AI is already transforming how we operate, unlocking productivity gains that were once out of reach. But amid this rapid acceleration, theres a growing risk: that we design work around what machines do best, and lose sight of how people grow, adapt, and ultimately, drive innovation.
Lately, Ive been having conversations with my peers in the learning and development community about this. Were at a pivotal moment. The choices we make now will determine whether AI leads to a more empowered and resilient workforce or one where employees can prompt algorithms but atrophy the very human skills that enable creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking.
No trade-off
The good news is that it doesnt have to be a trade-off. We have a rare opportunity to redesign work as a true partnership between people and technology.
AI supercharges productivity. But what if it also expands human capability as we work? Imagine a financial analyst using AI not just to generate a report, but to understand the why behind the numbers. Or a junior marketer learning in a simulated environment where AI offers real-time feedback and suggestions. These arent futuristic hypotheticals, theyre design choices we can make today.
A coach, not just a tool
When applied with care, AI can become a coach, not just an automation tool, supporting people in building skills through their day-to-day work. Theres an old saying that experience is the best teacher. I know this to be true because Ive lived it firsthand. During my first 15 years working in L&D, I had the great fortune to work with true masters in our craft, not just learning from textbooks and theories, but truly apprenticing through hands-on experience.
Since my early career days, the 70-20-10 learning model has become a widely recognized framework for L&D: 70% of learning happens through experience, 20% through relationships, and 10% through structured training or study. So what happens when AI produces the perfect solution effortlessly in less than 30 seconds, potentially diminishing these vital learning experiences? True learning, growth, and adaptation come from doing the work. Writing the book. Solving the complex problem. Navigating a conflict. Its in these moments of hardship, challenge, and struggle that people grow and change most profoundly.
Learning by subtraction
In the AI era, learning will be just as much about subtractionchallenging ones current mental models, questioning assumptions, and letting go of old ways of being and doing that no longer serveas it is about adding new knowledge. It is through opportunities for innovation, like hackathons, or creating slack time where workers have autonomy over how best to use their skills and talent, that we can focus on more strategic work and stimulate novel ideas.
Some companies are already embracing short-term gigs that get employees out of their comfort zone and contribute outside their usual roles: a finance team member joining a product sprint, a marketer exploring data science. These types of hands-on experiences not only require skill; they produce skill, as well as build confidence and curiosity to tackle even greater challenges.
Social beings
Humans are inherently social beings; we learn, grow, and innovate with and through others. What happens, then, when technology begins to separate us from one anotherbreaking down the vital connections that allow junior workers to learn from senior ones, and novices to apprentice with expertspotentially leading to isolated and fragmented workforces? The answer isnt to slow down tech adoption, its to double down on connection. Cultivating an environment rich with social connection creates trust, shared purpose, and the kind of informal interactions that spark new ideas and strengthen culture.
It’s within this context of human connection that we see the true value of our uniquely human skills emerge. This is backed by Workdays research, which shows that 83% of employees believe AI will elevate the importance of uniquely human skills. Skills like emotional intelligence, creativity, and communication are no longer nice to have, theyre essential.
The future belongs to those who recognize the power of AI and humans working together. By intentionally designing work as a true partnership between people and technology, we can unlock a future of unprecedented productivity, innovation, and fulfillment.
Douglas Rushkoff, the writer and media theorist who chronicled the countercultural spirit of early 90s online culture in books like Cyberia, hopes AI can help recapture that eras sense of possibility.
“I feel like there’s another opportunity to kind of stop using technology on people, and for people to start using technology to realize new visions,” says Rushkoff.
He recently joined the AI consulting startup Andus Labs, where he serves as a kind of scholar-in-residence. Hes also helping produce an upcoming Andus event called After Now, which will take place on July 23 and allow both online and in-person audiences in Manhattan to share thoughts on how AI will shape the future. Speakers include musician Brian Eno, The Atlantic CEO Nick Thompson, MIT scientist Nataliya Kos’myna, and investors Esther Dyson and Albert Wenger.
Thompson will speak on AIs impact on the media and information ecosystem. Eno, who has long worked with pre-LLM generative technologies to create music and art, will join Rushkoff in a conversation about “emergence, uncertainty, and the creative power of letting go.”
Comedian Greg Barris is scheduled to demonstrate how to build a collaborative AI assistant. Entrepreneur Julia Dixon, who created the AI platform ESAI to help college applicants despite having little tech background, will discuss how no-code tools can turn “AI curiosity into scaled impact.” Dyson and Wenger will explore how AI may transform business, along with broader economic and social systems.
The event will also help Andus Labsfounded by Chris Perry, a former innovation executive at marketing agency Weber Shandwickbegin building a network of AI-focused professionals. But according to Rushkoff, it’s equally an opportunity to reflect on what the AI era should look like: not just how the technology is used, but how society and work may need to evolve alongside it.
“Rather than looking for fast answers, how do we iterate with these technologies to create new and more compelling questions?” says Rushkoff.
Already, Andus Labs is collaborating with Marina Gorbis, executive director of the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, on a concept they call a “civic stack” for public AI applications. The company also plans to help corporate clients build internal AI innovation labsspaces where small teams can explore how AI might serve their unique needs, rather than treat it as just another IT product.
“As if they’re bringing in Lotus 1-2-3,” Rushkoff says. “The idea is to go into a company and find 10 or 20 people who are willing to think and experiment in this way, and have a certain amount of their time be able to be dedicated to really thinking through what aspects of their company they want to start to interrogate and amplify with these technologies, and then working with them to hopefully develop bespoke instances.”
Andus Labs also plans to publish insights from its work, Rushkoff says, as part of a broader effort to promote what it calls “generative thinking”not just by machines, but by humans.
“We’re trying to be to the autonomous technology age, what Bauhaus was to the industrial age,” Rushkoff says. “Bauhaus was looking at how you design industrially around the human body, and human perception, and human scale.”
Rushkoff is the author of more than a dozen books, including Survival of the Richest and Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus, and hosts the podcast Team Human. His work often critiques techno-solutionism and the commodification of human attention, pushing instead for more humane and equitable uses of technology.
His goal with Andus is to focus on a more human-centered approach than that of traditional tech firms, which he says often see AI as merely a new domain for market expansion. He doesnt intend to shy away from broader societal questions, including why people still need to work for a living, even as AI reshapes the economy.
“I know it sounds idealistic, but I guess what I’m saying is these apparent AI challenges can launch different kinds of conversations,” he says. “And then they suggest a different way of working with AI, which is not to accelerate the rate at which we can develop industrial age, easy solutions for problems, but rather to engage in a new style of generative thinking, [where] we iterate questions and problems with artificial intelligence.”
If you want to buy an electric vehicleor solar panels or a heat pump or home batterytheres a short window of time to make use of the existing federal tax credits currently available. Under the Inflation Reduction Act, the tax credits were supposed to last 10 years. Now, thanks to the Republican One Big Beautiful Bill, there are only about 10 weeks left to claim the EV tax credits before they disappear. Other clean energy tax credits will expire at the end of the year. Heres what you need to know if you want to make use of them to help cut emissions and save on your energy bills.
New electric vehicles
Deadline: September 30
If you need a new car, its a good time to get an EV. Models qualify for a tax credit of up to $7,500 if theyre assembled in North America and meet American sourcing requirements for battery parts and critical minerals. Theres a price limit of $55,000 for cars and $80,000 for trucks, and an income limit for taxpayers ($150,000 for single filers). You can claim the credit on your tax return next year, but many dealerships also offer the option to transfer the credit to the dealer and get an immediate discount. For foreign-made EVs, you may still be able to get a discount if you lease a car through a loophole that classifies leased cars as commercial clean vehicles. The dealer can get the tax credit and pass on the savings to you.
Used electric vehicles
Deadline: September 30
The market for used EVs is booming; they’ve outsold used gas cars for five out of the last seven months. More than a third of the EVs available now are under $25,000. Thats the price limit for used cars to qualify for a $4,000 tax credit. (Cars also have to be purchased from a licensed dealer, be at least two years old, and on resale for the first time.) The income limit for taxpayers is lower than for new cars: For a single person, your adjusted gross income needs to be $75,000 or less.
EV chargers
Deadline: June 2026
If you need an EV charger in your garage, you have more time to make your purchase: The tax credit of up to $1,000 doesnt expire until next summer.
Rooftop solar
Deadline: December 31
Like some of the other clean energy credits, the tax credit for solar panels existed long before the Biden administration. For the past 20 years, if you installed solar panels or solar shingles on your roof, you could get a 30% tax credit (on average, worth around $4,600). Now its going away. Adding solar to your home can help save thousands per year on electric bills. If you pair the panels with home battery storage, you can also have clean backup power when the grid goes down.
If you lease solar panels rather than buying them, the incentives last a little longer: Companies that lease solar can claim federal tax credits until 2027 and pass on savings to you. But because tariffs are pushing prices up, it may still make sense to act sooner.
Battery storage, including some induction stoves
Deadline: December 31
Even if you don’t have rooftop solar, a home battery can help you save money and cut emissions by storing electricity when there’s extra renewable energy available on the grid. To qualify for the current 30% tax credit, the battery must have a capacity of at least 3 kilowatt-hours. It includes sleek wall units and even high-end induction stoves that double as battery storage. Like companies that lease solar, those that lease batteries have longer to claim tax creditsuntil the 2030s, in this case.
Geothermal heating
Deadline: December 31
Even if you live in a climate thats sweltering in the summer and freezing in the winter, the temperature underground stays steady. Geothermal heat pumps tap into this, transferring heat into a house in the winter and reversing the process in the summer to keep the house cool.
Theyre pricey, with costs ranging from $15,000 to $35,000 or more. The current tax credit offers 30% of the cost of the tech and installation, with no cap and no income limit for the taxpayer. Again, there’s a longer timeline for companies that lease geothermal systems to claim credits and offer consumers some savings.
Air-source heat pumps
Deadline: December 31
Air-source heat pumps pull heat from the air, even in cold climates like Maine. Swapping out a gas furnace and air conditioner for air-source heat pumps (either a central system or mini splits) can help you save hundreds of dollars per year on energy bills. Heat pumps are around three times more efficient than traditional heating.
If your current HVAC system is nearing the end of its life, this could be a good time to invest. Heat pumps are pricey, with an average whole-home system costing nearly $20,000; a single-zone system can cost around $6,000. The current 30% tax credit has a cap of $2,000.
Water heaters
Deadline: December 31
A heat pump water heater is as much as four times as efficient as a standard water heater, and can help save around $200 per year for some homes. The current tax credit covers up to 30% of the cost, with a cap of $2,000. Solar water heaters, which use a rooftop system to heat water, are eligible for a 30% credit with no cap.
Weatherization, electrical upgrades, and home energy audits
Deadline: December 31
To help make your house more energy-efficient, you can get tax credits of up to 30% on insulation and air sealing ($1,200 cap); exterior doors (up to $500); and windows and skylights ($600). Electrical upgrades are capped at $600. (In total, weatherization and electrical upgrades can’t get a credit larger than $1,200 for the year.) Another tax credit offers $150 for a professional home energy audit.
Next steps
Under the IRA, with incentives that would have been in place for a decade, homeowners could slowly make upgrades as existing equipment wore out. Now they have to make harder decisions about what to prioritize in the next few months. Even without the tax credits, there are still thousands of other incentives in place from states, lcal governments, and utility companies. The savings calculator from the nonprofit Rewiring America can help you find additioal ways to save. The IRA’s rebates for clean energy products weren’t cut in the reconciliation bill, and some states have rolled out rebate programs using those funds.
Meanwhile, energy prices are expected to keep going up. That’s both because of the huge energy demand from companies like data centers and because the Big Beautiful Bill made it much harder to build new renewable energy, the cheapest source of new power.
Investing in solar, heat pumps, or other clean devices is “a way for homeowners to get themselves off the roller coaster of ever-increasing energy prices,” says Alex Amend, communications director at Rewiring America. Even without the tax credits to help with up-front costs, the new equipment can make sense financially over its lifetime. “As soon as you’ve flipped the switch, you’re going to be saving hundreds of dollars annually,” Amend says. “That’s still very much worth the investment.”
If you feel like some of your colleagues are getting special treatment, youre not alone.
According to a recent survey of 1,000 American workers conducted by Resume Now, 70% say theyve seen leaders play favorites, while 43% say theyve witnessed favoritism factor into promotions, raises, or recognition.
Nearly a quarter also believe leadership is protecting a toxic top performer at the expense of others.
Our survey revealed that favoritism absolutely is happening and probably happening more frequently than a lot of companies would like to admit, says Resume Now career expert Keith Spencer, though he notes that in most cases he believes managers arent showing preferential treatment on purpose.
I think the phrase assume mistake, not malice applies, he says. A lot of this could be happening because of unconscious bias; they dont realize theyre playing favorites when theyre giving more leeway or support to people that maybe remind them more of themselves.
Whether intentional or not, workplaces where staff members feel like theyre treated worse than their colleagues are likely to run into serious problems.
It should be concerning for companies to learn that their managers might be playing favorites, creating distrust and maybe some resentment, Spencer says. All of that can negatively impact morale, engagement, and even retention, so there are far-ranging ripple effects from playing favorites, whether intentionally or not.
Those who find themselves in a workplace where others enjoy preferential treatment arent helpless. Heres what the experts say you can do when your boss is picking favorites.
Turn down the temperature
Feeling like youre not getting the recognition you deserve can be frustrating, especially when praise is heaped on the less deserving, but in those moments its important not to lose your cool.
There’s this swirl of emotions that people feel in that situation that can lead to behaviors that are more self-destructive than helpful, says Dina Smith, an executive coach, strategic adviser, and author of Emotionally Charged: How to Lead in the New World of Work. My guidance to someone who feels as though they’re not the boss’s favorite is to really try to manage those emotions, reduce the intensity of them, and try not to take it personally.
Smith adds that while being overlooked or underappreciated can be frustrating, engaging in a heated confrontation wont solve anything.
Lean in, not out
Those who believe theyre getting passed over for opportunities as others enjoy preferential treatment might feel like checking out mentally, but Smith advises taking the opposite approach.
If they feel as though they’re not the favorite, they become less proactive with their manager. But the important thing to do is to become more proactive, to ensure they have full visibility into all that you’re doing, because typically they do not, she says.
Smith explains that managers often show preferential treatment to those they see putting in more of an effort but often miss the effort thats being made out of view.
I’ve seen many very high-performing people shirk from owning their accomplishments, or falling into the trap of believing good work speaks for itself, she says. That is magical thinking.
If you feel like youre not getting the recognition you deserve, its important to consider whether its the result of favoritism or a lack of visibility.
Question your own assumptions
While the Resume Now data suggests a significant proportion of workers are regularly confronting issues of favoritism, Justin Hale questions whether its reality or just their perception.
I dont think [workplace favoritism] is that high, says the author and course designer at Crucial Learning. Ive worked with thousands of people, and it absolutely happens sometimes, but I dont think it happens as often as people say.
Hale suggests its easier to cry foul than to look internally, leading many to see favoritism where it doesnt exist.
Sometimes you aren’t the right fit, but most of us want to find some reasoning or justification outside of I just didn’t do my best or I wasn’t qualified or I wasn’t the best choice, he says. We want to blame someone else; we want to point the finger elsewhere.
Before assuming the worst of your managers, Hale advises those who feel like theyve been passed over to really consider whether they were deserving, whether favoritism really does play a role, and what they can do to leave no doubt they are the right choice next time.
Have a difficult conversation
If youve given your manager the benefit of the doubt, used perceived favoritism as motivation to up your game, and established objective measures to demonstrate your efforts yet you still feel like youre living in someone elses shadow, its time to have a difficult conversation with your boss.
Those conversations, Hale says, are vital to fostering a healthy workplace.
If they don’t have a conversation, they’ll act out the conversation, he explains. In the absence of having an honest, candid conversation with your boss about this concern you have, youll hold it in, the resentment builds, and you may even spread it around to more people to feel justified in your resentment.
Difficult conversations need to be approached with a high degree of sensitivity. Thats because when faced with an accusation, managers are likely to respond defensively. You dont want to be honest at the expense of the relationship, Hale says.
Instead, he suggests kicking things off by sharing the positive outcome you want to achieve through the conversation, such as ensuring everyone on the team feels valued. Follow that by clearly defining your objectives and presenting objective facts and examples to demonstrate your position.
The next thing I advise is describing the concern you have by sharing your perspective or your opinion, Hale says. Then you can ask the question, Heres how Im seeing things, are you seeing it differently? which can open up a dialogue.
During these conversations, Hale says its important to avoid getting emotional or accusatory while maintaining emphasis on achieving a more positive future, not airing past grievances.
When people start conversations, even really difficult ones, with [the structure of] fact, then story, then question, he says, you decrease the likelihood of defensiveness on the receiver’s part significantly.
An aging office complex stands at the center of one of the most consequential political battles of the moment. The drama surrounds President Donald Trump’s desire to oust Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell ahead of his term’s conclusion in May 2026, a shakeup Trump has been calling for publicly for months in the face of Powell’s unwillingness to lower interest rates. As the head of an independent federal body, Powell’s job is not legally within the president’s power to touch, unless it can be proven that the chairperson has engaged in abusive or fraudulent behavior. In that case Powell could be fired for cause.
That’s why a spotlight has suddenly been placed on a 1930s-era office complex. The buildings in question are the Marriner S. Eccles building and 1951 Constitution Avenue, two adjacent buildings on the National Mall that are part of the Washington, D.C., headquarters of the Federal Reserve Board, which Powell oversees. The buildings have been undergoing a major renovation project in recent years, with an estimated cost of $2.5 billion. Trump and members of his administration have zeroed in on the cost of the project (which has risen since it was first proposed in 2017), claiming there are luxurious and unnecessary parts of the design that prove Powell is mismanaging the Fed.
The Trump administration is now undertaking a kind of retroactive design review, and making a case that the renovation’s scope has spiraled beyond the public interest, and that Powell should be held accountable. Powell maintains that the project is in compliance with all laws and standards. The renovation stands in the middle, and the future of U.S. monetary policy is at stake.
[Image: National Capital Planning Commission]
Why the Trump administration is targeting the Feds renovation
Trump wants Powell out, and the Fed’s renovation project is a potential avenue to achieve that goal. In a July 10 letter to Powell, Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, called the project an “ostentatious overhaul.” He wrote that the White House has “serious concerns” with the scope of the renovation, citing specific elements, including private dining rooms, rooftop garden terraces, water features, marble decor, and a private elevator.
A week later, Powell responded to Vought with his own letter outlining the reasons for the renovation’s high cost, noting that the buildings in question have not undergone comprehensive renovations since they were built in the 1930s. “Both buildings were in need of significant structural repairs and other updates to make the buildings safe, healthy, and effective places to work,” Powell wrote.
He also addressed Vought’s specific concerns about the “ostentatious” parts of the design, which, Powell notes, are either merely anodyne design elements that have been misinterpreted as luxury amenities or simply not part of the project at all. Powell explains that the “rooftop garden terraces” Vought targets are either the lawn that will sit above new underground parking or common vegetated roof areas intended to handle stormwater and improve building efficiency. The “private dining rooms” in Vought’s letter are actually conference rooms sometimes used for mealtime meetings. The “private elevator” does not exist, and upgrades are being made to existing elevators for accessibility reasons. “There are no special, private, or VIP elevators being constructed as part of the project,” Powell writes.
This showdown between the two sides continues.
What the Fed’s renovation entails
The $2.5 billion Fed renovation project is a deep upgrading of the guts of the two buildings. The Eccles building was completed in 1937 as the original headquarters of the Fed, and covers 275,000 square feet in the footprint of an H shape. The Constitution Avenue building, originally used by the U.S. Public Health Service, was completed in 1932; it covers 126,000 square feet in the footprint of an E shape. Both are registered historic buildings, and no major renovations have been conducted on either since their original construction.
Work to bring the buildings up to date includes a complete replacement of the heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems, as well as the fire detection and suppression systems. Plumbing and electrical systems needed upgrading, and lead and asbestos had to be removed. In order to comply with modern building, safety, and accessibility codes, many upgrades had to be made to the interior layout and spaces of the two buildings.
[Image: National Capital Planning Commission]
Each will have its overall floor area expanded. The Eccles building is getting five-story infill additions in the two open sections of the its H-shape; the Constitution Avenue building will get its own five-story addition, turning its E shape ino a blocky 8. The most complex part of the project is underground. Because Washington, D.C., has strict height limits that cap most buildings at 130 feet, expanding buildings often means building downward. The Fed’s renovation involves rebuilding the foundations and expanding the usable space below grade in both buildings, an especially tricky prospect in D.C.’s swamp-like conditions.
The renovation launched in 2017, during Trump’s first term. Design concepts were approved in stages in the following years, with rules and oversight from the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission on Fine Arts, and the National Park Service, among others. It was designed as a joint venture between Quinn Evans Architects and CallisonRTKL, the latter of which is now part of the large international design and engineering firm Arcadis. (Both firms referred questions about the project to the Federal Reserve Board, which did not respond to an interview request.) The final design was approved in September 2021.
Work has been underway on the complex since it was officially approved by the National Capital Planning Commission, the body that oversees urban planning issues in the District of Columbia (and which has come to play an important role in the current drama surrounding the renovation). The upgrades will allow the two buildings to consolidate about 1,750 of the Fed’s roughly 3,400 employees, reducing the need to lease external building space. The project was initially estimated to cost $1.7 billion.
[Image: National Capital Planning Commission]
Why the cost has risen
It’s very common for large building and renovation projects to see their costs rise over time, particularly those involving older buildings that have historic preservation protections in place. And for a project that was proposed before the pandemic, approved during the pandemic, and has largely been built after the pandemic, material and labor costs have surged significantly.
In the eight years since the project was originally approved by the Fed Board, the price of steel, for example, has skyrocketed, hitting a peak in 2021, just before construction started. Once work got underway, renovation teams also discovered more asbestos and lead in the building than originally anticipated; naturally, remediation has added to the cost. Builders also found the water table beneath the underground parking construction was higher than expected, leading to additional excavation and shoring to keep the building’s foundation stable.
[Image: National Capital Planning Commission]
These issues are not ideal, but also not surprising. The Trump administration, though, has suggested that the rise in project costs is actually due to the private dining rooms and extensive marble work Vought outlined in his letter to Powell. During Trump’s first term, some of his appointees to the architecture-focused Commission of Fine Arts called for additional marble to be used on the building’s facade. The Fed itself had called for more glass to be used in the building’s expansiona gesture the architects describe as creating “a literal connection to the Boards goals for more openness and transparency as an organization.”
Though Powell has dismissed Vought’s accusations as false or misinterpretations of the plan, the suggestion of wasteful spending lingers and is being used to explore whether the project has violated the rules of the National Capital Planning Commission. Trump recently replaced three members of that commission with White House insiders, including one of Vought’s aides, and as Politico reported, the renovation became an unexpected focus of the commission’s latest meeting.
[Image: National Capital Planning Commission]
What happens next
Work continues on the project, which was originally expected to take more than four years to complete. The sudden scrutiny could add delays to that timeline. Trump officials now serving in the National Capital Planning Commission could continue to make the renovation a target; Vought has already said that administration officials want to visit the buildings to observe the work thats underway. In the face of this pressure, Powell has called for a review by the Fed’s inspector general.
This far into a multiyear, multibillion-dollar project, little is expected to change about the actual renovation work underway. The remainder of Powells term at the Fed, however, seems up in the air as Vought and others within the Trump administration seek to use the project against him.
Most designers know they have to wait a few years until they crack the six-figure ceiling. But at some organizations, they might not have to wait at all.
As Fast Company wrapped up its latest report on the state of the design jobs market, we wondered which companies paid the highest premium for designers who were just starting out in their careers. We looked at the 40,000 job listings wed gathered from Googles job search engine between December 2024 and February 2025 and zeroed in on the salaries that companies were offering to prospective employees with up to one year of previous experience.
Heres what we found.
!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}))}();
Architects
Somewhat surprisingly, the best place to start high in architecture is to go into local and federal government. Los Angeles offers its junior architects the most, at an average of $131,800 a year, followed by the Navy and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. And thats to say nothing of the pensions and health care that comes with working in public service.
Graphic Designers
The American tobacco market has been flagging for years, but the market for nicotine has never been higher. That has left Altria flush with cash for hiring designers to package the pouches flying off the shelves. Other top-paying companies include food conglomerate Danone, a motley assortment of agencies and, curiously, plumbers.
Interior Designers
The government is again a top entry-level payer for interior designers, with the Veterans Health Administration offering $103,000 to its junior designers. But, interestingly, its furniture stores that make up the bulk of this list, at least with the salaries theyre promising that designers can make on commission. Li Interiors leads the pack at $112,500 for entry-level talent, rounded out by Furniture Fair, BoConcept, and Ethan Allen.
Product Designers
As weve written elsewhere, product designers can expect to make the highest salaries overall, and thats just as true for entry-level ones. Ford tops the list with salaries averaging $150,000, followed by insurer Oscar, blockchain startup QuickNode, and Warner Bros.
Urban Designers
The University of Pittsburgh offers the highest salary for urban designers looking to start out at the top of the income bracketa planner in its planning, design, and construction department fetches $112,600. Several design firms and municipal governments are offering starting salaries that arent far behind.
UX Designers
Topping the list of companies offering high entry-level UX design salaries is marketing agency Lio, which manages to outdo tech giants Agilent and Oracle. Deloitte, unsurprisingly, is also a top payer.
This article is part of Fast Company’s continuing coverage of where the design jobs are, including this year’s comprehensive analysis of 170,000 job listings
On Monday morning, January 29, 2024, Christina Vittas posted a nine-word tweet: Elmo is just checking in! How is everybody doing? Apparently, not so great.
Vittas had been managing the social accounts for the beloved Sesame Street superstar since the end of 2020. She hadnt anticipated that Elmos friendly question would tap into a deep vein of national angst: a looming presidential election, inflation, and conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine.
Christina Vittas: I thought, Strategically, when is the best time for Elmo to post this? Monday morning, right? People are getting back in. How are we doing? is a question that a friend would ask. I posted on X at 10:46 a.m.
[Illustration: Antonio Sortino]
Aaron Bisman, SVP of Marketing for Sesame Workshop: Vibes werent so hot, and Christina had a sense that this was a great moment to ask this question. We saw that the engagement was very, very fast. Within a couple of hours, we realized we had sparked an important conversation.
Vittas: At about 1 p.m., one of my coworkers, [senior social media manager] Eder Reynoso, tapped me on the shoulder in our meeting and was like, Christina, this is going places.
Rosemarie Truglio, SVP of Curriculum and Content for Sesame Workshop: I didnt know the tweet was going out, but my office is very close to marketing and communications, so then of course I went online and was surprised by the sheer volume and kinds of responses.
Elmo: Elmo didnt realize so many people were having big feelings!
By early afternoon, Elmos tweet had become the number one trending topic on X, prompting discussions on Reddit, Instagram, and Facebook. Other Sesame Street characters joined in, sharing links to the Sesame Workshop curriculum. Celebrities like Chance the Rapper and T-Pain also weighed in, culminating in a message from President Biden via the POTUS account: Our friend Elmo is right: We have to be there for each other, offer our help to a neighbor in need, and above all else, ask for help when we need it. Even though its hard, youre never alone.
Bisman: We regrouped to discuss what to do with all this attention. Thats when we saw the opportunity to make this a moment to share our emotional well-being resources, an initiative we launched in May 2023.
[Illustration: Antonio Sortino]
Truglio: The curriculum comes from a developmental and educational perspective. To create it, were listening to the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association. Were demystifying mental health. Were providing families with the language and the strategies and the toolbox to manage their feelings.
Bisman: Elmos tweet rearticulated a core concept, and now we had a new educational framework for how we teach these things. That helped extend what we could do with it.
The conversation continues to this day, reaching its apex, perhaps, on October 18, 2024, when Elmo and Andrew Garfield engaged in a heartfelt video discussion about how the actor continued to process his grief after the passing of his mother in 2019.
Bisman: Again, I give Christina full credit. Shes immersed in pop culture and knew that Andrew was talking pretty openly about the loss of his mother.
Vittas: That conversation brought additional life to the campaign. Thats the power of the internet, finding something when its truly a great, authentic fit.
Elmo: Elmo learned that its very important to check on your friends and see how theyre doing, because maybe theyre not feeling okayand sometimes just being a friend can help.
[Illustration: Antonio Sortino]
Bisman: We were thinking about whether wed want to do something to mark the one-year anniversary. But after the Andrew Garfield moment, we were thinking, When will it be too much? The worst thing you can do in social is beat a joke or a viral moment to death. We definitely didnt want to do that. To be like, Oh, remember that thing we did a year ago? It didnt feel like the right moment.
Vittas: When you bring up Elmo online, people typically know of this moment. I think its an honor that Elmo is connected with checking in on friends.
Elmo: Elmo wants everyone to know that they always have a friend on Sesame Street. Elmo loves you!
Time is finite. Energy is cyclical. And yet most professionals try to “do more” by pushing harder, longer, and fasteruntil they burn out or underdeliver.
But what if the key to high performance wasn’t in grinding harder, but in thinking smarterin sync with how your brain naturally works? Drawing from neuroscience, peak performance psychology, and decades of productivity coaching, here are seven brain-based strategies to help you get more done with less stress.
1. Work with Your Ultradian Rhythms
Your brain runs on 90120 minute cycles of peak focus followed by dips in energy called ultradian rhythms. Pioneering research from sleep scientist Nathaniel Kleitman finds that, like sleep, our waking hours follow a rhythm of alertness and fatigue.
Ignoring these cycles leads to mental fatigue, diminished focus, and decision fatigue. But when you align your workflow with your brain’s natural rhythm, you can maximize productivity while reducing stress.
What to do:
Schedule your deep work (writing, coding, planning) in 90minute blocks, followed by a 1020 minute break. Don’t fight your biology; leverage it.
Try setting three such cycles in your day and track your focus levels. You’ll likely find you do more in less timewith greater clarity.
2. Front-Load Your Day with High-Impact Work
Your prefrontal cortexthe brain’s executive centeris sharpest in the first few hours of the day, assuming you’ve rested adequately. Waiting until late afternoon for complex problem-solving? That’s like trying to play Beethoven on a detuned piano.
Morning hours offer a natural cognitive advantage. Your brain’s executive function, responsible for planning, analysis, and self-regulation operates more efficiently early in the day before decision fatigue sets in.
What to do:
Schedule your top priority (not just urgent emails) first. Think of your brain like a batteryit’s fullest early on. Use that power strategically.
Plan strategic thinking, difficult conversations, or creative work for your first 23 working hours. Leave admin and reactive tasks for later.
3. Banish the Myth of Multitasking
Multitasking is a productivity killer masquerading as efficiency. Neuroscience confirms that task-switching increases errors and drains mental energy. Every time you switch contexts (from email to report to meeting), your brain pays a “switching cost.”
Stanford researchers found that frequent multitaskers perform worse on attention, memory, and task-switching tests than those who single-task. This cognitive overload reduces your ability to prioritize and retain information, even after multitasking ends.
What to do:
Batch similar tasks together (like emails, calls, or approvals) and avoid switching tools every few minutes. Try time-blocking: assign chunks of your day to themed work.
Use browser tab managers and mute nonessential notifications to minimize temptations. Protect your deep work time like it’s your most important meetingbecause it is.
4. Use Visual “Cues” to Trigger Flow States
Your brain thrives on cues and routines. Like musicians warm up with scales, you can train your brain to enter focus by anchoring it to a repeatable ritual.
These rituals act as environmental signals that prime your brain for a specific cognitive stateespecially helpful when transitioning from distraction to deep concentration. Over time, these cues create a conditioned response that accelerates your entry into the flow.
What to do:
Light a candle. Put on a specific playlist. Open your task app. These seemingly small actions act as psychological “on switches” that tell your brain, “It’s time to focus.”
Build your prefocus routine and use it consistently to activate goal-directed behavior.
5. Reduce Cognitive Load with External Memory
Your working memory can only hold 47 items at once. Trying to juggle every to-do in your head is a recipe for stress, errors, and decision fatigue.
Research shows that when you offload informationvia writing or digital captureyou reduce strain on your cognitive system and free up bandwidth for problem-solving and creativity. This process is known as cognitive offloading. As productivity expert David Allen says, “Your mind is for having ideas, not holding them.”
What to do:
Use a trusted system: a task app, planner, or digital calendar. Offload everything so your brain can focus on thinking, not remembering.
Tools like OneNote, Evernote, Todoist, or a simple notepad support this cognitive unloading process.
6. Make Rewards Immediate and Visible
The brain is wired for immediate gratification, thanks to the dopamine system. That’s why checking off a task feels so goodit gives you a mini reward and motivates further action.
Neuroscience shows that small, frequent wins activate the brain’s reward circuitry, reinforcing behavior and building momentum. Motivation increases, and burnout risk decreases when progress is visible and acknowledged.
What to do:
Break big goals into smaller milestones. Use visual trackers (like progress bars, Kanban boards, or checklists) to mark wins. Celebrate micro-achievements with recognitioneven if it’s just a fist pump or a digital badge.
Recognizing incremental progress keeps your team engaged and your brain craving the next step.
7. Protect Your Brain with Boundaries
Your brain needs recovery just like your muscles. Without boundaries, you risk decision fatigue, emotional burnout, and reduced creative output. Constant task-switching and always-on expectations deplete cognitive resources faster than most leaders realize.
Setting firm boundaries around your time and energy is not just self-careit’s a performance strategy. Recovery fuels resilience and long-term productivity.
What to do:
Set hard stops on your workday. Say no to low-impact meetings. Use tools like Do Not Disturb, email batching, r calendar guards.
Establish “shutdown rituals” to mentally disengage from work and protect after-hours focus.
Think Like a Brain, Not Just a Boss
You don’t need more hours in the day. You need to align with how your brain works best. When you structure your work to match your cognitive peaks, automate your focus rituals, and honor rest as part of the rhythm, you can achieve more in less timeand with less stress.
Today’s most effective leaders aren’t just task managers; they’re rhythm designers. They guide their teams like conductors, not traffic cops, blending science, intention, and culture. The goal isn’t just output; it’s sustained clarity, energy, and performance.
Think like a brain, and your organization will follow in harmony.
The founder of financial technology startup Bolt is back at the helm of the companyand hes been busy. Ryan Breslow originally made a name for himself by implementing progressive HR policies such as unlimited paid time off (PTO) and a four-day workweek. However, in 2022 Breslow left Bolt surrounded by a flurry of controversy, including a plan to loan employees money to buy stock options. Since returning, hes been dismantling all the policies that put him on the map as a young CEO, writing that his PTO stance sounds progressive, but its totally broken.
In this exclusive interview with Fast Company, the 31-year-old entrepreneur explains how the changes fit into his culture overhaul at Bolt. Paid subscribers will learn:
What he discovered about unlimited PTO that led him to change the policy
The mistaken assumption employees made about the four-day workweek
Where HR was misaligned with Breslows business goals and why people ops isnt
Why Breslow feels better than ever about the workplace culture hes creating
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Lets start with unlimited PTO. You said the bad employees take too much and the good ones dont take enough. How did you arrive at that conclusion?
I just took over the company and Ive been doing a lot of work assessing what is going on at the ground floor: How do we drive performance improvement? How do we drive a higher clip of execution? The first thing I noticed was that even though we [had] unlimited PTO, our A performers werent taking it. Even I was taking time off, because we were running really hard. I found myself having to have conversations with our A players, saying, You need to take time off. And then I saw that our B players, they were taking time off. Clearly, something was wrong, and I wanted to come up with a way to resolve that. (Editors note: The companys current policy is a mandatory four weeks of PTO.)
And you also got rid of the four-day workweek?
Yes. It was a good experiment. The premise wasnt what most people thought: It was to work extremely hard for four days, and then take three days off. It wasnt just working 20% less. It was working the same amount in four days. But in reality, we realized we need to work Fridays, too. Theres a reason the five-day workweek has become a norm. Were just in a place right now where we need to pick up the pace and work faster and more intensely than we ever have before. We dont have the luxury of taking a day off per week. (Editors note: Bolt clarified that the policy had already been winding down across most teams, but that Breslow officially ended it upon his return.)
Did you get any pushback about ending the four-day workweek or unlimited PTO?
I didnt get any pushback on reversing the four-day workweek. I think people generally understood that we have a lot of catching up to do as a business. This may be a little biased, but without me being there, we didnt grow as much as we should have, which is why Im back. I think everyone understood why we went back to a five-day workweek.
In regards to unlimited PTO, I think this is actually the most well-received people-related, culture-related move Ive ever made. We had overwhelming, positive feedback from employees.
Can we also talk about replacing HR with people ops? Aside from the name, how is it truly different?
People ops is focused on pushing the business forward. Its focused on streamlining operations. They have objectives around making the company go faster. HR is much more misaligned with the businesss speed and growth and execution, and has developed a culturein my opinionof being comfortable not doing much. We still care about giving folks a place where they can go to raise issues. We still care about fostering a healthy and productive and collaborative workplace, and [employees] can still go to people ops for that, but theyre talking to folks who are more proactive, more operationally driven, more solution-driven.
I think naming matters. When the stigma of a certain title can get in the way of that function performing the way we want it to perform, then sometimes you do have to rename a thing. Bolt is named Bolt because were lightning fast. Sometimes getting the name right has a big impact on the energy that the team absorbs.
Are there any examples of operations that were eliminated from HR or is it really about this mindset shift?
We did part ways with some folks who we didnt think represented people ops and represented the HR energy. They werent moving fast. They werent operationally focused. They were taking too long to implement changes. We kept the ones who were aligned with the people ops vision, energy, and objectives.
How do all these workplace changes fit into the larger picture of what youre trying to do at Bolt?
Were trying to create a win-win culture where teammates feel empowered . . . to be all-in and work really hard. They feel empowered to take the time off they need. Where the business moves forward, where we dont get stuck in the mud, where we have solution-oriented, future-oriented teams focused on pace and execution. Ive done a lot of experimenting with culture and I really think were landing on a model that I feel better about than ever.
How does that culture affect your talent pool?
We have way more folks interested in joining than we could possibly hire. We have no talent problem. Weve got a lot of old Bolters who have been pinging us to rejoin. We have people who were there during the three years I was gone saying, Why wasnt Bolts energy like this when I was there? We dont have a talent problem. People are really fired up about the culture.
Corporate leaders and billionaires are often viewed as visionaries and wealth creators. But beneath the surface, many are trapped in an invisible financial crisisone rooted not in market volatility or poor investments but in their psychological relationship with money.
As a finance professor and editor of the forthcoming book Financial Therapy for Men, I study this often overlooked aspect of financial psychology. Money is far more than numbers on a balance sheetit carries emotional, psychological and social meaning. Peoples relationships with money are shaped by childhood experiences, cultural beliefs, and personal triumphs and failures. This emotional baggage can influence not only their sense of safety and self-worth but also how they manage power and status.
The field of financial therapy emerged in the mid-2000s to address these dynamics. Drawing from behavioral economics, financial psychology, family systems theory, and clinical therapy, it aims to help people understand how their thoughts, feelings, and experiences shape financial behavior. Foundational academic work began at Kansas State University, home to one of the first graduate-level programs in the field.
Since then, financial therapy has gained traction in the U.S. and globally: Its supported by a peer-reviewed journal and is increasingly integrated into professional practice by financial advisers and licensed therapists. Studies have shown that financial therapy can improve relationships and reduce emotional distress.
Yet much of the field focuses on people who are emotionally open and reflectiveneglecting executives, who are often socialized to view themselves as purely rational decision-makers. I think this is a mistake.
Research shows that people often project their unconscious anxieties onto markets, experiencing them as mirrors of competence, failure, or control. This means that public valuations and capital flows may carry deeply symbolic weight for corporate leaders.
My research suggests that people at the highest levels of wealth and power have deeply complex emotional relationships with moneybut the field of financial therapy has largely overlooked them. This isnt an accident. It reflects a broader assumption that wealth insulates people from psychological distress. In reality, emotional entanglements can intensify with greater wealth and powerand research suggests that men, in particular, face distinct challenges. True inclusion in financial therapy means recognizing and responding to these needs.
When distress becomes a leadership crisis
In a 2023 studyWhen and why do men negotiate assertively?Jens Mazei, whose research focuses on negotiations and conflict management, and his colleagues found that men become more aggressive in negotiations when they think their masculinity is being threatened. This was especially true in contexts viewed as masculine, such as salary negotiations. In non-masculine contexts, such as negotiations over flexible work and child care benefits, participants werent significantly more aggressive when their masculinity was challenged.
On male-coded topics, many men in the study reinforced gender norms by rejecting compromise, using hardball tactics or even inflating financial demands to reassert their masculinity. These behaviors reflect an unconscious need to restore a sense of masculine identity, the researchers suggest. If this reaction occurs in salary negotiations, how might it manifest when the stakes are exponentially higher?
Emerging research in organizational psychology shows that financial stress is linked to abusive supervision, particularly among men who feel a loss of control. Further, traits such as CEO masculinity have been linked with increased risk-taking, while female CEOs tend to reduce risk. Together, these findings point to a dangerous intersection of psychological stress, masculinity and executive decision-making.
M&A as a masculinity battleground
Financial distress doesnt always look like bankruptcy or bad credit. Among powerful men, it can manifest as overconfidence, rigidity, or aggressionand it can sometimes lead to very uneconomical outcomes.
Consider the research on M&A. Most mergers and acquisitions are value killersin other words, they destroy more economic value than they createand the field of M&A is deeply male. These two facts suggest that some mergers are driven more by threatened masculinity than by strategic logic. If men become more aggressive in negotiations when their masculinity is threatened, then CEOs and corporate leaders, who are overwhelmingly male, may react similarly when their companies, and by extension their leadership, are challenged.
Target companies rarely take a passive approach to acquisition attempts. Instead, they deploy defensive measures such as poison pills, golden parachutes, staggered boards, and scorched-earth tactics. In addition to serving financial goals, these may also act as symbolic defenses of masculine authority.
Mergers and acquisitions, by their nature, create a contest of power between dominant figures. The very language of M&Afor example, raiders, hostile takeovers, defenses, and white knightsis combative. This reinforces an environment where corporate leaders may view acquisition attempts as challenges to their authority rather than as just financial transactions.
A growing body of behavioral-strategy research confirms that boardroom decisions are often shaped by emotional undercurrents rather than purely rational analysis. While this research stops short of naming it, the dynamics it describes align closely with what Mazei and colleagues call masculinity threat.
This has direct implications for corporate M&A. The overwhelming majority of top CEOs are men, and the language of M&A often evokes siege, power struggles and conquest. In such a symbolic arena, acquisition attempts can trigger deep, emotionally charged responses, as the identity stakes are high. What appear to be strategic financial decisions may actually be refexive defenses of masculine authority.
On a related note, researchers in behavioral finance have long studied the endowment effect, or the tendency for people to value assets more simply because they own them. While the endowment effect has been studied primarily among retail investors making ordinary financial decisions, it could be particularly important for corporate executives and billionaires, who have more to lose.
When combined with threatened masculinity, the endowment effect can produce combustible reactions to declining valuations, missed earnings or takeover bidseven for individuals who remain vastly wealthy after marginal losses. While the research at this intersection is still emerging, the underlying behavioral patterns are well-established.
What does financial therapy for the ultrarich look like?
Financial therapy for high-net-worth individuals rarely looks like sitting on a couch discussing childhood trauma. Instead, it takes an interdisciplinary approach involving financial advisers, therapists, and sometimes executive coaches. Sessions tend to focus on legacy planning, control issues, guilt over wealth, or strained family relationships.
Many high-net-worth men display behaviors that dont look like stereotypical financial distress. These can include compulsive deal-making, emotionally driven investment decisions, workaholism, and difficulty trusting advisers. In some cases, unresolved financial trauma shows up as chronic dissatisfaction and the sense that no achievement, acquisition, or net worth is ever enough.
While financial therapy is intended to help individuals, I think it could actually be a tool for global economic stability.
After all, when masculinity is threatened in corporate decision-making, the consequences can extend far beyond the boardroom. These actions can destabilize industries, fuel economic downturns, and disrupt entire labor markets. Unchecked financial anxiety among corporate elites and billionaires isnt just their own problemit can cascade and become everyones problem.
From this perspective, financial therapy isnt just a personal good. Its a structural necessity that can prevent unchecked financial distress from driving destructive corporate decisions and broader economic disruptions.
If financial therapy helps people navigate financial distress and make healthier money decisions, then no group needs it more than male corporate leaders and billionaires.
Prince Sarpong is an associate professor at the University of the Free State.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
