 |
|
|
|||||
Every workplace seems to have one. A manager who goes silent for days, then suddenly reappears in the team chat the moment senior leadership checks in. Theyll swoop in to take credit for the work they hadnt touched, and say, “Oh yes, weve been addressing that.” This type of boss shows up when theres an audience, then vanishes as soon as the higher-ups leave. Ive started calling them the performative manager, because thats exactly what they are. The rise of the performative manager To performative managers, actually leading isnt really the point. All they care about is looking like they’re leading. Performative managers care more about optics than outcomes, and their favorite project is themselves. It sounds like something out of a bad office comedy, but its a reality thats become easier to spot as more work happens online. A Resume Genius Report found that 62% of Gen Z employees face high performance expectations but little support, and more than half rarely get feedback from their managers. That’s not a small problem. Gallup research shows that managers shape roughly 70% of how engaged a team feels, which means one bad boss can drag an entire department down. Think your boss might be a performative manager? Here are five signs to watch for: 1. They promise support, then ghost you the second you need it If your boss is great at saying “Im here for you” but never proves it, you might be dealing with a performative manager. They love looking supportive, but rarely follow through. One of my friends, lets call her Sarah, learned this the hard way. During her first one-on-one at a banking firm, her manager said all the right things, such as “If theres a problem, well work through it together.” It sounded reassuring at the time. But when client requests started piling up and Sarah was drowning in email, that same manager was nowhere to be found. Sarah eventually figured things out on her own and sought help from her coworkers instead. What to do: When your manager disappears, get scrappy. Ask teammates for insight, look for past examples, or test a solution yourself. The more resourceful you become, the less youll need to wait around for someone elses “guidance.” 2. They only come to you during performance review season If your boss suddenly remembers you exist right before review season, chances are theyre preparing for their evaluation, not yours. Youll recognize the signs: more one-on-ones, warmer Slack messages, and maybe even a surprise “training session” that conveniently proves how engaged theyve been all along. What to do: Use that sudden burst of attention to your advantage. Bring up projects youve led, the impact youve made, and what kind of support would help you grow next. Document your achievements (and keep them visible) so theres a clear record of your work. If your success makes them uneasy, dont shrink back. Instead, play it smart: share wins in ways that highlight the whole teams progress, for example, mentioning how your idea helped everyone hit a deadline or made a process easier. 3. They repeat your solution verbatim in meetings You share an idea with your manager, and its crickets. Later on, your manager repeats the idea word for word in a meeting, and suddenly its “brilliant.” Its not that they dont hear you. They just save your insight for when it benefits them most. What to do: As tempting as it might be, resist the urge to confront them mid-meeting. Instead, start putting your ideas in writing where you have a clear trail in emails, shared docs, or Slack channels. If your idea suddenly reappears in a meeting, jump in with calm confidence: “Yes, thats exactly what I was exploring earlier, and heres how we could take it further.” Its respectful, direct, and makes it clear that the idea started with you. You might also want to consider looping in higher-ups and collaborators so that it becomes more difficult for anyone else to take credit for your contribution. If you can, build relationships with other managers or team leads who notice your work. Good leaders can spot performative ones, and having someone credible to back you up helps protect your reputation. 4. They never admit they’re wrong My former colleague Dan used to lose his mind over his previous manager. “Hed ask what I thought about a problem,” Dan told me, “then immediately cut me off with, No, thats incorrect, even when I was literally describing the right solution.” Performative managers cant stand being wrong because they see it as a threat to their authority. They prioritize looking competent over actually improving. And when something does go wrong, theyre quick to turn the spotlight elsewhere. If higher-ups are asking questions, that miscommunication or missed deadline suddenly becomes your fault. Over time, this can slip into gaslighting. You might start replaying conversations in your head, trying to figure out if you really missed something. You didnt. What to do: When disagreements come up, reframe your input in neutral terms, like: “Lets test both options and see which one works best.” Staying outcome-focused protects your time and mental health. If your manager pins the blame on you, respond factually and calmly. Reference what you had agreed on or shared: As mentioned in the update last week, I followed the plan we discussed. No one really wins an argument by losing their temper, but you can by keeping receipts. 5. They turn mentoring into a show of ego If “never admitting theyre wrong” is annoying, this is its final form. My friend Sarah called her manager “a walking pop quiz” who acted like everything was already his idea, and “everyone else was just trying to catch up to his galaxy brain.” For Sarah, every one-on-one started the same way: “So, what do you think went wrong here?” followed by a smug Nope, regardless of what she’d say. Performative managers enjoy playing teacher to remind everyone how smart they are. Beneath the surface, its less about teaching and more about control. What to do: Try to make these interactions short and focused. If they interrupt your work with “learning opportunities,” politely acknowledge them, give a brief update on your progress, and find a natural way to end the conversation. You can always wrap things up with a soft exit like, “I need to prep for my next meeting, but Ill send you an update later.” Performative managers rarely fool people for long. The corporate world has no shortage of them, and knowing how to navigate them without losing your sanity wll help you work smarter. Your power move isnt calling them out. Let them perform. The real professionals are too busy getting things done.
Category:
E-Commerce
After Viagra came to market in 1998, women began clamoring for a drug of their own. But it has taken decades for the medical community to take women’s sexual health seriouslyand even longer to develop and approve a drug that improves women’s libido. A new documentary called The Pink Pill: Sex, Drugs, and Who Has Control, premiering at the DOC NYC film festival, explores the fight to launch Addyi, a drug known as the female Viagra. Directed by Aisling Chin-Yee, the film follows Cindy Eckert, the founder of Sprout Pharmaceuticals, who worked for five years to bring Addyi to market, which she managed to do in 2015. But just as fascinating, the film explores society’s perception of women’s sexuality and whether women have a right to sexual pleasure. The film also has an unusual backer. Knix, the underwear startup known for its period panties, provided the capital to bring this film to completion, and Knix founder Joanna Griffiths serves as an executive producer. It’s an interesting strategy that allows Knix to be part of a broader conversation about women’s rights while also potentially introducing the brand to new consumers. Joanna Griffiths [Photo: courtesy Knix] The Governments Effort to Block Addyi Low libido is a widespread problem among women. In this film, women talk about how their desire for sex can suddenly dry up, harming their romantic relationships and lowering their quality of life. But while men’s loss of sexual desire is treated as a medical problem, women’s sexual problems have been dismissed. Women describe their doctors telling them to drink some wine or read a steamy romance novel to get themselves in the mood. Then, in 2009, a German pharmaceutical company stumbled across a breakthrough. A medication originally developed to treat depression was found to improve women’s sexual desire. But when the company tried to bring it to market, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration rejected the drugciting concerns about its effectiveness and side effectsand it was abandoned. Enter Eckert, a pharmaceutical executive who had struggled with low libido herself. She believed it was worth taking on the FDA. She bought the drug from the German company for $5 million and went back to the federal agency to ask what trial data was required to approve it. But as she met the FDA’s demands, it kept coming back to her with new issues. Chin-Yees documentary makes the case that the FDA had a higher standard for Addyi than it did for other drugs because it was meant for women. For instance, one side effect of Addyi is sleepiness, which is true of many medications on the market. But the FDA wanted to block Addyi out of concern that a woman might take the drug at night, then fall asleep while driving her kids to school the next day. In response, Eckert poured more than $1 million into a driving study that showed women actually drove better after taking Addyi, likely because they slept better. “[Their concerns were] very much about protecting women because they might not make good choices,” says Dr. Anita Clayton, an OB-GYN professor at the University of Virginia whose clinical practice and research focus on womens mental health and sexual dysfunctions. Eckert was confronted with other FDA roadblocks for five years, and kept working to meet the organization’s requirements. During this period, the fight to launch the drug became a broader movement around a woman’s right to experience sexual pleasure, with many women’s organizationsincluding the Black Women’s Health Imperative and Jewish Women Internationaladvocating for the FDA to approve Addyi. There was also backlash. People argued that the drug wasn’t necessary because women are physically capable of having sex even if they aren’t aroused, whereas men cannot. Others argued that its normal for women not to enjoy sex after its no longer required for reproduction, such as after giving birth or entering menopause. In the end, however, Eckert managed to jump through every last hoop, and the FDA approved the drug for use in 2015; it became widely available in 2017. But the drug has had disappointing sales and has not become as successful as Viagra. In December 2024, however, Eckert’s company received $45.6 million in late-stage VC funding, and is currently generating revenue. So there’s hope that more women will feel comfortable talking to their doctors about low libido, and that doctors will prescribe Addyi. [Photo: courtesy Knix] When a Brand Becomes a Film Producer Knix founder Griffiths fell in love with The Pink Pill when it came across her desk two years ago when Chin-Yee was in the final stages of filming it. “It raises so many important questions about women’s sexuality,” she says. “It sparks so many further conversations about everything from our political climate to the role that sex plays over the course of a woman’s life.” In 2023, at the Banff World Media Festival, Griffiths announced that Knix was partnering with production studio Catalyst to launch Docs for Change, a project that would identify promising female documentary filmmakers and finance, develop, produce, and distribute their films. A large number of filmmakers applied, but The Pink Pill stood out because it shed light on an area of women’s health that has long been overlooked. The topic of the film isn’t directly related to Knix’s business, which is selling high-performance underwear and clothing, like period panties and teen bras. But over the years, Griffiths has tried to weave the brand into broader conversations that affect women. In 2021, for instance, the company launched Life After Birth, an art exhibit and book that documents how women’s bodies change after childbirth. Projects like this aren’t necessarily designed to market products, but rather to associate the brand with broader ideas. “We want our customers to know that we are advocating for them,” she says. [Photo: courtesy Knix] Frida, a brand for babies and new moms, did something similar when it recently commissioned a statue of a postpartum woman that is currently being exhibited around the world. Griffiths believes funding films and art is more rewarding than many of the other things that consumer brands spend their marketing budgets on, like expensive dinners and influencer trips. “You can spend $90,000 on a fancy dinner with beautiful florals for just small groups of celebrities and influencers,” she says. “But a film is by definition designed for a mass audience. The goal is to get as many people as possible to watch it.” To that end, Knix will help disseminate The Pink Pill via free movie screenings in the U.S. and Canada, and is working to find streaming services to carry it. Knix is also going to launch “screening kits” so people can host parties in their homes where theyll watch the movie with friends and then have a conversation about it with discussion questions. It’s a novel approach to marketing, but Griffiths believes its already paying off. “We’re already part of so many big conversations about women’s health,” she says. “We want to continue doing so.”
Category:
E-Commerce
Aaliyah Arnold, the 21-year-old founder of BossUp Cosmetics, goes live on TikTok a few times a week. Each livestream will last anywhere from 4 to 12 hours. Thousands tune in to watch her pack mystery boxes for customers, give away products, and teach makeup tutorials. I mix in music, jokes, giveaways, and real product demos so people feel like theyre hanging out with me while shopping, Arnold tells Fast Company. Livestreaming now makes up 60% of her companys total sales. Her biggest livestream to date hit $170,000 in sales, with more than 1 million viewers tuning in. Arnold is one of many solopreneurs on platforms like TikTok leaning into live selling to get ahead in the ecommerce industry. Dubbed Gen Zs answer to QVC, live selling has been big in China for almost a decade, but somewhat flown under the radar in the U.S. That is, until recently. The number of online shoppers who purchased during a livestream, across different platforms, jumped 29% to 41 million in 2024, according to eMarketer. From household name brands like Crocs to small businesses like BossUp Cosmetics, more brands are getting in on the action. For smaller businesses and solopreneurs, live selling levels the playing field and allows them to compete against bigger brands in todays attention economy. Take a scroll on platforms like TikTok and livestream shopping app Whatnot and you can shop for just about anything, from makeup tools to sweets to collectibles. Energetic hosts pitch their wares, hooking consumers with limited-time deals and chaotic entertainment that triggers sales. I started livestreaming in 2022 because I wanted a real way to connect with my audience, Arnold says. I wanted people to see the girl behind the brand, the story, and the products in action. She adds, It started as a fun way to build community, and it quickly became one of the most important parts of my business. Whatnot is another platform popular with solopreneurs. The platform hosts more than 175,000 hours of livestreams every week, according to its 2024 State of Livestream Selling Report, which calls that figure 800x more than QVCs weekly broadcast hours. Here, independent sellers conduct live auctions or flash sales as shoppers bid on items and interact in the chat. One in five solopreneurs say live shopping has at least doubled their annual revenue, according to statistics shared with Fast Company. Vinyl records seller Amy Eskeberg, 35, who sells under the handle eskeeknowsvinyl, has been livestreaming on Whatnot at least twice a week since 2023. In a typical livestream, which lasts an hour and a half, Eskeberg will make around 75 sales. Which might not sound like a lot, Eskeberg tells Fast Company. But is a lot when considering how many records a physical store might sell in that time span. What was supposed to be a side hustle quickly turned into her full-time gig. Although it was foreign at first to be on camera, I recognized the major benefits livestream selling offered versus other methods, Eskeberg says. Mainly, the ability to sell at a much faster pace, versus waiting around for sales with the quick auction feature. She also likes the social aspect of livestreaming that creates community with viewers. For solopreneurs, that is the unique selling proposition. By going live, founders can communicate directly with their customers, responding to their questions in real time, all without having to invest thousands in a brick-and-mortar store or pop-up. Instead of relying on organic foot traffic for exposure, TikTok has a built-in audience of 170 million American users ready to stumble across your small business. Whatnots monthly active users also increased 180% year over year in 2024. Consumer trend forecaster WGSN has found that conversion rates for live shopping are 10 times higher than those for traditional e-commerce. Eskeberg says she generated around $500,000 from livestreaming on Whatnot in 2024, accounting for almost all her record businesss overall sales. She currently does not sell anywhere else. Just as many solopreneurs lean heavily on personal branding and a strong social media presence to attract new customers, the same principle applies when going live. Ninety-nine percent of the time, I livestream from the same spot on my vintage floral 1970s couch that could have belonged to your grandma that has become a centerpiece of my image, Eskeberg says. I also try to include several giveaways every show to keep casual viewers, she adds, noting that she hopes they like the vibe and decide to bid on a record or come back to a future show where a record they want might be listed. Social shopping is set to change the way we buy things forever. Nearly half (47%) of U.S. consumers have made a purchase through social media, while 6 in 10 (58%) are interested in doing so, according to data from market research firm Mintel. A further 46% have made a purchase through a livestream event and would do so again. Going live, a solopreneur has the chance to meet those shoppers and sell to them . . . from the palm of their hand.
Category:
E-Commerce
After 43 days, the U.S. government shutdown finally came to an end late on November 12, when Congress voted through a long-overdue funding bill, which President Donald Trump promptly signed. But the prolonged gap in government-as-usual has come at a cost to the economy. The Conversation spoke with RIT economist Amitrajeet A. Batabyal on the short- and long-term impact that the shutdown may have had on consumers, on the gross domestic product, and on international trust in U.S. stewardship of the global economy. What is the short-term economic impact of the shutdown? Having some 700,000 government workers furloughed has hit consumer spending. And a subset of those workers believed they may not have a job to come back to amid efforts by the Trump administration to lay them off permanently. In fact, the University of Michigans monthly index on consumer sentiment tumbled to a near record low in Novembera level not seen since the depth of the pandemic. Because lower consumer sentiment is related to reduced spending, that has a short-term impact on retailers, too. And because parks and monuments have been closed throughout the shutdown, tourism activity has been downa decline no doubt worsened by the reduction in flights enforced due to shortages in air traffic controllers. The effect was particularly pronounced in places like Washington, D.C.one of the most popular destination for touristsand Hawaii. This short-term effect will likely extend to secondary businesses, such as hotels. Indeed, prior to the shutdown, the U.S. Travel Association warned that such an event would cost the total travel industry around $1 billion a week. And the longer-term impact? Estimates range, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the cost to Americas gross domestic product in lost productivity is in the range of $7 billion to $14 billionand that is a cost from a self-imposed wound that will never be recovered. And from an international macroeconomic point of view, trust in the U.S. has been hit. Even before the shutdown, political dysfunction in Washington contributed to a downgrade in the U.S. credit ratingsomething that could result in higher borrowing costs. The shutdown further erodes the U.S.s standing as the global leader of the free market and rules-based international order. Accompanied by the economic rise of China, this shutdown further erodes international investors impression of the U.S. as an arbiter and purveyor of the established trade and finance systemand that can only hurt Washingtons global economic standing. Has the economic pain been felt evenly? Certainly not. Large numbers of Americans have been hit, but the shutdown affected regions and demographics differently. Those on the lower end of the income distribution have been hit harder. This is in large part due to the impact the shutdown has had on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Some 92% of SNAP benefits go to American households below the federal poverty line. More than 42 million Americans rely on SNAP payments. And they were caught up in the political maelstrom, left not knowing if their SNAP payments will come, if they will be fully funded, and when they will appear. There is also research that shows Black Americans are affected more by shutdowns than other racial groups. This is because traditionally, Black workers have made up a higher percentage of the federal workforce than they do the private sector workforce. Geographically, too, the impact of this shutdown has been patchy. California; Washington, D.C.; and Virginia have the highest proportion of federal employees, so that means a larger chunk of the workers in those regions were furloughed. Hawaii has also ben disproportionately hit due to the large number of military there. One analysis found that with 5.6% of people in the state federally employed, and a further 12% in nonprofit jobs supported by federal funding, Hawaii was the second-hardest-hit state during the shutdown. How easy is it for the U.S. to recover from a shutdown? Because shutdowns are always temporary, recovery depends on how long it has gone on. Traditionally, the long-term economic trend is not badly affected by the short-term pain of shutdowns. But it may be slightly different this time around. This shutdown went on longer than any other shutdown in U.S. history. Also, the nature of this shutdown raises some concerns. This was the first shutdown in which a president said that back pay was not a sure thing for all furloughed federal employees. And the uncertainty over those threatened with layoffs again broke from past precedent. Both matters seemed to have been settled with the deal ending the shutdown, but even so, the ongoing uncertainty may have affected the spending patterns of many. And we also do not know what the economic impact of the reduction of domestic flights will be. Have other economic factors exacerbated the shutdown effect? While the shutdowns in Trumps first administration did take place while tariffs were being used as a foreign policy and economic tool, this year is different. Trumps tariff war this time around is across the board, hitting both adversaries and allies. As a result, the U.S. economy has been more tentative, resulting in greater uncertainty on inflation. Related to that are the rising grocery prices that have contributed to an upward tick in inflation. This all makes the job of the Federal Reserve harder when it is trying to fine-tune monetary policy to meet its dual mandates of full employment and price stability. Add to that the lack of government data for more than a month, and it means the Fed is grasping in the dark a little when it comes to charting the U.S. economy. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal is a distinguished professor, Arthur J. Gosnell Professor of economics, and head of the Department of Sustainability at the Rochester Institute of Technology. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
To many watching from the sidelines, it can feel as if the global trade landscape is completely upending on a daily basis with no sign of slowing. To shine some much-needed light on the discussion, Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen assesses the biggest myths around trade and tariffs today, shares advice about avoiding jail, and gives insight into Chinas ability to weather volatility. This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by former Fast Company editor-in-chief Robert Safian and recorded live at the 2025 Masters of Scale Summit in San Francisco. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode. Myth No. 1 is, Don’t act on tariff announcements too quickly. Policy could shift again. I remember you telling me about Customs and Border Protection finding out about changes on Truth Social. Things just keep changing. We have a Supreme Court case that’s coming down the pipeline and it may, actually all the tariffs might just get refunded. And we’ll find that out in the next couple of months. And then, by the way, for sure the administration will claim that as a victory because the stock market’s going to go way up. But when you’re talking to clients, are they like, Yeah, we gotta do things. We don’t have to do things? Sometimes the best thing is to do nothing. You might say that’s actually an action. It could be a radical action to just say, Hey, we’re going to stay calm. Some changes in a supply chain take many years to play out, if you’re going to move your production to a new country. We’ve seen this where people said, “Oh, okay, China doesn’t work. We’re going to set up production in India.” And it turns out the tariffs on India are just as high as on China right now. So it is very difficult to make long-term decisions in a policy environment that changes so quickly. Are they looking over their shoulder at each other and saying, What’s that one doing? Should I be doing that? What can I do differently? Yeah, there’s a lot of that. It’s been very interesting. So we’re a customs broker to help companies figure out what duties they owe and pay them. And it’s a really complex world as you can imagine. There’s every variety of product out there. I’m used to being the expert when I talk to my customers. But now, the CEOsthey have to know their product at a level that I don’t. I don’t know every single product and every rule. And then I’m just like, I smile and nod, like, Yeah, yeah. It’s been really tough for us to be at that forefront trying to monitor what’s happening and interpret it for our customers and . . . give them advice: What decision should you make? Let’s move to myth No. 2: The government has a plan. Don’t worry, they know what they’re doing. Everything’s going to turn out great. It’s difficult to say. I think there’s maybe a plan. I don’t know if it’s a good plan. The reality is there’s actually some pretty good reasons for us to be concerned about the lack of industrial production in the United States. And one of the problems in life though is you get a bunch of people in a room and you say, Hey, we got this problem, we gotta do something, they’re going to do something. And it doesn’t always mean they’re going to do the right thing. Like, yes, tariffs may be an effective way to stimulate manufacturing. [But] the way they’ve been done so far, actually, I’ve met more companies that are shifting production offshore as a result of the tariffs because you have to pay duties on the components that are coming in and on the machinery that you use. These sorts of unintended consequences. Second-order impacts, maybe? Typical. Economies aren’t meant to be centrally planned. All right, let’s move to No. 3: China’s in a better position to adapt to trade volatility than the U.S. And I have to say that I’ve heard this exactly the opposite way too. I almost wrote this the other way, that the U.S. is in a better position to adapt to trade volatility than China is. Which is very illustrative that you could have written it both ways and it does illustrate trade is a positive-sum scenario. Both parties do trade because they’re both made better off by doing it. And this idea that you can win a trade war is sort of inherently wrong. You win a trade war by just not having one and doing trade in both parties. That said, the United States does depend on global trade less than China does. We’re self-sufficient in food and energy and they’re not. And that’s a big deal. They import, I think 80% of their energy. They import a lot of food from around the world. So if you’re talking about subsistence level, who’s going to survive in a terrible situation? We do depend less on trade. But that said, I think both parties, definitely both parties are going to lose. You have a lot of communications, you say, with CEOs here. Is there communication or information that you’re getting from contacts in China about how the trade war is impacting things there that maybe we’re not seeing as much? The thing that we’re seeingand it’s not just China; you see this on a global basisis when you jack up duty rates the way we have, you just create this huge incentive for fraud. For fraud? Yeah, for cheating. And it’s quite simple what’s happening. And it’s happening en masse. We’re spending a lot of time in D.C. trying to help them understand how this happens. The United States is the only country in the world, the only major country in the world, that allows foreign companies to import goods into the country without any kind of legal entity, physical presence, employees, bank account, nothing. You just, as a foreign company, fill out this form and you just get approved and you can start importing from overseas. Well then you just . . . mis-declare, you say the products are worth $10,000 when they’re worth $100,000. You just reduce your duty rate by 90%. And it’s very difficult for customers. We don’t have enforcement agents in other countries for trade compliance. We do for terrorism, for drugs, but not for trade compliance. Because it hasn’t been measurable, it hasn’t been worth it? Yes, exactly. And now the incentive is there. . . . There’s a bill in the Senate that’s being talked about and maybe Executive Order we will see to make it much more difficult for this type of fraud. But it’s not China-specific. I think this is like anyone in the world if you’re in a foreign country. You can take advantage of this. Don’t do that by the way. And if you’re an American company that’s buying from those people on those terms and they#8217;re importing for you, you are committing fraud. And I only have one rule in life: I’m never going to jail. I don’t have the personality for it.
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] next »