 |
|
|
|||||
By noon on a recent Tuesday, my calendar had already decided what kind of manager I would be. Back-to-back 1:1 meetings until the end of the day. Nothing was on fire, yet nothing was moving either. That might be fine in a slow cycle. It is not fine when you are releasing new features in real time and your best engineer has three recruiters in her inbox. In this market, teams dont just compete on comp alone. They compete on how much freedom they have to actually create and build. We ran a simple test at my company. We canceled the standing 1:1. We kept space for new hires and anything sensitive, like a performance review. Everything else moved to an as needed basis. The first worry was trust. Would people feel like they lost access to their manager? They did not. Access improved because help arrived at the right moment: in the middle of a decision, during a roadblock, or on a draft that needed real feedback. Not next Tuesday at 2:30. Leaders I admire do this already. Jensen Huang. Marc Andreessen. Doug Leone. The weekly 1:1 is a relic of calendar-driven management The weekly check-in is a habit from an office-first, synchronous work environment. In a remote, product-driven organization, the cost of context switching is high, and most collaboration starts in writing. Recurring 1:1s often slide into status updates or meandering chats. This can be useful at times, yes, but its a poor default. I want conversations that are tied to goals, decisions, and growth, within the project timeline. What replaced the weekly 1:1 We switched to a shared doc and a few well-named Slack channels. Now we use short notes that say what changed, what is blocked, what needs a decision, and tag the right people. Because it is written, we skip the catch-up meeting and we have a record of how and why choices were made. When we need to make a decision in the moment we jump into a quick huddle. These are small and focused. We leave with one owner and one date. If the topic is fuzzy, we pause and write a brief doc or build a tiny prototype first. Better to spend five minutes getting clear than 30 minutes wandering. We show work instead of describing it. Rough prototypes carry more information than long explanations. A two-minute screen recording usually gets sharper feedback than a half hour of narration. I hold open office hours every week for growth, feedback, and sticky problems. People come when they need it instead of me trying to guess who might benefit from the time. It works like a help desk for humans. Some topics do need group discussion, so we have small group sessions for things like what to prioritize or writing cleaner product requirement documents. We record them so the advice becomes reusable, and people can learn from one another instead of hearing me repeat the same paragraph 10 times. We also created a simple rubric so everyone knows what kind of communication to use: async for status updates and FYIs, huddle for a decision, office hours for coaching, immediate 1:1 for anything sensitive. What actually improved Focus came back first. With fewer standing meetings people had real blocks of time to build. Writing forced clarity and huddles only happened when a live discussion would change the outcome, which meant we got faster at making decisions. Coaching got better. Instead of delivering the same guidance across 10 separate 1:1s I deliver it once at higher quality and make it accessible to all. Documentation improved because conversations start in writing and end with visible decisions. You can feel these gains. The calendar is lighter. The work moves. There is a talent angle, too. People choose environments where progress beats ceremony. Protect attention and show up at the right moments, and you keep great teammates. Waste it, and you teach them to take recruiter calls. Guardrails that keep it human This only works if its humane. New hires keep a weekly 1:1 for the first month or two, then we taper as they find their footing. Anything personal goes straight to a private conversation: performance, compensation, and hard sensitive feedback. The cadence is variable because the work is variable. Sometimes I need to meet someone three times in two days. Other times, we are on separate tracks, and a check-in every few months is enough, or we cover it in a larger group. We rotate huddle times across time zones and publish response expectations so access is not personality-based. And the managers job does not shrink. You still watch for quiet voices, stuck work, and moments to recognize people. If you miss hallway moments, create them on purpose. Light coffee chats. Demo open houses. The occasional in-person day. Serendipity scales better with a little planning. This isnt about being contrarian or cutting meetings for sport. Its about building a system that gives people time to do meaningful work and gives managers better ways to support them. Run the 30-day test with your team. Protect the obvious exceptions. Hold yourself to the same standards you set for others. If your calendar feels lighter, your writing is sharper, and decisions arent stalling, keep going. If not, bring the weekly 1:1 back. The point isnt the ritual. The point is building a way of working where smart people can do their best work and feel supported while they do it.
Category:
E-Commerce
The rules for collecting Social Security are changing in 2026. Two of the most important things to know if you’re collecting benefits: Your monthly check payments will increase, and if you’re planning on collecting benefits before retirement age and still plan to work, your checks could be reduced or even paused. For more on this, read on. The 2026 cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase benefits Social Security benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments for 75 million Americans will increase 2.8% in 2026, the Social Security Administration (SSA) announced on Friday. However, due to inflation and the skyrocketing cost of living, many retirees might not actually be getting more for their hard earned dollars. Each year the SSA announces a cost-of-living adjustment, known as COLA. Over the last decade, the COLA increase has averaged about 3.1%. This year’s increase is 0.3% greater than 2025’s 2.5% cost-of-living-adjustment, but far smaller than previous years with higher inflation, as CNN noted. So, how much does that add up to? For an average payment of $2,071, that’s an additional $56 a month, which will kick in this January, according to the SSA. Social Security is a promise kept, and the annual cost-of-living adjustment is one way we are working to make sure benefits reflect todays economic realities and continue to provide a foundation of security, Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank J. Bisignano said in a statement. The cost-of-living adjustment is a vital part of how Social Security delivers on its mission. What other changes are coming to Social Security in 2026? Also changing in January: The maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax (taxable maximum) is slated to increase to $184,500 from $176,100. And another noticeable change is on the horizon for working seniors who are collecting Social Security. Given the high cost of living, an increasing number of older Americans are still working into their golden years. Those who have reached full retirement age (FRA) can work without penalty. However, those who have applied for Social Security before reaching full retirement age (FRA) and are still collecting a paycheck may see those payments either reduced or paused in 2026, depending on how much they earn, and at what point they reach FRA, according to The Motley Fool. In 2025, the full retirement age was 67 (for those born in 1960 or later). People collecting Social Security while working, who were under the FRA for their age, lost $1 in benefits for every $2 they earned over $23,400 (or $1 for every $3 they earned above $62,160). However, in 2026, that threshold limit is expected to slightly increase from $23,400 to $24,360, and the $62,160 limit is increasing to $64,800meaning people can earn another $960 more next year without being penalized, per The Motley Fool.
Category:
E-Commerce
One of Hollywoods crown jewels is on the block: WarnerBros. Discovery, the parent company of HBO, CNN, and major movie franchises like Harry Potter and the D.C. universe, officially confirmed this week that it is open to a sale. The company has already received multiple offers, but wouldnt disclose any of the parties bidding for its assets; potential acquirers reportedly include Paramount Skydance, Netflix, Comcast, Amazon and Apple a who’s who of the modern streaming landscape. The disclosure followed public overtures from Paramount, which reportedly was willing to pay as much as $24 per share, or around $60 billion total, for the publicly traded media company. WarnerBros. Discovery rejected that offer as too low, and hopes to drum up additional interest by publicly putting itself up for sale. Any potential deal, regardless of the ultimate identity of the winning bidder, will almost inevitably reshape the streaming landscape, which in turn could have major consequences for consumers. The proposed sale is also a testament to how much the media landscape has changed since the pandemic, when consumers flocked in droves to streaming, abandoning traditional pay TV in the process. 83% of consumers now watch streaming TV, according to a recent Pew survey. Within just a few years, streaming has become ubiquitous and at the same time a victim of its own success, with little room to grow any further. A lot of the major streaming services are looking at slowing subscriber growth, says Omdia media & entertainment analyst Paul Erickson. If you really are looking to substantially grow your presence, youll have to make a big move. Like buying a $60 billion entertainment giant, for instance. This wont stop the decline of traditional TV Not all potential bidders are willing to pay as much as Paramount, or take over all of Warner Bros. Discovery, for that matter. We have no interest in owning legacy media networks, said Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos during his companys earnings call this week. Sarandos didnt directly comment on his companys talks with WarnerBros. Discovery, but the streamer is said to be interested in getting its hands on big HBO shows and movies and the studio that produces them, not the companys TV networks. The same is likely true for potential big tech buyers like Apple and Amazon, and for good reason. Traditional TV networks have been shedding viewers for years, and are increasingly losing advertisers to streaming as well. Thats why WarnerBros. Discovery had planned to spin off its own TV networks into a separate company next year, something that Comcast subsidiary NBCUniversal is also doing. Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison has expressed more confidence in the future of traditional TV. Ellison has said that he wants to revitalize the linear side of the business at Paramount, says Erickson. But even that likely wouldnt change the broader shifts in the entertainment industry. Media companies have already begun to consolidate and shutter a number of traditional TV networks — WarnerBros. Discovery closed four networks this summer alone. UniversalKids, a network run by Comcast subsidiary NBCUNiversal, shut down earlier this year, and Paramount will shutter five MTV channels in the UK by the end of the year. Additional closures are likely as eyeballs and investments continue to move to streaming. Apps may also start to disappear But consumers shouldnt just get ready for TV networks to disappear from their program guide. Any acquisition of WarnerBros. Discovery will likely also lead to some streaming services consolidation, with fewer app icons vying for our attention when we turn on the TV. All of the reported bidders already operate their own streaming services. The company theyre looking to buy, WarnerBros. Discovery, not only runs HBO Max, but also Discovery+, with both services already sharing overlapping catalogs. Its unlikely that any buyer would want to operate three or more paid services that all compete with each other. Financially, it makes sense to not maintain development staff for separate apps, says Erickson. It would be better, long-term, to merge them together. If not merging the brand, at least functionally merging [the services] within a single experience, a single app. Instead of having a separate HBO Max app on their TV, consumers may in the future find all of HBOs content within a dedicated section of another streaming service. However, getting such integrations right can be challenging as well.Easy to say, hard to do, , Erickson concedes. A merger could make TV viewing more confusing WarnerBros. Discovery is itself no stranger to those challenges. Back in 2020, when the company was still known as WarnerMedia, it launched the HBO Max streaming service as a way to more directly compete with Netflix. The thinking at the time was to position HBOs brand, and hugely successful shows like Game of Thrones, as the services crown jewels, while also adding a bunch of other stuff from the companys other TV networks and massive back catalog shows like Friends, South Park and Rick & Morty. HBO, and then some: Thats what the Max part of the branding was supposed to stand for. Following the merger with Discovery in 2022, HBO Maxs value proposition got even more muddled, as the service also started to stream reality TV fare from HGTV and TLC, documentaries from the Discovery Channel and cooking competitions from the Food Network all formats that had little in common with HBOs trademark high-profile dramas. The company tried to reflect that change by dropping HBO from the services name, rebranding it as just Max. WarnerBros. Discovery tried to unite too many worlds, says Tracy Swedlow, co-producer of The TV of Tomorrow Show (TVOT). Stretched thin and without a clear vision, it became a patchwork of brands with no identity. Consumers were extremely confused by the name change, with some wondering whether they had lost access to HBO altogether. WarnerBros. Discovery also realized that most subscribers just didnt care all that much about the non-HBO content hosted on the service. This May, WarnerBros. Discovery backpedaled and renamed the service HBO Max again, with executives committing to refocus on HBO as its core strength. An acquirer will have to walk a fine line between maximizing the value of the HBO brand while keeping things simple for consumers. There is considerable brand equity in the HBO brand, says Erickson. It culd be that the HBO Max service goes away, but the HBO brand lives on. I am hopeful well see a reinvention of this legendary brands remaining extraordinary assets, Swedlow adds. Streaming is bound to get more expensive Any potential buyer will have to put up a lot of money for WarnerBros. Discovery money that shareholders will ultimately want to see recouped. That will almost inevitably lead to further price increases for streaming services. There’s a lot of upward pressure on pricing in streaming, Erickson says. Consumers have already faced multiple price increases in recent months. HBO Max announced just a few days ago that it is raising the cost of its streaming plans by $1-$2 per month. Prices for Disney+ went up by $2-$3 per month this week; Apple and Netflix also increased prices for their services this year. A lot of those price increases are due to increased investments in live sports, which tends to be one of the most expensive content segments for streamers and TV networks alike. However, with streaming services reaching a point of market saturation, and consumers still feeling the pinch from inflation, theres a limit to what any acquirer will be able to pay for a future streaming service that includes HBOs shows. Price rises will have to stop someplace, before they alienate consumers, Erickson says.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||