicitly point to excellencism (very high but flexible standards without fear of failure) as a healthier and more sustainable alternative.
For leaders and organizations, the implication is clear: the goal is not to hire, promote, or reward perfectionists, but to cultivate excellence without fear. High standards are essential, but only when paired with flexibility, learning, and psychological safety. In an economy that increasingly rewards speed, adaptation, and collaboration over flawless execution, the most effective leaders are not those who never err, but those who know when precision matters and when good enough is not a compromise but a strategic choice. Perfectionism mistakes control for quality. Excellence optimizes for impact.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-16X9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/tcp-photo-syndey-1x1-2.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"Get more insights from Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic","dek":"Dr. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic is a professor of organizational psychology at UCL and Columbia University, and the co-founder of DeeperSignals. He has authored 15 books and over 250 scientific articles on the psychology of talent, leadership, AI, and entrepreneurship. ","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/drtomas.com\/intro\/","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91424798,"imageMobileId":91424800,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
The Republican National Committee has vastly outpaced Democrats in the crush for cash ahead of the midterm elections, holding a nearly $100 million advantage at the close of 2025, according to year-end filings to the Federal Election Commission.As Democrats have struggled in the Trump era, the RNC tallied $172 million raised in 2025, with $95 million cash on hand at year’s end. In contrast, the Democratic National Committee posted $145 million for the year, with $14 million on hand and $17 million in debt, to start the new year underwater.It’s all pointing to a turbulent election cycle ahead as President Donald Trump fights political headwinds that tend to brush back the party in power, in this case Republican control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, and reward challengers during the midterms.In the campaigns for control of Congress, the total hauls are less stark. House Republicans posted one of their stronger years, raising $13 million in the last month of the year, to close with more than $117 million for the National Republican Congressional Committee, the main campaign arm. House Democrats trailed slightly at $115 million.Both of the House committees started 2026 with about $50 million cash on hand, according to the filings, which were due to the FEC this weekend. A similar dynamic is playing out in the Senate.House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday the GOP’s overall fundraising haul left him “bullish” on the party’s chances to not only hold onto their razor-thin majority in the House, but grow it with more members.“We’re going to have a war chest to run on,” Johnson, R-La., said on “Fox News Sunday.”To be sure, the fundraising totals reflect the 2025 calendar year, before the onslaught of actions and events that have scrambled the nation’s politics in the first month of the new year.From the U.S. military attack on Venezuela to the shooting deaths of two Americans protesting the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions in Minneapolis, it’s not at all certain whether voters and donors will undergo lasting shifts in their attitudes toward the political parties.“Momentum is on our side,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which supports the House Democrats.He said the Republicans are “running scared” because the Democrats have better candidates and a better message for voters as the party tries to wrest back control of the House.In the Senate, the National Republican Senatorial Committee raised $88 million in 2025, closing out the year with $19.3 million cash on hand. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $79.8 million, but ended up slightly better with $21.7 million cash on hand.
Associated Press
Every company wants to be innovative. Most approach this by trying to hire highly creative specialists or by spinning up a new innovation team. But companies that consistently innovate do something different: They build company-wide systems focused on customer solutions and make innovation part of everyday business.
Smart organizations focus on building reliable processes to understand customers, test assumptions, and scale what works. In my experience at Verra Mobility, the difference between companies that talk about innovation and companies that deliver it often comes down to a repeatable process that drives creativity.
QUESTION EVERYTHING YOU “KNOW”
The biggest innovation killer isn’t resistance to change; its the assumption that we already know the answer.
When someone says they “know” what customers want, we dig deeper. Who did you talk to? How long ago did you talk to them? In our business reviews, we’ve made it mandatory for every business review to include not only operational performance, but also market updates and competitive intelligence. We want to push people to ask more questions, not just review more slides.
This creates a culture where expertise is valued, assumptions are challenged, and customer insight drives decisions. When you force teams to back up their opinions with current data, they start questioning how they’ve worked and look for better solutions.
UNDERSTAND WHAT CUSTOMERS WANT TO ACCOMPLISH
Most innovation fails because we solve the wrong problems. Teams focus on how customers are using a product instead of understanding what theyre trying to achieve.
Take time to sit with customers and understand their complete workflowswhich teams they interact with, how they’d be impacted by process changes, and identifying opportunities to improve. Go deeper than marketing personas to understand the decision makers who will ultimately sign off on new programs.
A few years ago, a car rental company client told us their biggest issue wasnt reconciling $100 traffic violations, it was accounting for daily $10 tolls. We created a whole new business line for automated toll management. We started with one state, then expanded based on what worked.
MAKE EXPERIMENTATION PART OF THE PROCESS
Innovation requires observation, but success requires testing assumptions quickly and cheaply.
We’ve built experimentation into our standard improvement process. When teams create solutions, I ask them to identify their biggest assumptions upfront, then look at the probability that assumption is correct. If we’re not sure, we test it quickly with a pilot or single customer trial.
Take rough prototypeseven napkin drawingsdirectly to customers. The less finished it looks, the more honest the feedback you receive. When something looks polished, people don’t want to hurt your feelings. When it’s obviously a sketch, they’ll tell you exactly what’s wrong.
Rather than funding only well-developed ideas in annual planning cycles, we create ways to test concepts early and build our business on what succeeds.
MAKE INNOVATION EVERYONE’S JOB
Innovation isnt a special teams responsibility. Everyone needs the mindset that there’s always room for improvement, and that they play an active role in identifying solutions. When innovation is part of everyones daily work, it becomes sustainable.
This means regular forums where teams share customer insights and have clear processes for moving from hypothesis to experiment to implementation. It means bringing together product management, sales, and customer success to ensure new innovations don’t create support nightmares. Most experiments will failbut they’ll fail fast and cheap, not slow and expensive.
THE INNOVATION DISCIPLINE
Here’s what most companies get wrong: They think innovation is about creativity and inspiration. While those are important, real success is driven by discipline and systems.
Companies that succeed long-term create processes where good ideas surface, get tested quickly, and spread when they work. Any organization can do that if theyre willing to watch, question, and pilot solutions quickly.
David Roberts is CEO of Verra Mobility.
President Donald Trump said Sunday he will move to close Washington’s Kennedy Center performing arts center for two years starting in July for construction, his latest proposal to upturn the storied venue since returning to the White House.Trump’s announcement on social media follows a wave of cancellations by leading performers, musicians and groups since the president ousted the previous leadership and added his name to the building. Trump made no mention in his post of the recent cancellations.His proposal, announced days after the premiere of “Melania,” a documentary of the first lady was shown at the center, he said was subject to approval by the board of the Kennedy Center, which has been stocked with his hand-picked allies. Trump himself chairs the center’s board of trustees.“This important decision, based on input from many Highly Respected Experts, will take a tired, broken, and dilapidated Center, one that has been in bad condition, both financially and structurally for many years, and turn it into a World Class Bastion of Arts, Music, and Entertainment,” Trump wrote in his post.Neither Trump nor Kennedy Center President Ric Grenell, a Trump ally, have provided evidence to back up their claims about the building being in disrepair, and last October, Trump had pledged the center would remain open during renovations. In Sunday’s announcement, Trump said the center will close on July 4th, when he said the construction would begin.“Our goal has always been to not only save and permanently preserve the Center, but to make it the finest Arts Institution in the world,” Grenell said in a post, citing funds Congress approved for repairs.“This will be a brief closure,” Grenell said. “It desperately needs this renovation and temporarily closing the Center just makes sense it will enable us to better invest our resources, think bigger and make the historic renovations more comprehensive. It also means we will be finished faster.”The sudden decision to shutter and reconstruct the Kennedy Center is sparking blowback as Trump disrupts the popular venue, which began as a national cultural center but Congress renamed as a “living memorial” to President John F. Kennedy in 1964, in the aftermath of the slain president’s death. Opened in 1971, it is open year-round as a public showcase for the arts, including the National Symphony Orchestra.Since Trump returned to the White House, the Kennedy Center is one of many Washington landmarks that he has sought to overhaul in his second term. He demolished the East Wing of the White House and launched a massive $400 million ballroom project, is actively pursuing building a triumphal arch on the other side the Arlington Bridge from the the Lincoln Memorial, and has plans for Washington Dulles International Airport.Leading performing arts groups have pulled out of appearances at the Kennedy Center, most recently, composer Philip Glass, who announced his decision to withdraw his Symphony No. 15 “Lincoln” because he said the values of the center today are in “direct conflict” with the message of the piece.Last month, the Washington National Opera announced that it will move performances away from the Kennedy Center in another high-profile departure following Trump’s takeover of the U.S. capital’s leading performing arts venue.The head of artistic programming for the center abruptly left his post last week, less than two weeks after being named to the job.A spokesperson for the Kennedy Center could not immediately be reached and did not respond to an emailed request for comment.Late last year, as Trump announced his plan to rename the building erecting his name on the building’s main front ahead of that of Kennedy he drew sharp opposition from members of Congress, and some Kennedy family members.Kerry Kennedy, a niece of John F. Kennedy, said in a social post on X at the time that she will remove Trump’s name herself with a pickax when his term ends.Another family member, Maria Shriver, said at the time that it is “beyond comprehension that this sitting president has sought to rename this great memorial dedicated to President Kennedy,” her uncle. “It is beyond wild that he would think adding his name in front of President Kennedy’s name is acceptable. It is not.”Late Sunday evening, Shriver posted a new comment mimicking Trump’s own voice and style, and suggesting the closure of the venue was meant to deflect from the cancellations.She said that “entertainers are canceling left and right” and the president has determined that “since the name change no one wants to perform there any longer.”Trump has decided, she said, it’s best “to close this center down and rebuild a new center” that will bear his name. She asked, “right?”One lawmaker, Rep. Joyce Beatty, the Ohio Democrat and ex-officio trustee of the center’s board, sued in December, arguing that “only Congress has the authority to rename the Kennedy Center.”On Sunday, Beatty said that once again Trump “has acted with total disregard for Congress,” which allocates funds to the center.She questioned what comes next for the artists and the building itself. “Let’s be clear: remodeling the premises will not restore the Kennedy Center to what it was. A return to artistic independence will,” she said. “America’s artists are rejecting this attempted takeover, and the administration knows it.”
Associated Press writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.
Michelle L. Price and Lisa Mascaro, Associated Press
Bad Bunny won album of the year at the 2026 Grammy Awards for his critically-acclaimed “Debí Tirar Más Fotos,” closing out a surprising and history-making night. It is the first time a Spanish-language album has taken home the top prize.“Puerto Rico, believe me when I tell you that we are much bigger than 100 by 35,” he said in his acceptance speech in Spanish, referring to a Puerto Rican colloquialism about the island’s small size. “And there is nothing we can’t achieve. Thank God, thank you to the Academy, thank you to all the people who have believed in me throughout my career.“To all the people who worked on this album, thank you mami for giving birth to me in Puerto Rico, I love you,” he continued.Then he switched to English: “I want to dedicate this award to all the people who had to leave their homeland to follow their dreams.”Harry Styles presented the award the English singer previously took home the top prize in 2023 for “Harry’s House.” He beat Bad Bunny that year, who was nominated for “Un Verano Sin Ti” the first Spanish-language album to be up in the category.
Anti-ICE messages from the stage
Billie Eilish won song of the year for “Wildflower” and used the moment to add her voice to the chorus of musicians criticizing immigration authorities Sunday.“No one is illegal on stolen land,” she said while accepting the award for the song from her 2024 album “Hit Me Hard and Soft.” “(Expletive) ICE is all I want to say.”Immigration was a central theme of the night. The first time Bad Bunny was on stage after winning the award for música urbana album he used his speech to share an anti-ICE message, highlighting the humanity of all people.“Before I say thanks to God, I’m going to say ICE out,” he said, starting out his speech in English to huge applause. “We’re not savage, we’re not animals, we’re not aliens. We are humans and we are Americans.”Before that, Olivia Dean was named best new artist.“I never really imagined that I would be up here,” she said, receiving her first Grammy while wiping away tears. “I’m up here as a granddaughter of an immigrant. I wouldn’t be here I am a product of bravery, and I think that those people deserve to be celebrated.”Those statements all aired live on the CBS telecast. Earlier in the day, at the Premiere Ceremony where 86 Grammys are handed out, artists were equally as pointed about ICE and immigration enforcement.Shaboozey accepted the award for country duo/group performance with tears in his eyes. “I want to thank my mother, who as of today, has retired from her job of 30 years working as a registered nurse in a psych ward as an immigrant in this country. Thank you, mom.“Immigrants built this country, literally, actually. So, this for them,” he concluded. “Thank you for bring your culture, your music and your stories.”Kehlani, after winning her first Grammy, ended her acceptance speech with “Imma leave this and say, (expletive) ICE.”“I’m scared,” Gloria Estefan said of the current political moment backstage at the Grammys. “There are hundreds of children in detention centers. I don’t recognize my country in this moment right now.”
Kendrick Lamar, Lady Gaga, Jelly Roll and more win big
Kendrick Lamar and SZA won record of the year at an electric 2026 Grammy Awards Sunday night for “Luther.”Cher presented the award and mistakenly said it goes to “Luther Vandross” instead of Kendrick Lamar and SZA.One of the song’s producers, Sounwave, began the acceptance speech by saying, “Let’s give a shoutout to the late and great Luther Vandross.”Lamar also won the first televised award of the night, rap album for “GNX,” accepting the trophy from Queen Latifah and Doechii.“It’s an honor to be here,” he said in his acceptance speech. “Hip-hop is always going to be right here We’re gonna be having the culture with us.”The victory means Lamar broke Jay-Z’s record to become the rapper with the most career Grammys. Jay-Z has 25; after he took home rap album and record of the year, Lamar’s total is 27.Pop vocal album went to Lady Gaga for “Mayhem,” while pop solo performance went to Lola Young for “Messy,” whose speech playfully lived up to the song’s spirit.“I don’t know what to say,” she joked about “obviously” not having a speech prepared. “I’m very, very grateful for this.”The inaugural contemporary country album category went to Jelly Roll for “Beautifully Broken.”This year, the Grammys renamed country album to contemporary country album and added a traditional country album category, a distinction that exists in other genres. But the news arrived right after Beyoncé’s “Cowboy Carter” won best country album, inspiring backlash online.“I believe music had the power to change my life,” Jelly Roll said in his acceptance speech, which he spent the majority of thanking God.Pharrell Williams received the Dr. Dre Global Impact Award.“To everyone in this room who believes in the power of Black music,” he said, “thank you so much.”
A live concert experience
A powerful Grammy Awards in memoriam segment celebrated the legacies of the late D’Angelo and Roberta Flack at the 68th annual ceremony Sunday night.Ms. Lauryn Hill appeared on the Grammy stage for the first time since 1999, when she became the first hip-hop artist to win album of the year for her “The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill.”The D’Angelo tribute was first: A medley of several songs, among them “Brown Sugar” with Lucky Daye, “Lady” with Raphael Saadiq and Anthony Hamilton and “Devil’s Pie” with Leon Thomas.Then, Hill focused her attention on Roberta Flack: “First Time Ever I Saw Your Face” with Jon Batiste, “Where Is The Love” with John Legend and Chaka Khan, and a mesh of “Feel Like Makin’ Love” and “Killing Me Softly with His Song” with her Fugees bandmate Wyclef Jean.If there was one set that felt like an avant-garde artistic performance piece on Sunday night, it was Tyler, the Creator’s medley of “Thought I Was Dead,” “Like Him,” (in which he was joined by Regina King) and “Sugar On My Tongue.” It played out like theater: others would be wise to take note.All eight nominees in the best new artist category participated in a medley at the award show across multiple stages, the back halls of the arena and even the venue’s loading dock. It was an interesting and impressive mod-podge of different styles, from the British soul of Young and Dean to Addison Rae and Katseye’s hypnotic pop. The Marías kicked things off with their dreamy indie rock; sombr and Alex Warren offered their radio hits “12 to 12” and“Ordinary” respectively. Leon Thomas reminded the audience why he’s the only nominee also up for album of the year with his fully formed R&B.The hits arrived fast and furious in the show’s first hour. Rosé and Bruno Mars’ opened Grammys with an electric rendition of their multicultural pop smash, “APT.”; the Blackpink singer channeled a pop-punk Gwen Stefani in her tie and platinum blond hair. Sabrina Carpenter with her “Manchild” kiss-off. Justin Bieber slowed things down with “Yukon” from his comeback record “Swag.” Lady Gaga reimagined her hit “Abracadabra” as an electro-rock song.
First-time winners were abundant even before the show started
During the Premiere Ceremony, the Dalai Lama won his first Grammy for audio book, narration and storytelling recording, beating out Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. You read that correctly.“Golden” from “KPop Demon Hunters” won song written for visual media at the Premiere Ceremony, marking the first time a K-pop act has won a Grammy. Songwriters delivered their acceptance speech in both English and Korean, highlighting the song’s bilingual appeal.Music film went to “Music for John Williams,” which means director Steven Spielberg has officially won his first Grammy. That makes him an EGOT winner an artist with an Emmy, Grammy, Tony and Oscar.
Associated Press Writer Berenice Bautista contributed to this report.
For more coverage of this year’s Grammy Awards, visit: www.apnews.com/GrammyAwards
Maria Sherman, AP Music Writer
Short staffing and the transition from paper checks to digital refunds are among the biggest challenges facing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) this tax season.
Thats according to the National Taxpayer Advocates expansive Annual Report to Congress, the latest version of which was recently posted online. The annual report aims to help Congress strengthen taxpayer rights, reduce taxpayer burden, and improve IRS performance.
The Taxpayer Advocate Service, or TAS, is an independent office within the IRS that’s meant to look after the interests of taxpayers. Erin M. Collins, who submitted and signed off on the latest report, has served as the National Taxpayer Advocate since 2020. Here are some highlights of the report:
Transition away from paper checks could impact refunds for some
Specifically, the report notes that while the majority of refunds were issued electronically last year, taxpayers who do not provide direct deposit information may experience significant refund delays, as the IRS will generally hold refunds for up to six weeks while requesting banking information or determining whether an exception applies, with paper checks only issued afterward.
As a result, some taxpayers will be disproportionately affected by the agency’s phasing out of paper checks.
That includes taxpayers without bank accounts, or who are disabled, elderly, or underbanked, and other vulnerable taxpayers for whom paper checks have often been the only practical means of receiving refunds needed to cover basic living expenses.
Average refunds last year tallied $3,167, the report saysa significant amount for many households.
Filing your tax return online should result in a refund being issued within a few weeksbut, again, the report is warning that may not be the case for some.
Only 6% of taxpayers filed their returns last year on paper. And only 7% received their refund via paper check.
The IRS is significantly smaller this year
Staffing issues at the IRS could be an even bigger issue. The IRS last year had a relatively large workforce, due in part to an influx of funding from the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act.
Over the past year, however, the IRS has had its workforce reduced by 27%, according to Collins’s report.
That’s in addition to leadership turnover, and the implementation of extensive and complex tax law changes mandated by the [One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025], many of which apply retroactively and require significant IRS programming, guidance, changes to tax forms and instructions, and taxpayer education.
The number of customer service agents was also cut by 22%, meaning it will likely be more difficult to get help if youre trying to work out any issues with or get an update on your refund.
In all, the agency’s manpower stood at around 74,000 in December, down from 102,000 a year ago. That could mean a more turbulent experience for taxpayers trying to keep track of their refunds.
Even so, taxpayers expecting a refund can use the Wheres My Refund online tool to check their status 24 hours after filing electronically.
They can also try using the IRS2Go app or log in to their IRS Individual Online Account for updates.
