From the latest skyscraper in a Chinese megalopolis to a sixfoottall yurt in Inner Mongolia, researchers at the Technical University of Munich claim they have created a map of all buildings worldwide: 2.75 billion building models set in highresolution 3D with a level of precision never before recorded.
Made from years of satellite data analysis by machinelearning algorithms, the model reflects a sustained effort to capture the built world in three dimensions. The result now provides a crucial basis for climate research and for tracking progress toward global sustainable development goals, according to the scientists behind it.
Professor Xiaoxiang Zhu, who leads the project and is the chair of data science in Earth observation at TUM, says the real achievement is that the new map is a threedimensional picture of how much space people actually inhabit. 3D building information provides a much more accurate picture of urbanization and poverty than traditional 2D maps, she explains. With 3D models we see not only the footprint but also the volume of each building.
[Screenshot: FC]
At the heart of this work is the GlobalBuildingAtlas, an open dataset that describes individual buildings across the planet both as 2D outlines and as simple 3D objects. In total, it contains 2.75 billion building footprintspolygons tracing the edges of each structurecovering every building the satellites could detect in satellite imagery from 2019.
[Screenshot: courtesy of the author]
At first glance, there are some interesting takeaways from the map, like the distribution of building volume clusters around major metropolitan regionswith particularly dense concentrations in East Asia, Europe, and North America. Meanwhile, many parts of the Global South show vast numbers of buildings that are small and lowrise, especially in Africa, which has more buildings than Europe and North America, but far less total built area and volume.
[Screenshot: FC]
The ability to map building height and volume reveals disparities that conventional 2D maps tend to hide: A dense informal settlement and a carefully planned neighborhood of multistory buildings can look similar in a flat, areabased statistic. But if you have accurate 3D buildings, experts can understand that they offer radically different housing conditions and require different infrastructure. Their proposed metric of building volume per capita turns the GlobalBuildingAtlas into a lens for spotting where housing and infrastructure lag behind population and, therefore, where urban policy and investment should concentrate.
[Screenshot: FC]
How they made it
The scientists used machine learning algorithms to identify one billion more buildings than any previous global database, creating simplified 3D “shoebox” models for 97% of them. That’s 2.68 billion 3D buildings, compared to Google Open Buildings, which has 1.8 billion building outlines.
The team started with daily satellite images from the PlanetScope constellation, which photographs the Earth at roughly 9.8 feet per pixel. Then they stitched together about 800,000 cloud-free scenes from 2019 into a seamless global mosaic, and taught a neural network to recognize buildings by training it on known building outlines from OpenStreetMap and other sources.
To add height to these flat building outlines, the team used laser measurements (LiDAR) from airborne surveys in developed countries to train an AI that can estimate how tall a building is just by looking at a single satellite photosimilar to how a person can judge a skyscraper’s height from its appearance and shadow. This height-prediction model scans the entire global image and assigns a height value to every pixel, even calculating its own margin of error.
Instacart just became the first company to offer an end-to-end integrated shopping experience with OpenAIs ChatGPT. Its yet another signal that AI is about to upend the way we shopand, maybe, the way we cook.
The new partnership was announced by Instacart and OpenAI on December 8. To use the interface, ChatGPT users need to make an Instacart account and then surface Instacart within their chat thread using a prompt like, Instacart, help me shop for apple pie ingredients. From there, they can discuss recipes, ingredient swaps, and their preferred store with ChatGPT, which will help them order all of the items they need from Instacart without ever changing tabs or leaving the chat.
[Image: Instacart]
This partnership is a significant milestone in the race among tech companies to make AI an integral part of the shopping experience. Amazon, for example, now offers a suite of AI tools to help shoppers make decisions and point them toward future purchases.
According to Adobe Digital Insights 2025 report on holiday season shopping, the company saw the first material surge in AI-directed traffic (users following links recommended by chatbots like ChatGPT and Google Gemini) to U.S. retail sites in 2024. This year, it expects AI traffic to rise by 520%. In all, Adobe found that over a third of shoppers in the U.S. have used AI to help with online shoppingand that number is bound to keep growing.
Clearly, many shoppers are already turning to ChatGPT for advice on the best products to buy and where to get them. For OpenAI, then, it makes sense to bring the shopping itself directly onto its own platform. In all likelihood, this partnership with Instacart is only a trial run ahead of plenty more integrations to come.
In a press release, Nick Turley, head of ChatGPT, said that the new collaboration will allow users to go from meal planning to checkout in a single, seamless conversation. I decided to put Turley’s promise to the test by using the new interface the way I predict that its target audience might: recreating a TikTok-viral recipe (Ina Gartens brownie pudding) from start to finish.
Testing out ChatGPT’s recipe-generating chops
Making a trendy recipe with the new Instacart integration starts with actually getting ChatGPT to accurately reproduce its ingredients and instructionswhich, as it turns out, can be a challenge.
Based on my testing, ChatGPT is pretty good at regurgitating more general, nonspecific recipes from the open web. For example, a search for a popular, gooey chocolate chip cookie yields a standard recipe that ChatGPT describes as similar to The New York Times or Nestlé Toll House; while a search for green goddess salad yields a recipe that went viral in 2022 and has since resulted in dozens of publicly available articles, which ChatGPT is then able to pull from for its own summary.
Things get a bit trickier when youre looking for one specific recipe, thoughespecially if it’s protected by a paywall or other blocker. When I asked ChatGPT to find the recipe and instructions for The New York Times Lemon-Tumeric Crinkle Cookies, it confidently provided a slightly inaccurate ingredient list and instructions, and attributed the recipe to the wrong author. I asked the question again, this time including the real author in the prompt, only to be met with the same response with the disclaimer, I cant reproduce the copyrighted article verbatim, but these ingredients + steps accurately reflect the recipe (they didnt).
I moved on to attempting to recreate Ina Gartens brownie pudding, starting by asking ChatGPT to use popular TikTok videos to find the recipe. The resulting recipe was almost correct, but not quiteit substituted Gartens recommended framboise liquor for coffee. Next, I specifically requested that ChatGPT use the most-viewed TikTok video about the recipe in order to recreate it. The chatbot told me that it doesnt have access to TikToks live trending videos, so it couldnt pull exact instructions from the most-viewed clip, instead offering a TikTok-style version based on what it called popular adaptations. This version strayed even further from the original.
[Screenshot: courtesy of the author]
As a last-ditch effort, I asked ChatGPT to pull the brownie pudding recipe directly from Ina Gartens official website. ChatGPT then assured me that it was providing the exact recipe from her site (not an adaptation, not a TikTok version, but her real published recipe). This was, once again, not the real recipe.
[Screenshot: courtesy of the author]
For OpenAIs model, it seems, finding general recipes on the open web is simple, but accurately retrieving information from external apps, like TikTok, or paywalled websites, like The New York Times, is unpredictable at best.
Following this slightly maddening exchange, I decided to bake both Gartens official recipe and ChatGPTs bootleg TikTok-style version in order to decide which reigns supreme.
The battle of the brownie puddings
After my frustrating back-and-forth with ChatGPT, I was ready to throw in the towel and place my Instacart order as quickly as possible. But the process of actually using the integration proved to be a bit of a rollercoaster.
At first, everything was proceeding smoothly. I conducted several test runs using the activation word Instacart, and ChatGPT successfully added my requested ingredients to my cart directly through our chat. Mid-way through this experimentation, though, ChatGPT appeared to lose the plot, informing me, I dont have the ability to directly add items to Instacart or access your account.
[Screenshot: courtesy of the author]
After several troubleshooting questions, during which ChatGPT informed me that the Instacart connector wasnt active, I asked how to reactivate it. ChatGPT then said that I needed to be in a ChatGPT Plus or Pro plan session with Plugins enabled. In an email to Fast Company, though, an Instacart spokesperson clarified that the integration is available to all accounts, including free ones.
[Screenshot: courtesy of the author]
Its unclear to me exactly what went wrong, but when I tried again several hours later in a new chat, the connection was up and working again. Ordering the ingredients for the Tik-Tok style recipe was quick and straightforward, and everything arrived from my local Target within two hours (except the unsalted butter, which was substituted for salted due to a store shortage).
The recipes themselves were a similar concept with notably different executions. The TikTok style version, for example, called for vanilla extract instead of Gartens seeds from one vanilla bean; likely a result of multiple TikTokers making the swap themselves at home and suggesting it to viewers (vanilla beans in this economy?). Gartens original version also required cocoa powder alone for the chocolate component, whereas ChatGPTs interpretation called for solid chocolate. And, in terms of the baking process, Gartens pudding needed to be suspended in a water bath and baked for an hour, while ChatGPT omitted the water step entirely and suggested just 30 minutes in the oven.
Given its presumably crowd-sourced origins, the TikTok-style recipe was unsurprisingly cheaper, easier to make, and quicker. It had an extremely dark, almost bitter chocolate taste compared to the original recipe, which was mellower and sweeter. Both have their place, in my opinionthough Gartens was ever so slightly tastier.
Right now, the Instacart integration feels built for people who are already regular users of both ChatGPT and Instcart. For that niche, it might save time when brainstorming for meal prep and troubleshooting general recipes. But for everyone else, Im not sold on the utility of this tool. If you have a specific recipe in mind, its probably easier (and less headache-inducing) to just make it the old-fashioned way.
[Photo: courtesy of the author]
Most people care about fairness at work and want to support colleagues who face marginalizationfor example, people of color, women, and people with disabilities. Our research has found that 76% of employees want to be allies to co-workers who face additional challenges, and 84% value equity. Thats in line with a 2025 national survey that found 88% of employees supported employers offering training on how to be more inclusive.
So why doesnt that support always turn into action?
Our new study in the Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health points to one reason: Some people may freeze with worry because they feel like a fake. Specifically, they feel like they dont have the skills to effectively support their marginalized co-workers, even though they want to. Those feelings may block action, which makes people feel even more fraudulentcreating a loop thats hard to break.
Together, weMeg Warren, Michael T. Warren, and John LaVellefound that 1 in 5 people who want to support marginalized groups experience the impostor phenomenon even when they have the skills to be effective allies.
The impostor phenomenon, formerly called the impostor syndrome, is the feeling that youre not good enougheven when theres objective evidence that you are. Researchers have documented it across many workplace and professional settings, including in health care, technology, entrepreneurship, the C-suite, and academia.
Importantly, these feelings are linked to significantly higher anxiety and feelings of depression among people who want to be allies. We found that men, leaders, younger employees, and people of color were more likely to experience the impostor phenomenon in the context of allyship.
What the impostor phenomenon looks like for allies
Consider James, a senior project manager. For the past few years, his company has expected all managers to undergo diversity, equity and inclusion training and to support the companys Black Employee Network. Earlier this year, however, the company publicly withdrew its commitment to DEI and removed all mentions of it from its website.
When his team asked for his thoughts, James felt lost. The facts he learned during the Black Employee Network meetings were unsettling and undeniable. Before, he regularly cited these during various meetings with his colleagues and senior leaders. Now, he felt pressured to act as if none of this mattered. He felt frustrated, at a loss for words, and a complete fakelike he didnt know how to support his colleagues anymore.
While James is a composite character drawn from many stories weve heard over the course of our research, his experience captures the bind that many would-be allies face.
When allies feel this way, they often compare themselves to an imagined perfect ally, thinking that if they cant be outrageously heroic, they must be failures. They then deal with feelings of inadequacy by procrastinating or overpreparing before stepping up for othersto the point where they miss crucial opportunities where they could have made a difference.
People tend to feel like an impostor when they encounter a challenge that seems bigger than their ability to cope with it. So its not surprising that a lot of people feel this way about workplace equity. Inequity and bias play out in complex ways in organizations: The rules change rapidly, and people can receive mixed messages about what behaviors are appropriate, valued and rewarded. This can make allyship feel overwhelmingly challenging, even for those who are otherwise skilled.
Work culture also matters. In toxic organizational cultures or hypercompetitive environments, people feel pressure to hide their mistakes, they worry about colleagues sabotaging their efforts, and they see humility as a weakness. In such placesand especially when the would-be allys role is highly visible and entails heavy responsibilitypeople are vulnerable to impostor feelings.
Past criticism can add fuel, too. If youve been admonished for standing up for a colleague or have seen others be attackedincluding by those who wish to maintain an unjust status quoyou might further feel pressure to only act in ways that are immune to criticism. Thats an impossible standard.
Consequences of feeling like an impostor: Feeling worse, doing worse
Leaders in particular are vulnerable to feeling like impostors on allyship. Many havent been properly trained on how to listen to and support co-workers who might be facing discrimination and are quietly suffering, yet are held responsible for solving complex issues around fairness that long predated them.
And when stuck in this uncomfortable space, people who feel like impostors are likely to become defensive and feel pressured to be a hero. To prove themselves, they may overcompensate in ways that backfirefor example, by loudly claiming support for disadvantaged workers without following up with useful action, or by swooping in to fix issues without respecting the preferences of the people involved.
Unfortunately, this not only affects their ability to be a supportive colleague, but it also likely harms their mental health. Indeed, the impostor phenomenon has been found to be linked to heightened anxiety and feelings of depression, both in our study and beyond.
So you might wonder: What if I opt out of all of this by not thinking about inequity at all? Our research suggests that this is a bad idea. People who are disengaged from issues of inequity, and who dont invest in learning and growing as allies, experience lower self-confidence at work and have lower job satisfaction. Checking out of allyship could be bad for your professional well-being.
The good news is you dont have to be stuck feeling this way. You can take low-risk, bite-sized actions that can pull you out of feeling fake and boost your confidence, all while improving your own professional success and mental health.
Research points to three simple ways forward. First, recognize and loudly celebrate the strengths of marginalized colleages, which creates an uplifting work culture. Second, take concrete steps to build trustfor example, by giving proper credit to a disadvantaged colleague if their merit is wrongfully questioned. And finally, overcome your cynicismwhich research shows invariably suppresses constructive actionand instead adamantly choose hope, even when its hard.
Meg Warren is an associate professor of management at Western Washington University.
John M. LaVelle is an adjunct professor of public policy at the University of Minnesota.
Michael T. Warren is an assistant professor of psychology at Western Washington University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Revolutionary France may seem like a strange place to find a life hack, but in the 1790s, the French satirist Nicolas Chamfort offered some stark advice to cope with our daily travails.
One should swallow a toad every morning, so as not to find anything disgusting for the rest of the day, he wrote. In other words, start with the thing you dread most, and the following obligations will feel far more pleasant.
Chamforts name has largely been forgotten by the English-speaking world, but his unsettling phrase has endured as a popular productivity mantra: Eat the frog. The idea has even inspired a best-selling self-help book from the 2000s. But does it actually work?
It is only within the past few years that scientists have investigated the strategy, and they have found that “eating the frog” can be surprisingly powerful, boosting our satisfaction, motivation, and performance in the workplace, while helping us to begin our evenings feeling more refreshed. We just need to gird our stomachs and get on with it.
Biased expectations
You may be skeptical. The very idea of eating the frog runs against the widespread intuition that we should ease ourselves into a job with the simplest possible task. Most of us think that we can build up confidence as we progress, but it turns out to be completely wrong. Rachel Habbert and Juliana Schroeder at the University of California, Berkeley, first exposed this bias in 2020.
In a series of experiments, the researchers first asked participants to consider different word games, and to say which order they would like to tackle themwith the vast majority of people opting to work their way up to the hardest challenges. They seemed to believe that this would allow their confidence to grow.
To test whether those preferences were justified, Schroeder and Habbert then asked the participants to perform the tasks in order of either ascending or descending difficulty. Contrary to their predictions, the participants who started with the most demanding task ended up feeling considerably more confident than those who worked the other way. Eating the frog at the beginning of the task, it seemed, had allowed them to finish on a high.
The “easy addendum effect”
The results chime with a later finding by Edward Lai, an assistant professor of marketing at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. He was inspired, in part, by the peak-end rule. Put simply, this is the principle that our memories of an experience are biased by its most intense moments, and by the way it endswhile neglecting its overall duration.
In the original experiments describing this phenomenon, the late Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize-winning psychologist at Princeton University, asked participants to plunge one of their hands into unpleasantly cold14°C (57°F)water for 60 seconds. After they had dried off, they then plunged the other hand into water of the same temperature for the same length of time, followed by a further 30 seconds at 15°C (59°F)before being asked which trial they would like to repeat. The logical answer would seem to be the first, but most went for the second, since it ended on a more pleasant note.
Lai and his colleagues wanted to test how this might apply to our work.
They tasked some participants with common administrative jobs, such as filing books alphabetically or answering customer inquiries. Some of the participants were given a single block of tasks, while others were asked to complete the same number of jobs while also taking on a second block of easier tasks. (The people answering customer queries were given a few extra emails asking for straightforward clarifications, for example.)
Despite doing more work overall, the people who had been given the additional problems felt that they had made less overall effort than those who had simply tackled the core task, and they were more satisfied as a result. They also showed greater persistence.
They were less likely to want to take a break, and more likely to opt in to additional tasks, and actually complete them, Lai says.
To double-check that the sequence mattered, they also tried placing the simpler tasks at the beginning, or at the middle of the sequence. But the only way that people felt happier and more satisfied was when we put the easy ones at the end, he saysleading the researchers to call it the “easy addendum effect.”
We can only conclude so much from laboratory experiments, but the finding has since been replicated in real-life companies.
In one weeklong study, Chen Zhang, an associate professor in leadership and management organization at Tsinghua University in Beijing, and his colleagues encouraged 83 knowledge workers at an IT company to change their schedules so that they focused on the days biggest challenges during the morning.
As Schroeders and Lais findings would have predicted, they ended the day more positively, with less fatigue as they left work. A second survey at an e-commerce company found that this approach could also increase productivity. The participants supervisors reported that they were more likely to go above and beyond their everyday responsibilities after completing their most daunting tasks first, for example.
Reflection and planning
Putting all this into practice will take a little forethought. In Zhangs study, the participants spent the first moments of each morning rating the difficulty of each task before deciding on their schedule. In some cases, there will only be one logical order to do things. Whenever we have a bit of flexibility, however, we can choose to tackle the biggest challenges as early as possible. I frequently apply this strategy myself. Ive just started writing a new book, for instance, and some of the more technical sections will require particularly heavy lifting. Knowing about the easy addendum effect, I focus on these more demanding tasks before lunch and spend the afternoon working on the connective tissue and the personal anecdotes, which are often far more pleasurable to write, before spending the final hour revising what I have written. I arrange work calls and meetings in a similar manner, placing those with the potential for conflict in the first half of the day, and friendly catch-ups toward the evening.
Simply categorizing your emails can make a real difference, Lai says. Clearly, some will need to be answered urgently, but once you have prioritized those that need immediate attention, you can eat the frogs first and leave the quickest responses until last.
Lai is sure this simple habit has enhanced his own happiness. If I do that, I feel like it hasnt been such a bad day when I walk out of the office, he says.
Nicolas Chamfort, we can guess, would heartily approve.
Imagine the scene: Your plane just landed late. Youve barely got enough time to catch your connection, but first youve got to convince the other passengers to let you off before them.
Good luck.
Recently, though, a Delta Air Lines flight attendant flipped the script, according to Kathrin Peters. Peters, co-founder of consulting firm Withiii Leadership, says a recent flight taught her one of the best real-life lessons shes ever seen in generating instant connectivity.
After confirming the planes late arrival, the flight attendant asked passengers to raise their hand if they were ending their journey in Salt Lake City, the flights destination. After most of the hands in the cabin went up, he continued.
Now, everyone who has their hands up: Imagine the anxiety youd feel if you had to catch another flight tonight and werent sure youd make it. Put your hands down. And now, those connecting to San Francisco, Palm Springs, and Denver, raise yours!
Everyone, look around, the flight attendant requested. These are the people wholl be sprinting off the plane tonight as soon as we land. Look at them, and imagine this was you.
The flight attendant then implored everyone in the cabin who didnt have a connecting flight to stay seated and give the other passengers space to get out as quickly as possible.
If we all play our part, they can make it, the flight attendant said. Thank you so much for your consideration and help. Every one of those guys appreciates you for it.
Peters said the energy in the cabin completely shifted.
Everyone suddenly shared the same mission, Peters wrote in a LinkedIn post. We all knew who the people were that needed to hustle now. And we were all in it with them, feeling their adrenaline in our veins.
When the plane landed, says Peters, only connecting passengers stood up. Others helped them with their bags. Afterward, the remaining passengers patiently got up, grabbed their things, and exited calmly.
The whole plane was rooting for them, Peters said.
What this flight attendant did was brilliant, namely, motivating others to resist the urge to act in their own self-interest, and help instead. Its a case study in emotional intelligence, which includes the ability to empathize with others and build connection.
Why did the flight attendants technique work so well? And how can you use this lesson to help you become a better leader? To answer those questions, lets take a closer look at the quality of empathy. (Sign up here for my free email course on emotional intelligence.)
The three types of empathy
Empathy is the ability to understand and share the thoughts and feelings of others. But according to psychologists Daniel Goleman and Paul Ekman, there are actually three types of empathy:
Cognitive empathy: the ability to understand another persons thoughts and feelings
Emotional empathy: the ability to actually share or relate to those feelings
Compassionate empathy (or empathic concern): the ability to take action in an attempt to demonstrate empathy
Interestingly, while we all want others to show empathy to us, we often fail to show it to others.
There are several reasons for this, but it basically boils down to the fact that showing empathy is hard. The first two types, cognitive and emotional, take mental energy. And the third type, compassionate empathy, takes physical energy, too.
But the flight attendant was able to inspire passengers to exercise all three types of empathy, by gently guiding everyone through the process, each one building upon the other.
After identifying who was in a position to help, he helped them exercise cognitive empathy by prompting them to imagine the anxiety theyd feel if they were the ones trying to catch another flight. Then, he helped them build connection with emotional empathy, by pointing out who on the plane was in that exact situation and asking them to imagine they were the ones in it.
Finally, he motivated them to take action, by encouraging positive peer pressure and inspiring the group to work together. This was no longer a disconnected group of people, they were a team with a single mission: Get those passengers to their connecting flights.
How can you use these lessons in your workplace?
If youre a leader, look for ways to help your people exercise all three types of empathy. Identify whos in a position to help, and who needs help. Then, use questions and phrases similar to that flight attendants.
For example:
How would you feel if . . .?
Imagine this were you . . .
How can you help?
If we all play our part . . .
Thank you for your help.
Also, remember to gently guide everyone through the process, step-by-step. Because empathy takes time and effort, and thats a challenging journey to ask of others.
But if you use principles of emotional intelligence like that flight attendant, youll inspire people not just to feel empathy, but to act on it.
Like this column? Sign up to subscribe to email alerts and you’ll never miss a post.
Justin Bariso
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister publication, Inc.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
If youre order number 67 at In-N-Out, dont expect to hear your number called.
The fast food chain has reportedly removed the number from its system, after viral videos show teens responding with wild celebrations after waiting around just to hear the number called. Imagine explaining this to someone in the future, one commenter wrote.
Employees confirmed the number hasn’t been used for orders for about a month, according to a report from People magazine. After order number 66, the next order jumps straight to number 68. The chain has also removed the number 69, for good measure.
The two digits, pronounced six, seven, not sixty-seven, have also been wreaking havoc in classrooms over the past couple months. Vice President JD Vance even took to social media and called for the numbers to be banned.
He wrote on X, Yesterday at church the Bible readings started on page 66-67 of the missal, and my 5-year-old went absolutely nuts repeating six seven like 10 times. He continued, I think we need to make this narrow exception to the First Amendment and ban these numbers forever.
Others have adopted an “if you cant beat em, join em” approach. In November, both Wendys and Pizza Hut added a 67-cent Frosty deal and 67-cent wings” to their respective menus, paying homage to the meme in the hope of enticing teens. Domino’s also launched its own promo deal, offering customers one large pizza with one topping for $6.70.
The trend has, somewhat unbelievably, reached the house floor. Utah Republican U.S. Rep. Blake Moore, while reporting the ayes and nos for a vote on a joint resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives last month, joked the results were about 6-7 while doing the juggling hand gesture.
“6-7” officially cemented its status as the choice for Dictionary.com‘s word of the year. “Perhaps the most defining feature of 67 is that its impossible to define, wrote Dictionary.com. Its meaningless, ubiquitous, and nonsensical.”
For those still lost, the numbers can be traced back to a song called Doot Doot, released by hip-hop artist Skrilla in late 2024, in which he raps, 6-7, I just bipped right on the highway (bip, bip). From there, a video of a boy yelling 6-7 into the camera at a basketball game went viral.
Since then, its taken on a life of its own.
Organizations often describe change as a technical exercise: Adjust a workflow, update a reporting line, reorganize a process or two. On paper, it all looks relatively contained. But the lived experience of change rarely aligns with the tidy logic of a project plan.
Recently, I worked with a team in the midst of what leadership kept referring to as a small restructuring. And technically, it was. The core work wasnt shifting, no ones job was threatened, and the strategy made sense.
Yet the emotional climate thickened almost immediately. One manager became more reserved than usual, answering questions with careful brevity. Another grew unusually fixated on minor details. A third found herself more irritable, though she couldnt articulate why. Nothing dramaticjust a low hum of unease moving through a group of otherwise steady professionals.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/cupofambition.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/cupofambition-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to A Cup of Ambition\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"A biweekly newsletter for high-achieving moms who value having a meaningful career \u003Cem\u003Eand\u003C\/em\u003E being an involved parent, by Jessica Wilen. To learn more visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/acupofambition.substack.com\/\u0022\u003Eacupofambition.substack.com\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/acupofambition.substack.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91454061,"imageMobileId":91454062,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
What struck me was how quickly this supposedly minor adjustment stirred up deeper questions for people. Thats the part of change we tend not to acknowledge. Even modest shifts can unsettle the psychological architecture we rely on to feel competent, grounded, and connected. The disruption isnt about the logistics of the change; its about the quiet, internal recalibration that follows.
The Psychology Beneath Transition
In both coaching and clinical work, clients often describe this experience in vague terms: I dont hate the change. Something just feels . . . off. That feeling isnt superficial. Its a signal that the change is brushing against something importantidentity, capability, belonging, autonomy, the sense of who we are in relation to the work and the people around us.
Most reactions to change are not reactions to the actual change. They are reactions to what the change is interpreted to mean.
A new workflow can raise doubts about whether ones skills remain relevant. A shift in reporting lines can evoke questions about trust or status. A more efficient structure may unexpectedly trigger fears of being left behind. Even when the change is welcome or long overdue, it can still destabilize the sense of continuity that makes daily work feel predictable.
When these emotions arent acknowledged, they tend to surface indirectlyas tension, withdrawal, hypervigilance, or that familiar sense that the team is slightly out of sync without being sure why.
A Leaders Turning Point
I saw this play out with a director who couldnt quite understand why her team seemed anxious. Were not changing their jobs, she said. Why is this causing so much stress?
She was looking at the content of the change rather than its psychological implications. So I asked her, If you were sitting in their chair what might this change symbolize?
She thought for a long moment. Probably that Im losing control, she said quietly. Or that leadership thinks our judgment isnt strong enough.
Once she recognized that meaning-makingnot mechanicswas driving the reaction, she changed her approach. Instead of doubling down on explanations of the strategy, she met individually with team members to ask how the transition was landing for them. These werent troubleshooting conversations; they were opportunities for people to articulate the emotional subtext of the change.
Over the next two weeks, the atmosphere settled. People began to reengage. The same plan, once met with tension, now felt workable. The difference wasnt procedural. It was psychological.
What Effective Leaders Actually Do
Leaders often assume that smooth change management depends on clear plans and well-communicated timelines. Those matter, of course, but theyre not what ultimately determines whether people adapt. The leaders who navigate transition well understand that the emotional environment carries more weight than any formal framework.
1. They acknowledge the wobble
Effective leaders dont pretend everyone is fine, nor do they treat every raised eyebrow as a crisis. They simply name whats happening in a way that feels matter-of-fact and compassionate: This kind of shift can throw people a bit. If youre feeling unsettled, youre not alone.
The acknowledgment isnt performative; its grounding. It signals that disorientation is expectednot a personal failing or a sign that someone is resistant. When the leader names the wobble, the team doesnt have to expend additional energy hiding it.
2. They offer predictable touchpoints
In times of transition, people instinctively look for something steady to hold onto. Leaders who understand this create simple, reliable anchors: a weekly check-in that doesnt get rescheduled, updates that arrive when theyre promised, a shared understanding of what will happen nexteven if what happens next is simply another conversation.
Predictability doesn’t remove uncertainty, but it gives people a rhythm they can orient themselves around. It restores a sense of temporalityI know where we are, and I know when Ill hear something againwhich has a surprising regulating effect on the nervous system.
3. They reinforce continuity
One of the most destabilizing parts of change is the fear that everything is up for grabs. Leaders who navigate change well remind people of what isnt shifting: the teams shared values, their collective purpose, the norms that shape how they work together, the relationships that predate the change.
This isnt about offering false reassurance; its about locating the throughline. People need to know what they can still rely on so they can make sense of what is genuinely new. Continuity is the psychological counterweight to upheaval.
4. They return a sense of agency
Change often creates a feeling of being acted upon, which is why even small choices can make a disproportionate difference. Leaders who understand this invite their team to help in decision-making in thoughtful, bounded ways: How should we sequence this work? What would make the new process feel more workable? Which aspects should wetest first?
Its not about democratizing every call; its about restoring a sense of authorship. When people have a hand in shaping even a small part of the transition, the experience shifts from something happening to me to something Im participating in.
5. They make room for emotion without absorbing it
Every change process brings emotion along for the ridefrustration, anticipation, grief, relief, confusion. Strong leaders dont pathologize those reactions, nor do they try to rescue people from them. They stay steady enough to listen without absorbing the emotional charge, and curious enough to understand what the emotion is pointing to.
When they respond, they dont personalize the feelings or interpret them as pushback. They treat emotional reactions as datainformation about needs, fears, assumptions, or blind spots in the transition. That stance alone often lowers the temperature.
Final Thought
Change will always involve more than new workflows or org charts. It touches peoples sense of competence, identity, and place in the systemand thats where the real work of leadership happens. When managers pay attention to the emotional experience of changenot just the operational rolloutteams stay steadier and transitions land more cleanly. The leaders who succeed arent the ones with the perfect plan; theyre the ones who help people find their footing as the ground shifts.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/cupofambition.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/11\/cupofambition-mobile.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cstrong\u003ESubscribe to A Cup of Ambition\u003C\/strong\u003E","dek":"A biweekly newsletter for high-achieving moms who value having a meaningful career \u003Cem\u003Eand\u003C\/em\u003E being an involved parent, by Jessica Wilen. To learn more visit \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/acupofambition.substack.com\/\u0022\u003Eacupofambition.substack.com\u003C\/a\u003E.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"SIGN UP","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/acupofambition.substack.com\/","theme":{"bg":"#f5f5f5","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91454061,"imageMobileId":91454062,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Electronic gifts are very popular, and in recent years, retailers have been offering significant discounts on smartphones, e-readers, and other electronics labeled as pre-owned. Research I have co-led finds that these pre-owned options are becoming increasingly viable, thanks in part to laws and policies that encourage recycling and reuse of devices that might previously have been thrown away.
Amazon, Walmart, and Best Buy have dedicated pages on their websites for pre-owned devices. Manufacturers like Apple and Dell, as well as mobile service providers like AT&T and Verizon, offer their own options for customers to buy used items. Their sales rely on the availability of a large volume of used products, which are supplied by the emergence of an entire line of businesses that process used, discarded, or returned electronics.
Those developments are some of the results of widespread innovations across the electronics industry that supply chain researcher Suresh Muthulingam and I have linked to Californias Electronic Waste Recycling Act, passed in 2003.
Recycling innovation
Originally intended to reduce the amount of electronic waste flowing into the states landfills, Californias law did far more, unleashing a wave of innovation, our analysis found.
We analyzed the patent-filing activity of hundreds of electronics firms over a 17-year time span from 1996 to 2012. We found that the passage of Californias law not only prompted electronics manufacturers to engage in sustainability-focused innovation, but it also sparked a surge in general innovation around products, processes, and techniques.
Faced with new regulations, electronics manufacturers and suppliers didnt just make small adjustments, such as tweaking their packaging to ensure compliance. They fundamentally rethought their design and manufacturing processes to create products that use recycled materials and that are easily recyclable themselves.
For example, Samsungs Galaxy S25 smartphone is a new product that, when released in May 2025, was made of eight different recycled materials, including aluminum, neodymium, steel, plastics, and fiber.
Combined with advanced recycling technologies and processes, these materials can be recovered and reused several times in new devices and products. For example, Apple invented the Daisy Robot, which disassembles old iPhones in a matter of seconds and recovers a variety of precious metals, including copper and gold. These materials, which would otherwise have to be mined from rock, are reused in Apples manufacturing process for new iPhones and iPads.
How do consumers benefit?
In the past two decades, 25 U.S. states and Washington D.C. have passed laws requiring electronics recycling and refurbishing, the process of restoring a pre-owned electronic device so that it can function like new.
The establishment of industry guidelines and standards also means that all pre-owned devices are thoroughly tested for functionality and cosmetic appearance before resale.
Companies deeper engagement with innovation appears to have created organizational momentum that carried over into other areas of product development. For example, in our study, we found that the passage of Californias law directly resulted in a flurry of patents related to semiconductor materials, data storage, and battery technology, among others. These scientific advances have made devices more durable, repairable, and recyclable.
For the average consumer, the recycling laws and the resulting industry responses mean used electronics are available with similar reliability, warranties, and return policies as new devicesand at prices as much as 50% lower.
Suvrat Dhanorkar is an associate professor of operations management at Georgia Institute of Technology.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
AI coaches are everywhere. Theyre training marathoners and coaching leaders, and even billionaires Ray Dalio created an AI clone to serve as a digital mentor. In the past few months, searches for AI coaching have gone through the roof.
And its easy to see why. AI coaches are available 24/7, cost less than a gym membership, and can recall every word youve ever said. Research even shows they can match human coaches in helping people reach their goals. Ironically, people often tell AI things theyd never tell another person. Studies show chatbots reduce our fear of judgment, making them surprisingly effective at uncovering whats really going on.
And with 94% of employees saying theyd stay longer at a company that invests in their growth, AI coaching seems like the perfect solution, at least on paper. Im a coach and I use AI.
But after a decade of coaching more than 4,000 people, heres what Ive learned: AI moves the needle 90%, sure. But for the life-changing 10%, you still need a human.
Why AI coaching falls short
Last month, a client told me she wanted to readjust her focus. If shed asked an AI coach, she wouldve gotten a list of productivity hacks. But when I heard her say it, I noticed something felt off.
Did you notice how your energy dropped when you said that? I asked. That question opened the real issue. She wasnt struggling with priorities; she was afraid of leaving her comfort zone. Changing her focus was a protective strategy that wouldve kept her stuck.
Thats the 10% AI cant identify.
Science backs this up. Our brains sync through mirror neurons, a process called emotional contagion. Its how a coach can sense when your energy dips, even before you speak.
Humans also co-regulate each others stress responses, a process thats essential for change. Thats why, in psychotherapy, the relationship itself predicts outcomes as much as any treatment method. The same holds true for coaching.
Finally, clients often tell me they chose to work with me because of my story. Im the child of immigrants who became a Princeton-trained engineer before walking away from corporate life. Im also an introvert whod rather watch Netflix than network. That shared humanityseeing someone whos been where they arebuilds trust and makes them realize: If she can do it, maybe I can too.
The smarter way forward: 3 ways to use hybrid coaching
Still, Im not saying AI coaching doesnt work, because it does. But the smartest coaches and clients wont choose between humans and AI. Theyll use both.
Heres how to combine them for the best results:
1. Be consistent
Use an AI tool like ChatGPT to stay accountable every day. Prompts like Based on my reflections this week, what patterns or habits keep showing up? or Highlight one recurring theme in my journaling that might be holding me back help you track growth between sessions.
2. Dig deeper
AI can help you surface patterns faster. One of my clients uses AI to journal every morning. By the time she shows up to our call, she has already identified her blocks, so we can focus on getting results faster. Try prompts like: How would an executive or business coach advise me on this?
3. Define actions
After each session, use an AI transcription tool like Otter.ai to turn coaching insights into concrete steps. Use prompts like: Based on this call, what actions do I need to take in the next week/month? and Turn this call into a simple weekly action plan. Thats how AI helps you move fasterwhile your human coach makes sure you move in the right direction.
Happy Friday is ranked as one of the worst ways to begin an email and it is also one of the worst ways to end a piece of correspondence.
While Happy Friday may seem like a friendly send-off to colleagues as they approach the weekend, it can easily offend for many reasons.
Here are three excellent reasons never to use this expression.
#1: IT CAN BE ANNOYING
This expression may be used by people who are trying to lift the spirits of a colleague or make the recipient feel relieved that the workweek is coming to an end.
But your colleague may be involved in working hard to complete an assignment, or be involved in a project that needs to get done. If so, your Happy Friday will be irritating. His or her reaction might be to feel this writer knows little about the pressures of work or completing assignments.
According to a study a full 69% of employees say their mental health has worsened over the past year, so theres a good chance your colleague is not having a happy Friday.
#2 IT CAN BE INSENSITIVE
Beginning or ending your email with Happy Friday presumes that everyone is having a great day. But how do you know?
I get emails from people I dont even know wishing me a Happy Friday. I was in the hospital when a few of these came, and I was not having a happy time. It is presumptuous to wish someone a happy day when she could be sick, tired, or overworked.
In such cases, the words Happy Friday will only deepen the recipients misery. According to a study by the American Psychological Association, half of adults in the United States reported feelings of emotional disconnection, isolation from others (54%), left out (50%), or lacking companionship (50%).
So wishing someone Happy Friday may elicit a deeper sense of loneliness, with the recipient feeling bad to be left out of the happiness circle.
#3 IT IS A CLICHÉ
If you are still tempted to use this expression, dont succumb to that temptation because it is a cliché that gives rise to other clichés.
In some of the emails I get Happy Friday is followed by wishing you a lovely weekend and hoping you had a great week, and hoping you are well.
Happy Friday also gives rise to Happy Monday, Happy Tuesday, or Happy [any day of the week, or any season].
I am much more likely to read and respond to emails that dont begin or end with this awful expression. Give it up!
Instead, you might begin your correspondence by mentioning your last communication with that person. For example say thank you for following up with me or I loved your thoughts about . . . . And conclude with action, such as Ill look forward to hearing from you regarding next steps. In short, use your opening and closing to frame the subject matter of the correspondence.
