The right model can have a major impact on your project’s flexibility, budget, and overall success. So which one is right for you? And how do you know you have made the right choice?  The answer in short is all about your project.  

In today’s blog, I will take the time to cover both models, their strengths, weaknesses and where they work best. Let’s jump in.  

Understanding market trends 

First off, why are we talking about dedicated teams? Globally the IT outsourcing market is on the rise. Outsourcing was valued at $565.43 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach $609.53 billion by 2024.  

North America leads in IT outsourcing, holding a significant share of the market. Meanwhile, Asia-Pacific, especially countries like India and China, is expected to see the fastest growth due to larger pools of teams to hire from. With 56% of global companies now using remote hires, dedicated teams mean quicker access to talent from around the world. This gives companies more choice when it comes to matching solutions to their project’s demands. 

Why does Time & Material work for dedicated teams? 

T&M has one big advantage going for it and that’s flexibility. In short, T&M means you only pay for the hours & resources used. This makes it a great match when the project scope is still evolving. But it’s not the only benefit. Here’s why T&M might work for your project, especially when you look for a  dedicated team to hire in a trustworthy software house company.

T&M offers you flexibility  

T&M contracts are adaptable. This means if your project’s needs change, you don’t have to renegotiate the entire contract. You can adjust the project when needed. When it comes to dedicated teams it’s a great way of bringing on specialized skills. Having this flexibility means you aren’t just tied to one technology or language.  

It gives you transparency in spending 

With T&M, you have a clear view of where your money is going. Regular reports detail how much time has been spent on each task, this is mostly tracked through software like Jira. This can allow you to adjust your budget in real time. This can be a bonus when managing a dedicated team so you can see where their efforts are being spent.  

You are always on board with what’s happening 

T&M projects give you the chance to be hands on. As stated, they’re great for flexibility, so throw yourself into the iterative sprints to share your feedback. This allows you to steer the project as needed and provide input. This model is ideal if you like to stay hands-on and it can help your dedicated team integrate with your in-house team. 

You have a core team  

Since T&M contracts often last for the duration of the project, you get consistency. The same team works with you throughout, meaning your team will develop an understanding of your goals and processes. This can help better align them with the project and development process. 

The problem with a T&M model   

However, T&M projects come with a few potential downsides. The flexible nature of T&M means that final costs can be unpredictable, so if you’re working with a tight budget, you’ll need to keep a close eye on spending. Effective time management is also crucial to avoid project overruns. 

Why does fixed price work for dedicated team projects 

If your project scope is well-defined from the start and you need predictability, Fixed Price could be the right fit. Here’s why you might choose this model, especially when working with dedicated teams. 

You are certain of your budget 

With Fixed-Price projects, you know the total cost upfront. This means predictability, and if you have a strict budget, or that spending stays on track, this can be a valuable bonus. It also makes it easier to get project approval from stakeholders, as you can present a clear financial plan from the start. 

Your project’s scope is clear from the start  

Fixed Price contracts are built around a defined scope and set of deliverables. This means that everyone knows what to expect from day one. This model is a great fit for projects where requirements won’t change, and it allows you to focus on other priorities while your team works on delivering results.  

You can be more hands-off  

With Fixed Price, once the scope is set, you don’t have to be as involved day-to-day. You can leave the execution to your development team, which can free you up to focus on other things. This approach is perfect if you prefer to step back after the initial planning and let your team take control.  

Structured Payment Milestones:  

Fixed-Price projects often have payments tied to specific milestones. For you, this means peace of mind, as you can track progress through these milestones. You can be confident that your project is moving forward, and on schedule. 

Fixed Price doesn’t work in all cases  

That said, Fixed-Price contracts can be rigid. Any changes to the scope after the contract is signed can be costly, as they often require a formal change request and renegotiation. This model also requires detailed upfront planning, which can delay the start of the project if you’re eager to get things underway. You and your software partner will need to create a detailed project plan and you must have an idea about the end product.  

Deciding Between Time & Material and Fixed Price for Dedicated Teams 

Your choice between T&M and Fixed Price will depend on several factors, including the scope of your project, your budget, and how involved you want to be in the day-to-day. Here are some key things to think about 

• Project Scope and Flexibility: if you expect requirements to change, T&M provides the necessary flexibility to adapt as you go. For projects with a stable, well-defined scope, Fixed Price offers predictability and financial security. 
• Budget Constraints: T&M is cost-effective for projects where you want control over spending and can adjust the budget as needed. If you need a set budget, Fixed Price will offer the financial stability you’re looking for. 
• Preferred Level of Involvement: T&M suits projects where ongoing input is beneficial, as it builds collaboration and helps you make adjustments in real-time. Fixed Price is ideal if you want to be hands-off after the initial discovery phase planning, as the project can proceed independently, working to the defined goals and outcomes. 

Using Dedicated Teams with the Right Model 

Using dedicated teams in either T&M or Fixed Price projects provides benefits to your project. With T&M, you can adjust your team on the fly, bringing in skilled engineers for specific tasks as and when. In a Fixed Price setting, you get dedicated resources focused on a single solution, often resulting in faster delivery of the project’s goals. 

Ultimately, whether you choose T&M or Fixed Price will depend on your project’s needs, scope, and budget. Match your objectives to the best outcome you need, you can match the development process that delivers on your goals, whether through the flexibility of T&M or the predictability of Fixed Price. 

According to Morgan Stanley, via TechCrunch’s Manish Singh, Morgan Stanley says Amazon will reduce its manager headcount by 13,834 by the end of the Q1 2025.

Catch our conversation on Amazon’s Plans to Cut 14,000 Manager Roles!

Morgan Stanley estimates that Amazon will cut nearly 14,000 managerial roles by the end of Q1 2025. pic.twitter.com/fUKtuvTOb4

— Manish Singh (@refsrc) October 7, 2024

Amazon has already engaged in multiple rounds of layoffs, impacting tens of thousands of workers. More recently, the company has rolled out a controversial five-day-a-week RTO mandate, which some believe to be an effort to thin the company’s ranks and trim unneeded roles.

Some employees have already voiced their opposition to the RTO mandate, with some saying they have no intention of complying, often because they were hired during the pandemic, assured remote work would continue, and live outside commuting range of any corporate office. It’s unclear at this time if Amazon will primarily target these individuals, or if the layoffs will have a wider scope.

Change management is the art of taking organizations through all types of transitions minimally disruptively and with maximum employee engagement. Here’s how to guide your workforce through organizational changes with confidence and success.

Catch our chat on navigating workforce management during big changes!

Understanding the Need for Change

Effective change management begins with a clear understanding of why the change is necessary. The communication of why the transition is necessary will help employees to see the big picture and how it aligns with the goals of the organization. Transparency is thus very vital; leaders should be able to paint a compelling vision of the future and explain how the change will benefit both the company and its employees.

First, there would be explaining the reasons for the change, the outcomes anticipated from this move, and how the various aspects of the organization will be affected. The first step in communication lays out a smooth transition by allaying potential fears and laying a foundation of trust.

Using Helpful Software for Change Management

Software tools can help a great deal in managing organizational change. For instance, the absence management software is very valuable during transition periods that might influence the scheduling and attendance of employees.

Absence management software allows the organization to track employee absence efficiently. This may be especially needed during times of change, such as in restructuring when jobs or work teams may change. Such software would ensure that when any employee is absent, this must be noted and managed so as not to create any potential gap in cover.

Engaging and Involving Employees

Employee engagement is a very crucial factor in any change initiative. Engaging employees by involving them in the process and listening to concerns can do this. Where involvement exists, valued opinion by the employees results in supported and positive contributions to the change.

Consider setting up a change ambassador program in which some employees can champion the transition. The ambassadors will help to communicate the benefit of the change, give feedback, and then further assist their colleagues in adapting to the new processes. In this way, engagement helps the employees own the process and aids attitude building toward the change.

Managing Resistance

After all, a very natural reaction is resistance to change. The most important thing, though, is that it needs to be listened to proactively. Such a way of recognition of the root of resistance-whether caused by fear of the unknown, loss of job security, or merely discontent with the change-allows for more specific strategies to be developed in order to overcome such resistance.

Address resistance through information, support, and employee involvement in the change process. Build in opportunities for employees to express their concerns and provide constructive ways of dealing with these concerns. Acknowledging and dealing with the concerns will reduce the resistance and build acceptance.

Monitoring Progress and Adjusting the Plan

Change management is a process rather than an event. Monitor the progress of the change on a regular basis and be ready to make any adaptations that are necessary for its successful completion. Regularly assess the progress of the change and whether it’s meeting the desired objectives.

Elicit responses regarding experiences from employees and find out if there is any cause for concern. Act on this feedback in order to make further changes in the plan of change and resolve any issues. In this way, the process of change becomes flexible and responsive, which keeps the transition on track and the employees supported.

Celebrating Success and Recognizing Efforts

Celebrating milestones and successes along the process of change helps to keep momentum and enhance morale. Recognize the efforts of those employees who have accepted the change and have contributed to its success. Celebrations, whether large or small, reinforce positive behavior and demonstrate appreciation for the hard work which the team has invested.

Conclusion

Effective change management plays a vital role in taking your workforce through organizational transitions successfully. You will have confidence to lead transitions by knowing the need for change, creating a strategic plan, engaging your employees, managing resistance, and monitoring progress. Remember, while processes change, space should be left so that an environment can be created where your people feel cared about and valued. Change management can therefore be smoother if the approach is considered to be thoughtful and proactive, and thus making your organization stronger and resilient toward change.

According to Entrepreneur, the question was posed to Google management during its latest “TGIF” (Thank God It’s Friday) monthly meeting. The query was specifically asked in the context of Amazon’s RTO mandate.

Catch our conversation on Google’s Commitment to Hybrid Work!

In response, a Google VP assured employees that the current system—three days a week in the office—was working and the company was not planning to make any changes. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai added that the current system would remain in effect as long as employees remained productive, especially when working remotely.

Google and Microsoft Are On the Same Page

Google’s stand is very similar to Microsoft’s. In a meeting with employees, Microsoft VP Scott Guthrie similarly assured staff that the current hybrid work solution was working, and the company would not change it as long as productivity remained the same.

That stance is not particularly surprising from Microsoft, as the company has long been a proponent of hybrid work, even releasing studies showing the improved performance of remote workers.

“If you make the time to do it right, your employees will be more engaged, more productive, and more connected, even when they’re miles away,” Keith Boyd, a Microsoft IT senior director, wrote in an August blog post. “And they’ll be far less likely to leave for a competitor who has a more sophisticated and flexible model than you do.”

Amazon’s Stance Will Cost It

In a highly competitive market, in which top talent often decides where to work based on perks behind just a salary, Amazon is putting itself at a significant disadvantage. Microsoft and Google, its two biggest cloud rivals, will clearly have a leg up when it comes to attracting new workers compared to Amazon.

In addition to having more success in attracting top talent, Microsoft and Google will be able to retain their talent far better than Amazon. In fact, Amazon employees are already applying for other jobs, with a survey by anonymous professional forum Blind finding some 73% of polled employees are considering leaving the company.

“My morale for this job is gone, gonna totally check out till PIP,” one employee said, referring to Amazon’s practice of giving an employee a low evaluation and setting nearly impossible goals until they fail and are let go.

Another said their “plan for next year is badge minimum needed Mondays and Fridays and come in as usual the other days.”

“My months of struggling to make three days a week are over, and I know that my time at Amazon has to end,” an Amazon employee named Laura said. She was hired during the pandemic and assured remote work would remain an option.

“Honestly, I’ve lost so much trust in Amazon leadership at this point,” she added. “I’ve been updating my resume and portfolio, and rage applying to new jobs on LinkedIn.”

Laura is by no means alone in her sentiment.

“I was not complying,” an employee named Ben said, citing the three-hour commute he faced as the reason for not coming in the office during the previous three-day-a-week mandate.

“I decided not to make life choices as Amazon can fire me at will anyway, and I do not want to make long-term life changes because some manager decided I should start going to the office when I was hired virtual and promised I could work from wherever I want,” he added.

Microsoft and Google Know Something

It’s important to point out that big companies rarely, if ever, do something purely for the sake of being magnanimous. Microsoft and Google are not continuing to support hybrid work purely because their employees want it.

There’s clearly a reason, and likely several, including the following:

• Employees are happier when hybrid work is an option, and happier employees are more productive.
• Hybrid work can significantly reduce the need for office space and real estate.
• Hybrid work can reduce the number of other perks companies provide, since hybrid work ranks so high on employee wish lists.
• Flexible work arrangements are a major recruiting advantage, giving Microsoft and Google an opportunity to poach top Amazon talent.

It’s likely there are even more reasons why Amazon’s biggest competitors are not following in its footsteps, not the least of which is they are seeing the fallout Amazon is experiencing. The longer Amazon continues to push its RTO mandate, the more that fallout will grow, and the company could find itself at a competitive disadvantage against its biggest rivals.

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff famously said, “Office mandates are never going to work” in mid-2022. Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen was even more emphatic about the monumental shift remote and hybrid work is having, calling it a societal turning point.

“It’s potentially an earthquake,” Andreessen said in mid-2022. “It’s potentially one of those things that in a hundred years, people could look back and say, ‘That was a real turning point for how society developed.’”

Amazon may be demonstrating just how much that shift is having an impact, and how unwilling employees are to go back to the old way.

Amazon traditionally hires hundreds of thousands of workers shortly before the holiday season to ensure it can keep up with demand. This year, the company will hire 250,000 employees, including full-time, part-time, and seasonal roles.

Catch our chat on Amazon hiring 250,000 holiday workers!

The holiday season is always exciting for Amazon and our customers, and it’s a time when we create a lot of new jobs for people who want to earn extra money for a few months or kick off a career at Amazon. This year, we’re hiring for 250,000 full-time, part-time, and seasonal roles across our customer fulfillment and transportation operations in the U.S., and we’re excited to welcome new teammates across the country.

The company says it will invest more than $2 billion for additional pay, both for fulfillment and transportation roles.

We’re investing $2.2 billion into additional pay for our fulfillment and transportation employees, bringing the average total compensation to more than $29 per hour when you include the value of their elected benefits (things like health care from the first day on the job). All seasonal employees earn at least $18 per hour, and have access to comprehensive benefits like health care coverage as soon as they begin working. While a seasonal or part-time role can be great for someone looking to make some extra income over the holidays, if an employee is looking for career growth, these jobs can be a great way to see if Amazon is a good long-term fit for them. Seasonal employees who stay at the company can see an average pay increase of 15% over their first three years with us.

Amazon says new workers will be able to take advantage of a slew of benefits the company is offering.

In addition to some of the benefits mentioned above, Amazon also provides employees access to earned pay at any time; health, vision, and dental insurance from the first day on the job; a 401(k) with company match; up to 20 weeks of paid pregnancy/parental leave for birth parents (six weeks for eligible supporting parents); and Amazon’s Resources for Living program, a free benefit offering mental health and financial services and support for employees, their families, and their households.

Interested parties can see available jobs at amazon.com/localjobs or text NEWJOB to 31432.

According to Business Insider, Scott Guthrie, executive VP of Microsoft Cloud and AI Group, is reassuring employees they are in control of the company’s remote work policies. Specifically, Guthrie said the company would not force employees back to the office unless their productivity dropped and forced the company’s hand. Two employees who were present at the meeting reported Guthrie’s remarks.

Catch our chat on Microsoft staying flexible while Amazon demands office returns!

As BI points out, Guthrie’s remarks are in line with previous statements company executives have made about the importance of remote and hybrid work for their employees’ well-being.

“If you make the time to do it right, your employees will be more engaged, more productive, and more connected, even when they’re miles away,” Keith Boyd, a Microsoft IT senior director, wrote in an August blog post. “And they’ll be far less likely to leave for a competitor who has a more sophisticated and flexible model than you do.”

Microsoft Continues to Be a Strong Proponent of Remote/Hybrid Work

Since the pandemic forced companies to turn to remote work, Microsoft has emerged as a major proponent of the shift. The company even conducted a study showing that employees worked an average of 10% more when allowed to work remotely.

In yet another survey, Microsoft said many of its peers were plagued by “productivity paranoia.”

“Many leaders and managers are missing the old visual cues of what it means to be productive because they can’t ‘see’ who is hard at work by walking down the hall or past the conference room,” wrote Microsoft. “Indeed, compared to in-person managers, hybrid managers are more likely to say they struggle to trust their employees to do their best work (49% vs. 36%) and report that they have less visibility into the work their employees do (54% vs. 38%). And as employees feel the pressure to ‘prove’ they’re working, digital overwhelm is soaring.”

“Productivity paranoia risks making hybrid work unsustainable,” the company added. “Leaders need to pivot from worrying about whether their people are working enough to helping them focus on the work that’s most important.”

Microsoft Likely Benefiting From Amazon’s Misstep

Microsoft is likely benefiting from Amazon’s recent misstep, as Amazon CEO Andy Jassy announced a five-day-a-week RTO mandate. The response has been severe, with 73% of the company’s employees wanting to find another job.

To make matters worse, 80% of the company’s employees said some of their peers were already looking for a new job, with 32% saying they knew someone who had already quit.

Still others were reluctant to make major life-changing decisions in response to the mandate out of fear they might still lose their jobs anyway.

“RTO blanket policy is crazy, particularly for those of us who were hired remote and FAR from an office. I have kids and family here so unwilling to relocate,” a verified Amazon professional who identifies as a parent said in response to the mandate. “Even if I didn’t there’s too great a risk I’d be laid off in 6 months anyway so why risk a move?”

In the wake of the mandate, some employees say their trust in Amazon’s leadership—and its reneged promises about remote and hybrid work—have reached a point where they no longer have any interest continuing with the company.

“My months of struggling to make three days a week are over, and I know that my time at Amazon has to end,” an employee named Laura told Fortune.

“Honestly, I’ve lost so much trust in Amazon leadership at this point,” she added. “I’ve been updating my resume and portfolio, and rage applying to new jobs on LinkedIn.”

Only time will tell if Amazon’s RTO mandate is successful or if it costs the company as much as other companies’ mandates have cost them.

Either way, it appears Microsoft is learning from Amazon’s misstep and is eager to avoid the turmoil its rival is currently going through.

Jassy announced employees would be required to come into the office five days a week, sparking major backlash. According to a survey by the anonymous professional forum Blind, some 73% of employees were considering applying for new jobs after the mandate.

Catch our talk on Amazon’s RTO mandate as a ‘negotiation game’!

Fortune is reporting that employees are beginning to do just that after coming to the conclusion that their days at Amazon are numbered.

“My months of struggling to make three days a week are over, and I know that my time at Amazon has to end,” an employee named Laura told the outlet.

Laura was hired remotely during the pandemic, and she was assured she would be able to continue working remotely. She views the company’s RTO mandates as a betrayal, with the company reneging on its promises. As a result, she has no desire to put forth the effort to comply with the mandate.

“Honestly, I’ve lost so much trust in Amazon leadership at this point,” she adds. “I’ve been updating my resume and portfolio, and rage applying to new jobs on LinkedIn.”

Adding to the sense of betrayal is the fact that Laura found out via news article, rather than from her manager.

“At first, I didn’t quite believe it,” she told Fortune. “After all, who expects to get career-altering news from a news article instead of your employer.”

“Which, to be honest, is a pretty horrible way to find out about something that’s going to impact your life in a huge way. I really, really would have liked a personal communication from my manager, but that didn’t happen for a couple of days.”

Amazon’s RTO Mandate May Be a Negotiating Ploy

Some are not convinced Amazon is really trying to force people back to the office five days a week, believing the mandate could be a negotiating ploy.

Amazon previously passed a three-day-a-week RTO mandate, but many employees were not cooperating.

“I was not complying,” an employee named Ben told Fortune, citing the three-hour commute he faced as the reason for not coming into the office three days a week.

“I decided not to make life choices as Amazon can fire me at will anyway, and I do not want to make long-term life changes because some manager decided I should start going to the office when I was hired virtual and promised I could work from wherever I want,” he added.

Experts have told Fortune that the five-day-a-week RTO mandate could be a negotiation ploy designed to get employees to commit to the three days a week management originally asked for.

Amazon’s Motives Are Unclear…And That’s a Problem

Ultimately, no one outside of Amazon’s senior management knows why the company is insisting employees return to the office, especially given how unpopular the RTO mandate has been and the backlash the company is facing.

Some have speculated that Amazon is using mandates as an elaborate scheme to thin the ranks of its workforce and maximize its profits.

“It’s not about collaboration,” said John McBride, a former AWS employee. “It’s about maximizing profit margins, minimizing tax liabilities, and cutting the workforce in the most strategic way possible.”

With experts now telling Fortune that they believe Amazon’s plans are a negotiation ploy, it’s clear that no one outside the company really knows what’s going on.

At the center of this evolution is Sam Altman, the CEO who survived a coup in late 2023. The move to oust Altman came from concerns within the organization’s board that he was drifting too far from OpenAI’s core values. While the coup failed within days, Altman has since consolidated power, restructuring the leadership team and driving the company toward commercial goals. Former Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Mira Murati’s recent exit, alongside key researchers like Ilya Sutskever, illustrates the broader unrest within the organization.

Catch our chat on the chaos at OpenAI as profits take priority!

Leadership Shifts Post-Coup

The failed attempt to remove Sam Altman from OpenAI’s helm was a turning point in the company’s recent history. When the board initially ousted Altman, it was seen as an internal revolt driven by concerns over transparency and decision-making. Former CTO Mira Murati and co-founder Ilya Sutskever reportedly raised concerns over Altman’s leadership style, describing him as pitting executives against each other. “Altman’s leadership had become divisive,” an insider revealed, adding that “he had lost the trust of those most committed to the mission of safe AI.”

However, the decision to oust Altman backfired almost immediately. Within days, as investors and employees rallied behind Altman, Murati and Sutskever reversed their positions, calling for Altman’s reinstatement. While the immediate coup ended with Altman back in control, the tension didn’t dissipate. In the months following, the company saw a string of high-profile departures, including Sutskever and safety researcher Jan Leike, both critical of the company’s evolving priorities.

Murati’s sudden departure in late September 2024 was another shock to the system. Known for her technical prowess and operational leadership, Murati’s exit signaled a deeper shift in OpenAI’s corporate culture. Altman acknowledged the abrupt nature of her resignation but framed it as part of a natural transition for a company in rapid growth mode: “I won’t pretend it’s natural for this to be so abrupt,” he said in a company-wide message, “but we are not a normal company.”

The Shift from Research to Profit

At its core, OpenAI was founded on principles of AI safety, research, and transparency. When Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and others launched OpenAI in 2015, it was heralded as a nonprofit organization with a clear mission: “Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return.” But as OpenAI’s ambitions and the scale of its research grew, so did its need for funding.

In 2019, OpenAI transitioned to a capped-profit model, creating a for-profit subsidiary to attract the billions of dollars required for advanced AI development. With investors like Microsoft pumping in billions, the stakes—and the expectations—skyrocketed. Yet the hybrid structure of a nonprofit overseeing a profit-driven arm created tension. According to former researcher Jeffrey Wu, who worked on models like GPT-2 and GPT-3, “Restructuring around a core for-profit entity formalizes what outsiders have known for some time: OpenAI is seeking to profit in an industry that has received an enormous influx of investment in the last few years.”

This shift culminated in recent reports that OpenAI would restructure into a full-fledged for-profit company, allowing investors to reap unlimited returns. “This is a complete break from the original ethos of the organization,” commented Sarah Kreps, director of Cornell’s Tech Policy Institute. She added that the move signaled a departure from OpenAI’s “founding emphasis on safety, transparency, and an aim of not concentrating power.”

Rushed Product Launches and Safety Concerns

One of the most contentious points within OpenAI has been the balance between rapid commercialization and AI safety. The company has developed a reputation for rushing product launches to outpace competitors like Google and Anthropic. One former employee described the internal culture as increasingly “product-first,” noting that safety protocols are sometimes bypassed in the rush to deploy new AI models. A key example is the launch of GPT-4o, an AI model released earlier this year.

Safety staffers working on GPT-4o were reportedly given just nine days to complete safety checks before launch—a deadline some found impossible to meet. “We were pulling 20-hour days,” said one safety researcher, “but there was no way we could properly assess the risks in such a short time frame.” After the launch, concerns were raised about the model’s ability to create persuasive content, which could potentially lead users toward dangerous behaviors. Yet, the company pressed forward, citing competitive pressures.

This focus on rapid product cycles has worried many within the AI safety community. Jan Leike, who left OpenAI to join competitor Anthropic, remarked in a statement: “Over the past years, safety culture and processes have taken a back seat to shiny products.” These concerns are echoed by others, who fear that OpenAI’s focus on commercializing AI tools, like its widely-used ChatGPT, may come at the expense of longer-term safety initiatives.

The Financial Pressure Behind OpenAI’s Transformation

OpenAI’s rapid shift toward commercialization is driven in part by the enormous financial pressure the company faces. With billions of dollars invested by Microsoft, Thrive, Apple, and other entities, OpenAI has been burning through capital as it scales up its models. Current estimates suggest OpenAI is losing billions annually despite projected revenues of around $4 billion. “We can’t sustain this level of growth without significant investment,” Altman reportedly told staff in an internal meeting.

The latest funding round, expected to close at $6.5 billion, values the company at a staggering $150 billion. Yet even with that influx of cash, OpenAI is expected to shift toward a more traditional for-profit model, potentially going public within the next few years. “There’s simply no other way to attract the level of capital we need to compete in this space,” a senior executive told Fortune.

But with this shift comes a significant risk. OpenAI’s original nonprofit foundation will likely be reduced to a minority stakeholder, and with it, the company’s mission of developing AI in the public interest could fade. “If you remove the profit cap, you’re fundamentally changing the nature of the organization,” said Jacob Hilton, a former OpenAI employee. “This isn’t just a legal issue—it’s an ethical one.”

A Leadership Crisis

As OpenAI transitions into its next phase, one thing remains clear: the leadership crisis has only deepened. In addition to the departures of key figures like Murati and Sutskever, the company is grappling with internal discontent. President Greg Brockman, a long-time Altman ally, has taken a sabbatical, and other senior researchers have defected to competitors like Anthropic.

“When I think about OpenAI, I think about Greg, and I think about Ilya,” said one former employee. “With no Ilya, it’s a different company. With no Greg, it’s a very different company.” Even Altman has acknowledged the challenges of retaining top talent, but he remains optimistic about the company’s future: “I hope OpenAI will be stronger for it, as we are for all of our transitions,” he said during a recent appearance in Italy.

OpenAI’s transformation may be inevitable given the scale of its ambitions, but the costs—both ethical and operational—are mounting. For investors, this shift may bring financial returns, but for those who joined the company with the goal of advancing AGI for the benefit of humanity, it feels like a betrayal. As one former researcher put it, “We were supposed to be building the future—now it just feels like another tech company chasing profits.”

OpenAI’s journey from a nonprofit AI research lab to a profit-driven tech giant reflects broader tensions in the tech industry as companies seek to balance innovation, safety, and financial returns. Sam Altman’s leadership has brought the company to the forefront of AI development, but at what cost? With key figures departing, safety concerns growing, and the company’s mission shifting, the question remains: What is the future of OpenAI? Will it continue to lead the AI revolution, or has it lost sight of its original purpose?

This article includes quotes from social media posts, corporate blogs, and various news sources, including The Financial Times, The Verge, Vox, Fortune, and the Wall Street Journal.

According to Reuters, Dell informed global sales team member that they must work from the office if they are able in the interests of collaboration and to “grow skills.”

Catch our chat on Dell’s global sales team RTO mandate!

“Working remotely should be the exception rather than the routine,” the memo said.

Interestingly, employees who are unable to go into the office—such as those who live too far from a Dell office—are allowed to remain remote.

“Remote sales team members who can’t go into a Dell office should continue to work remotely,” the memo added.

Dell has traditionally been one of the more aggressive companies pushing for a return to the office, a stance that has put it at odds with its workforce. The company forced employees to classify themselves as hybrid or remote, with remote workers ineligible for promotions, as well as consideration for new roles. Needless to say, the move was not a popular one.

“My team is spread out around the world. Almost 90% of the team did the same as in our case there was no real advantage going to the office,” one worker said at the time.

“I benefited a lot from being WFH since 2020 and had a lot of personal growth. I’m not willing to give that up if I don’t have to,” another employee said.

“The more time I have to spend in the office, the less time, money, and personal space I have for all of that,” said another worker, speaking of family time, hobbies, and other qualify of life benefits they have enjoyed. ”I can do my job just as well from home and have all of those personal benefits as well.”

“With the salary that we are receiving, a return to the office would leave a huge hole in our budget,” thanks to commuting and meal purchases, said another employee.

In the wake of Dell’s efforts, nearly half of employees opted to remain remote and forgo advancement rather than return to the office.

In Amazon’s case, its RTO mandate has been a disaster, with 73% of employees considering leaving the company. Only time will tell if Dell’s approach is as disastrous as Amazon’s.

Advanced browsers are revolutionizing cybersecurity. These tools provide better protection and unique features, changing how we protect digital data. While they promise significant advantages, they also face obstacles. The world of browser security is changing, and it’s both hopeful and uncertain for users and developers.

Join our chat on how enterprise browsers are redefining the future of security!

Understanding Enterprise Browsers

An enterprise browser is a specialized browser that addresses an organization’s security and management needs. They have advanced security, and strong admin controls, and work well with enterprise systems. These advanced tools are vital for businesses. They have strong security, and admin controls, and work with enterprise systems. They boost security and efficiency.

As cyber threats grew more sophisticated, browser development shifted. Speed and user experience, once paramount, gave way to security and administrative control. This evolution birthed specialized browsers. These new tools combine old functions with strong safeguards. They address a pressing need to protect data and systems in a dangerous digital world.

Differentiating Enterprise Browsers from Traditional Ones

Specialized browsers differ from traditional ones in several significant ways. Browsers like Chrome, Firefox, and Edge seek to be fast and user-friendly. Their enterprise counterparts focus on security, manageability, and compliance.

Enterprise-specific browsers revolutionize web security for organizations. Unlike traditional options, they provide centralized control and advanced threat protection. These browsers fit with existing security systems. They enforce policies and manage user access. A controlled browsing environment reduces risks from web threats and intrusions. This approach helps businesses keep strong digital defenses. They must navigate a more complex online world.

Unique Features of Enterprise Browsers

Tailored web browsers have features to meet businesses’ specific needs. Key features include:

1.  Customization and Control

IT admins wield powerful control through these browsers. They can fine-tune settings, manage extensions, and set user permissions. This customization aligns with company policies and security needs. It also maintains efficiency.

1. Enhanced Management Tools

Centralized management dashboards are a hallmark of these browsers. These tools let admins monitor and manage browser use across the organization. They can track user activity, enforce policies, and deploy updates efficiently.

1. Specialized Security Features

These browsers have advanced security features. They protect against cyber threats. They have real-time threat detection, data encryption, and sandboxing to isolate harmful content.

1. Adoption Trends in Business

More businesses are adopting specialized browsers to boost security. Research shows a rise in organizations using these tools. They aim to fix security issues and boost efficiency.

Statistics show a growing market for advanced browsers. Businesses cite better security and compliance as key reasons. Case studies and reports highlight the benefits. These include a lower risk of data breaches, improved control, and easier management.

Enhancing Security with Enterprise Browsers

Enterprise-customized browsers play a crucial role in enhancing organizational security. They provide several layers of protection designed to address various cyber threats:

1. Advanced Security Enhancements

These browsers have built-in security features. They include real-time threat detection, automatic updates, and secure browsing modes. These features help safeguard sensitive data and ensure a secure browsing experience.

1. Mitigation of Common Security Threats

They address common threats, like malware and phishing. They use features such as content filtering and sandboxing. By isolating potentially harmful elements, they protect against data leakage and unauthorized access.

1. Integration with Existing Security Protocols

These browsers work well with current security systems and protocols. They easily connect with enterprise authentication, firewalls, and endpoint protection, enhancing security.

Role of User Authentication in Security

User authentication is a fundamental component of security in specialized browsers. It ensures that only authorized personnel can access sensitive information and resources. These browsers support various login methods. They include multi-factor authentication (MFA), single sign-on (SSO), and biometrics.

Strong authentication practices fortify security defenses. They thwart unauthorized access and shield against identity theft. Advanced browsers empower organizations with robust support for these methods. By embracing stringent measures, companies safeguard their data from breaches. Enhanced authentication acts as a crucial barrier, bolstering cybersecurity posture.

Benefits of Enterprise Browsers for Organizations

Adopting specialized browsers provides many benefits for organizations, including:

1. Improvements in Security

Enhanced security features protect against many cyber threats. They reduce data breach risks and ensure a safe browsing environment for employees.

1. Data Protection

These browsers need strong data protection, like encryption and secure storage. They protect sensitive data from unauthorized access and theft. They ensure compliance with data protection laws.

1. Enhanced Employee Productivity

These browsers improve employee productivity. They do this by providing a secure, controlled browsing environment. Features like quick access to resources and tools cut downtime. They also support better workflows.

1. Support for Regulatory Compliance

Specialized browsers help organizations meet regulations. They support data protection, privacy, and compliance with industry standards. This includes comprehensive audit trails, access controls, and reporting capabilities.

Challenges and Technical Hurdles

Advanced browsers are very beneficial. However, their implementation can pose challenges and technical hurdles.

1. Implementation Challenges

Integrating these browsers into an IT environment may need much planning and resources. Organizations must ensure compatibility with current systems and address any potential conflicts.

1. Technical Hurdles

Technical issues may arise during deployment. These include compatibility with legacy systems, performance concerns, and network configurations. We must plan and work with IT teams to fix these issues, which will ensure a smooth integration.

1. User Resistance

Introducing new technologies often faces resistance from employees accustomed to traditional browsers. To succeed, we must use effective change management strategies. These include user training and clear communication. They help us overcome resistance and ensure a smooth transition.

1.  Maintenance and Support

Ongoing maintenance and support are critical for the effective operation of advanced browsers. Organizations must allocate resources for regular updates, security patches, and technical support. A strong support system and training for IT staff and users are vital. They will maintain the browser’s effectiveness and fix any issues.

The Future of Enterprise Browsers and Security

As technology leaps forward, specialized web browsers evolve in lockstep. These digital guardians will boost their defenses. They’ll use new features to counter threats. Their future is linked to our changing security landscape. It must adapt quickly to protect users in a complex online world.

AI, machine learning, and encryption breakthroughs will reshape secure browsers. These innovations promise smarter threat detection, streamlined security, and faster performance. As technology evolves, users can expect more robust protection and seamless browsing experiences. The future of online safety hinges on these cutting-edge developments.

As digital threats evolve, organizations must adapt swiftly. Staying informed on emerging trends is crucial. Invest in cutting-edge technologies and embrace security best practices. Regularly assess and upgrade browser solutions. This proactive approach helps maintain a strong defense against new risks. By remaining vigilant and flexible, companies can safeguard their digital assets effectively.

Conclusion

Specialized Enterprise Browsers are revolutionizing digital security. These tailored solutions meet today’s complex business needs. They provide strong defenses and protect data. They help organizations protect their virtual assets by ensuring compliance and enhancing security. As cyber threats evolve, these browsers are key to a safer future for companies.

Organizations should assess their security needs before adopting these browsers. They should evaluate available solutions and create a detailed implementation plan. Using these advanced tools can help businesses boost security, improve productivity, and tackle growing digital threats.

As Zoom points out in its press release, regulatory compliance, often relating to cybersecurity, has become a growing challenge for business.

Join our chat on Zoom’s latest advanced enterprise features!

In 2023 alone, over $549 million in non-compliance penalties were issued globally, more than 353 million individuals were impacted by security breaches, and 31 percent of enterprises experienced unstable network or bandwidth constraints. Companies face urgent pressures to manage often complex compliance obligations, avoid hefty fines, safeguard their reputations against security threats, and prevent user dissatisfaction stemming from unreliable connectivity. Zoom’s newest additions to its advanced enterprise offerings are poised to help companies overcome these challenges.

Zoom is adding four features designed to help enterprise companies.

• Zoom Compliance Manager Plus: Launched in March and powered by Theta Lake, Zoom Compliance Manager (ZCM) is an all-in-one offering that provides archiving, eDiscovery, legal hold, and information protection offerings for enterprises. Zoom Compliance Manager Plus enhances ZCM with advanced features such as risk detection, data loss protection, and advanced trends analysis. These enhanced capabilities will further help organizations fulfill regulatory obligations and mitigate organizational communications compliance risks.
• Zoom Meeting Survivability: Introduces a new level of network redundancy and enables business continuity, helping to ensure uninterrupted Zoom meeting service even during internet disruption due to outages from a storm, natural disaster, or carrier failure. Utilizing Zoom Node, a central hub for hosting Zoom workloads on premises, this functionality keeps meetings running smoothly via a failover to data centers where meetings are hosted on your local servers with minimal disruption to the end users.
• Zoom Mesh for Meetings: With Zoom Mesh, companies can optimize bandwidth usage and save up to 60 percent on internet bandwidth and associated costs. Already available for Zoom Webinars and Zoom Events, this capability now extends to Zoom Meetings for an exceptional user experience regardless of bandwidth constraints.
• Zoom Customer Managed Key (CMK) Hybrid: CMK Hybrid enhances Zoom’s current CMK data privacy offering by providing customers with more options to manage the encryption keys used to protect data maintained by Zoom. CMK Hybrid allows customers to control the entire encryption/decryption process on premises. Zoom Team Chat messages, for example, can be encrypted locally by the Zoom Workplace app (some Zoom cloud-based Team Chat functionalities will not be available as a result). Zoom CMK Hybrid will be available for Zoom Workplace starting with the support of Zoom Team Chat in Q4 2024.

“Zoom’s advanced enterprise offerings reflect our commitment to empowering businesses and providing them with offerings that enable them to be more efficient, secure, compliant, and reliable,” said Smita Hashim, chief product officer, Zoom. “Our advanced enterprise products and features are essential tools built for Zoom Workplace and Zoom Business Services like Zoom Events and Zoom Contact Center that work behind the scenes as part of the Zoom network infrastructure to provide exceptional experiences to our customers. Our goal is to make communication and collaboration on Zoom foolproof, future-proof, and fail-proof.”

Zoom has been building out its enterprise offerings, increasingly competing against Microsoft and Google in the office and collaboration space. These latest editions should go a long way toward helping enterprise companies meet the growing security and regulator challenges they face.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy made waves in mid-September when he said employees would be required to work from the office five days a week, ending the company’s RTO policy. The backlash was swift and severe, with employees taking to the company’s Slack channel to voice their opposition to the decision.

Catch our chat on 73% of Amazon workers eyeing new jobs over the RTO mandate!

Blind Survey Reveals Imploding Morale

Blind conducted a survey of 2,585 verified Amazon employees in the wake of the RTO mandate, and it doesn’t look good. According to the survey, a whopping 91% of employees are dissatisfied with the decision.

“My morale for this job is gone, gonna totally check out till PIP,” one employee said. PIP refers to Amazon’s practice of giving an employee a low evaluation and setting nearly impossible goals they must meet to raise their score. When they fail to do so, they are let go.

Another said their “plan for next year is badge minimum needed Mondays and Fridays and come in as usual the other days.”

Amazon Poised for a Mass Exodus

Even more telling, 73% of employees said they were considering looking for another job as a direct result of the RTO mandate. Four out of five, exactly 80%, said they knew of other employees who were already looking for a job, while nearly a third (32%) said they knew of someone who had already quit as a result of the mandate.

Some employees pointed out how the mandate did not account for those who had been hired for remote positions and were now faced with relocating or losing their jobs.

“RTO blanket policy is crazy, particularly for those of us who were hired remote and FAR from an office. I have kids and family here so unwilling to relocate,” a verified Amazon professional who identifies as a parent said in response to the mandate. “Even if I didn’t there’s too great a risk I’d be laid off in 6 months anyway so why risk a move?”

RTO Mandate Is Hurting the Hiring Process

If Amazon executives think it will be easy to replace any employees who leave, they may want to rethink that stance, as hiring managers are reportedly seeing candidates withdraw from the interview process as a result of the mandate.

A verified Microsoft professional said the following:

Candidates dropping out of Amazon recruitment pipeline in droves

I think the Amazon RTO order scared so many candidates that thousands of candidates are dropping out of Amazon’s recruitment process. I just had an Amazon recruiter blow up my phone and inbox 5 times in the last 24 hours to get me to provide my availability for an onsite interview. I just asked the recruiter why they are rushing to hire and he said the hiring managers are pissed that so many candidates dropped out of the pipeline in just the last 24 hours.

If you doubt that people would turn down an Amazon offer in a recession, remember that most candidates are still employed and likely working remote and were probably given false hope by the dishonest Amazon recruiters that they can ask to work remotely or hybrid. Yesterday’s announcement dashes the hopes of so many candidates who can’t be in the office 5 days a week for different reasons like having a disability or health problems, having childcare duties and commuting.

Unclear if Amazon’s RTO Will Be More or Less Strict Than Pre-Pandemic

A big question hanging over everyone’s mind is whether Amazon’s five-day-a-week mandate will be more or less strict than the company’s work policies pre-pandemic. As the company has increasingly forced people back to the office, it has instituted various badge-in measures to keep track of compliance. In contrast, the company did not have such measures before the pandemic forced a move to remote.

“I’m on the fence. If it truly is like pre-pandemic, then that means it’s way more flexible than the current 3x a week model with badge reporting. If they continue to have badge reporting, then it’s just monitoring us like children,” a verified Amazon professional said on Blind.

While that employee struck a hopeful tone, others have said the new policy is far more restrictive than the company’s pre-pandemic one.

“Please do note that this is (in a lot of cases) significantly more strict and out of its mind than many teams operated under pre-covid,” an employee wrote on Slack after the announcement. “This is not ‘going back’ to how it was before. It’s just going backwards.”

Andy Jassy Is Intent to Return to the Past

As WPN pointed out in our initial coverage of Amazon’s RTO mandate, Jassy is the stereotypical CEO who is currently pushing for a return to the office. Studies have shown that RTO mandates are largely being pushed by older, male, workaholic CEOs who are slow to embrace a changing landscape.

“Because the labor market is looser and there’s more talent to be hired, I think the employers think they’ll be able to get their way,” said Dr. Grace Lordan, associate professor in behavioral science at the London School of Economics.

“This belief of a certain cohort of people, and they are represented across all sectors, that presentee-ism is productivity, for them it’s perfectly rational that if somebody doesn’t want to come into the office then that basically means they’re not somebody who wants to add value to the firm,” Lordan added.

Unfortunately for those CEOs, the reality has been quite different, with many companies losing top employees and struggling to attract new talent as a result. In fact, 42% of companies saw higher attrition as a result of RTO mandates, while 29% struggle to recruit new employees. What’s more, 76% of employees say they will quit to find another job if flexible work is eliminated completely.

Amazon’s Plans May Backfire

It’s unclear what Amazon’s over-arching goal is. The company clearly knows how unpopular RTO mandates are, yet they implemented one of the strictest in the industry.

Some have speculated the company could be purposefully trying to reduce its headcount, pushing out employees who refuse to relocate or return to the office. While that may work in the short term, as the Microsoft employee above points out, it will certainly not help Amazon gain any goodwill among potential employees, given the company is reneging on previous promises that were made when remote employees were hired.

Ultimately, Jassy’s RTO mandate could be Amazon’s undoing, costing it some of its top talent in an industry where winners are defined by their ability to attract the creme of the crop.

Many aspects of daily life have been altered by modern technology, and the human resources (HR) department of most major companies are not exempt from this transformation. The use of this technology is supported by a third of all HR professionals. HR tech includes a broad range of software and hardware intended to improve employee-related tasks such as recruiting, hiring, onboarding, and retention. These procedures are essential to a business’ success, as top talent will only remain loyal to a company they have a positive experience at. Thankfully, HR tech can ensure that this happens. 

There are many different types of HR tech that are available. One of the more inventive forms is employee referral systems. With incentives like bonuses or gifts, these platforms encourage current employees to recommend prospective hires with skills they think would be a great addition to the company. This referral based approach has been proven to have a lot of success. In fact, 45% of the employees who are referred stay with the company for more than four years, which saves about $7,500 for each hire. Software companies providing employee referral systems, such as Erin, can help companies see a five-fold rise in hires from employee referrals and a 50% decrease in turnover. 

Applicant tracking systems (ATS) are another important form of HR tech. They expedite the hiring process and monitor candidates from end-to-end, including recruitment and hiring. A well-known applicant tracking system, Fountain, has successfully reduced hiring time by 93%. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that 97.4% of Fortune 500 companies rely on an ATS to support their recruitment. 

Platforms for talent marketplaces, candidate relationship management software, and workflow automation tools are other HR tech options. By automating tedious procedures, workflow automation can increase recruiting rates by 7x. Candidate relationship management systems nurture positive relationships with candidates and cut down on 250 hours of labor per year for program managers. There are also talent marketplace platforms that allow companies to apply to top tech talent, instead of the other way around. Hiring time is reduced by 40% thanks to talent marketplace platforms such as Hackajob.

Stakeholders strongly embrace the change in hiring that HR technology has brought about. Studies show that 78% of employees think this technology makes their work experience better overall, and 75% of HR professionals say it makes the hiring process better for applicants. According to 82% of businesses, HR technology is crucial for streamlining employee-related activities and is now an integral part of their operations. HR technology offers many advantages. Employee turnover rates have dropped by 17%, recruitment processes have sped up by 23%, and HR duties can now be completed 40% faster.

It is not surprising that 83% of HR professionals say that HR technology has returned a positive investment given these benefits. Despite the numerous software options that are available for HR tech solutions, all are united by a common objective to improve employee satisfaction and improve HR processes. Clearly, this goal has not only been achieved, but surpassed. Learn more about finding the right HR Tech PR agency to fit your needs below.

Source: Talent Tech PR

With more and more companies opting for remote work, human resource departments and executive leadership teams are scrambling to support their workers. This isn’t to say that remote companies can’t have a strong culture. Supporting their employees by giving them the flexibility to live wherever they want can be a strong motivating factor in terms of recruitment, but that can’t be the only perk that comes with a job. Here are three tips for building a strong company culture despite a distributed workforce.  

Join our chat on building a strong company culture in a remote workforce!

1. Know What Your Employees Value

What employees value has changed over the years. Before, it was all about having that corner office and perhaps an occasional free lunch. Today, individuals are looking for better work-life balance. They want a company that prioritizes their mental well-being, which can look like working remotely all or part of the time. Employees crave a sense of purpose in their work knowing that what they are doing matters and is valuable. 

Of course, every company is different. Those working for a remote tech startup team will have different priorities than an international corporate law firm. While human resource departments could guess or assume what their employees want, there are more concrete ways to understand their values. 

HR analytics, which is simply the process of collecting and evaluating employee information to make informed decisions, is one way to gather useful insights. Companies want to know what they’re doing right and how they can show up better for their employees. Analyzing employee surveys and yearly performance evaluations allows HR departments to make more informed decisions. This can benefit both employees in terms of their well-being as well as companies looking for better retention rates and a happier workforce. 

2. Encourage Collaboration 

Collaboration can lead to better communication amongst teams, improve productivity, and spark creative thinking. When individuals are working in silos, they may not have the same thought process as they would talk it out with a colleague. In an office setting, these conversations tend to happen naturally when others are asking how their day is going or what they’re working on. However, it’s less likely to happen when employees are spread out across the country or the world and speaking via Slack and other internal communication platforms. 

Your first thought may be to assign group projects. However, forced group work may bring up similar feelings of when the teacher mandated collective assignments in high school. For most people, that’s not the most enjoyable experience. To avoid this scenario, you want to look for ways that teammates will start to collaborate naturally. During team meetings, ask everyone to share a win from the last week related to a certain project or task. This can promote team learning and may even lead to side conversations amongst teammates who want to hear more about another’s project.  

The one challenge of collaboration in a distributed workforce is time zones. It’s rare for everyone on your team to be working in the same geographical location. You may even have some international employees who are working while the majority of the team is already logged off for the day. Asynchronous collaboration may be beneficial in these instances. Encourage your team to utilize shared documents, which allow for commenting and suggesting modes. Project management tools can also be advantageous as everyone on the team can work together to collaborate on a single project or goal. 

3. Celebrate Achievements

It’s all too easy to accomplish a goal and immediately move on to the next objective. However, celebrating achievements can improve your company culture by boosting morale and strengthening relationships. By spotlighting individual team members or the team as a whole, you’re placing value in their work. This shows that what they are doing is valuable and being recognized. 

While you may not be able to gather for cupcakes in the conference room, there are ways to celebrate no matter where people are physically located. During an all-hands meeting, have a designated slot of time to remotely pat someone on the back. A different employee can be recognized during each meeting for their recent work and efforts. For an individual team, a manager could have everyone log off an hour or two early on a Friday after a project is accomplished. 

Remember, it’s not always the size of the gesture, but the fact that you’re taking a moment to reflect and acknowledge an individual or team for their work. Sending someone a Venmo to buy themselves a coffee after completing a challenging assignment can be just as meaningful as a shoutout at the next team meeting.    

Takeaways

A strong workplace culture matters. It makes the difference in terms of hiring, retention, and overall productivity. Keep these tips in mind as you navigate the many challenges of a distributed workforce.

ExxonMobil is the world’s largest producer of polymers, the key ingredient in single-use plastics. AG Bonta says the company “has been deceiving Californians for half a century through misleading public statements and slick marketing promising that recycling would address the ever-increasing amount of plastic waste ExxonMobil produces.”

Catch our chat on California’s lawsuit against ExxonMobil for recycling fraud!

The lawsuit alleges that ExxonMobil worked to convince the public that all plastics were recyclable, when the majority are not, either because it is not technically possible or because it is not economically feasible. As a result, the lawsuit says only 5% of plastic is recycled in the US, and that figure has never gone above 9%.

More recently, ExxonMobil continues to deceive the public by touting “advanced recycling” as the solution to the plastic waste and pollution crisis. “Advanced recycling” (also known as “chemical recycling”) is an umbrella term used by the plastics industry to describe a variety of heat or solvent-based technologies that can theoretically convert certain types of plastic waste into petrochemical feedstock, which can be used to make new plastic. Under its “advanced recycling” program, ExxonMobil uses heat to break down plastic waste. ExxonMobil promotes its “advanced recycling” program as a breakthrough in technology that will make plastics sustainable but hides important truths about its technical limitations, including that:

• The vast majority—92 percent—of plastic waste processed through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” technology does not become recycled plastic, but rather primarily fuels,
• The plastics that are produced through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” process contain so little plastic waste that they are effectively virgin plastics deceptively marketed as “circular” (co-opting a term typically understood as a full circle of sustainable reuse, where waste becomes raw material) and sold at a premium,
• ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” process cannot handle large amounts of post-consumer plastic waste such as potato chip bags without risking the safety and performance of its equipment,
• Plastics produced through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” program, in ExxonMobil’s best case scenario, will only account for less than one percent of ExxonMobil’s total virgin plastic production capacity, which continues to grow.

The AG’s office says ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” program amounts to a PR stunt designed to keep people buying single-use plastics while hiding their true impact on the environment.

“Plastics are everywhere, from the deepest parts of our oceans, the highest peaks on earth, and even in our bodies, causing irreversible damage—in ways known and unknown—to our environment and potentially our health,” said Attorney General Bonta. “For decades, ExxonMobil has been deceiving the public to convince us that plastic recycling could solve the plastic waste and pollution crisis when they clearly knew this wasn’t possible. ExxonMobil lied to further its record-breaking profits at the expense of our planet and possibly jeopardizing our health. Today’s lawsuit shows the fullest picture to date of ExxonMobil’s decades-long deception, and we are asking the court to hold ExxonMobil fully accountable for its role in actively creating and exacerbating the plastics pollution crisis through its campaign of deception.”

The lawsuit should come as no surprise, especially given ExxonMobil recently made the International Trade Union Confederation’s (ITUC) list of the top seven countries that undermine democracy worldwide. ExxonMobil was #3 on the list, specifically for its decades-long practice of hiding its own research on the true environmental impact of fossil fuels.

The ITUC says its mission is “the promotion and defence of workers’ rights and interests, through international cooperation between trade unions, global campaigning and advocacy within the major global institutions.”

Tune in: How Major U.S. Firms Got Branded as Undermining Democracy!

The ITUC has published a list calling out the top seven “emblematic companies that benefit financially by continuing to violate trade union and human rights, monopolise media and technology, exacerbate climate catastrophe, and privatise public services. They represent a wider corporate world that protects and expands its own profits by undermining democracy.”

The list includes:

1. Amazon.com, Inc.
2. Blackstone Group
3. ExxonMobil
4. Glencore
5. Meta
6. Tesla
7. The Vanguard Group

The organization then goes on to describe why each company made it on to the list.

Amazon

ITUC calls out Amazon for its repeated privacy violations, worker endangerment, and opposition to labor laws.

The world’s largest online retailer and cloud computing service, and its fifth-largest employer, there is no industry or community Amazon and its subsidiaries have not adversely impacted. The company has become notorious for its union busting and low wages on multiple continents, monopoly in e-commerce, egregious carbon emissions through its AWS data centres, corporate tax evasion, and lobbying at national and international level.

In the United States alone, where Amazon’s worker injury rate is twice as high as similar companies, the company has racked up more than US$250 million in fines for privacy, occupational health and safety, wage, and environmental violation cases filed by workers across sectors. Attempts to hold Amazon accountable to labour rights have led the company to challenge the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Board in the U.S. In Canada, the company is trying to overturn provincial labour law. In Europe, Amazon was barred this year from lobbying within the European Parliament for its refusal to attend hearings on violations of worker rights in its warehouses, becoming only the second company in history to face such a sanction. Its refusal to negotiate with unions in Germany has resulted in a decade of strikes. In India, the company has admitted to breaching workplace safety standards in its warehouses.

Blackstone Group

Blackstone Group makes the list for opposition to violations of consumer protection laws, violating employment laws, employing child labor, and harming the environment, including deforestation of the Amazon.

Blackstone is well-known by climate justice advocates for its role in the rapid deforestation of the Amazon rainforest and huge investments in fossil fuel projects. In the UK, Blackstone reaped huge profits while saddling one of the country’s largest long-term care providers with insurmountable debt. Blackstone infamously profited from housing market speculation after the 2008 financial crisis and aggressively evicted workers after the Covid-19 pandemic.

Blackstone and its subsidiaries have been penalised for competition, contracting, employment, financial and consumer protection violations to the tune of nearly US$300 million in one country alone. It was also the face of child labour in meatpacking, is known for its exorbitant fees to manage worker pensions, and has so far failed to sign up to a coalition-designed Private Equity Labor Rights Platform. In Brazil, it has been criticised for helping to privatise public infrastructure and corporatise agricultural land.

Blackstone seems to believe that it – not voters – should determine public policy. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on housing has accused Blackstone of, “using its significant resources and political leverage to undermine domestic laws and policies that would in fact improve access to adequate housing.”

ExxonMobil

ExxonMobil’s inclusion on the list should come as a surprise to no one, given the company’s long history of hiding its finding about the impact of fossil fuels on the environment.

Perhaps the greatest example of Exxon’s disinterest in democratic deliberation was its corporate commitment of nearly four decades to conceal from the public its own internal evidence that climate change was real, accelerating, and driven by fossil fuel use while simultaneously financing far-right think tanks in the US and Europe to inject climate scepticism and denialism into the public discourse.

While it altered its public position on climate change years ago, Exxon continues to lobby against meaningful climate policy and still promotes fossil fuel and plastics use to the detriment of communities around the world. It benefits from another entry on our list, Meta, by spreading right-wing propaganda in favour of fossil fuels. It finances the Republican Attorneys General Association, which has led efforts to pressure the US Supreme Court to throw out climate change lawsuits seeking damages from Exxon and its competitors.

Glencore

Glencore has a track record of flaunting the law, pleading guilty to various charges in a number of countries.

The largest trader of commodities and the largest mining company in the world by revenue, Glencore controls or produces huge portions of the global supply of coal, zinc, cobalt, and other minerals, metals, fuels and foods. The company’s undermining of democracy is not in dispute, as it has in recent years pled guilty to committing bribery, corruption, and market manipulation in countries as varied as Venezuela, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria, and South Sudan.

The scale of Glencore’s global lobbying lays bare the organisational conviction that it, rather than the voting public, should determine policy. While it publicly shows itself to support measures such as the Paris Agreement and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, for years it has made use of right-wing consultants to spend “millions bankrolling a secret, globally coordinated campaign to prop up coal demand by undermining environmental activists, influencing politicians and spreading sophisticated pro-coal messaging on social media.” This self-serving posture is also exhibited in its efforts to undermine popular climate policy in the European Union, the United States, and South Africa.

Meta

Meta’s role in politics and its ability to influence people, including its users falling victim to misinformation, has long made the company the target of critics and led to its inclusion on the list.

The world’s largest social media company, Meta is the parent of Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Threads, and Messenger. Combined, these products have nearly four billion users – the same number of people estimated to be voting worldwide in 2024. The company’s scale, and its corporate behaviour, have led some to call it “a foreign state, populated by people without sovereignty, ruled by a leader with absolute power.”

Meta’s algorithms can quite literally alter humanity’s perceptions of reality. Its revenue model exploits trillions of personalised data points to deliver highly effective advertising to its users. That has made it a perfect target for data breaches seized on by authoritarians and an ideal vessel for right-wing political parties to spread propaganda around the world. Violent, far-right militias in the US use Facebook to recruit new members. In Germany, the far-right AfD used Facebook to stoke anti-immigrant hatred and position itself for unprecedented success in June’s European parliamentary elections.

Tesla

While Tesla may be the world’s leading EV maker, that standing has come at the expense of workers rights, with the company engaging in a long history of combating unionization efforts.

In Germany, Sweden, and the US, Tesla has aggressively violated the right to organise, refused to engage in collective bargaining, and provoked unprecedented strike action for its subversion of social dialogue, a pillar of industrial democracy in many European economies. Tesla’s hostility toward unions earned it a place on a list of Worst Union-Busters of 2023. Tesla’s factories have “reported ten times more safety violations than Nissan … despite the fact that Nissan built almost ten times as many cars over the same period.”

But Tesla does not limit its efforts to weaken democratic norms in highly industrialised economies. Its supply chain relies on nickel mining companies that undermine consultation standards with local Indonesian communities and are deforesting so rapidly that flooding and water pollution threaten neighbourhoods. The company’s supply chain relies on another corporation on our list, Glencore, to mine copper and cobalt in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where child labour has allegedly been employed.

The Vanguard Group

The Vanguard Group makes the list for concentrating its power to such a degree that even its founder was worried about where the company was headed.

One of the “Big Four” institutional investors in the world alongside BlackRock, Fidelity, and State Street, Vanguard’s holdings put it “into an extreme position of power” at many of the companies it funds and makes it “the voice that matters most among investors.” This concentration of power troubled even Vanguard’s late founder, John Bogle, who wrote in 2018 that “If historical trends continue, a handful of giant institutional investors will one day hold voting control of virtually every large US corporation.”

Despite holding billions of dollars in worker money, Vanguard recently abandoned one of its most public commitments to environmental and social governance. After signing on to the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative in 2021, it left in 2022, bowing to pressure from its far-right friends and provoking a backlash from more than 1,000 of its more climate-friendly clients.

Conclusion

The ITUC’s list, and the cases it makes, is a damning indictment of the included companies. The ITUC minces no words in calling out the seven companies for their actions.

These companies deploy complex lobbying operations to undermine popular will and disrupt existing or nascent global policy that could hold them accountable. They are invariably led by ultra-wealthy individuals that support and finance far-right politicians and parties to further their own interests. When the far-right wins power, it discredits and defunds democratic global institutions; reduces taxes on the wealthy and on corporations; undercuts living wages; favours bilateral aid financing over multilateralism; and cracks down on human, trade union, and democratic rights, as evidenced by the ITUC’s Global Rights Index.

If more organizations continue to shine a spotlight on the actions of the companies on the list, public perception could eventually force them to change how they do business.

The offer includes a 30% wage increase over four years—up from the 25% that was previously rejected—along with a ratification bonus of $6,000, reinstatement of annual bonuses, and enhanced retirement contributions. However, the proposal fell short of the union’s demand for a 40% wage increase and the reinstatement of the traditional pension plan, which Boeing scrapped in 2014.

Tune in to Our Discussion on Boeing’s ‘Best and Final’ Offer to Striking Workers!

The union has not yet committed to a vote on the new contract, and with little sign of an imminent resolution, Boeing faces mounting financial pressures, while union members grow increasingly entrenched on the picket lines.

The Offer on the Table

Boeing’s “best and final” offer reflects a critical attempt to end a costly and protracted strike. The company’s original proposal, which included a 25% wage hike over four years, was rejected by a staggering 94.6% of union members, leading to the first strike since 2008. The current offer, which represents a slight improvement, includes a four-year wage increase of 30%, spread across an initial 12% bump followed by three annual increases of 6%. In addition, Boeing has doubled the ratification bonus from $3,000 to $6,000 and restored the Aerospace Machinists Performance Program (AMPP), which it had sought to eliminate in earlier negotiations.

We heard our IAM-represented employees and are offering bigger pay raises and more money today. This morning we presented our Best and Final Offer to IAM 751 & W24.

Learn more about the contract offer in the video below. pic.twitter.com/k1yRJEglPF

— Boeing in Washington (@BoeingWA) September 23, 2024

“Our offer reflects a genuine attempt to meet the union’s concerns while also keeping the company financially stable,” said a Boeing spokesperson. “We are committed to our workers and believe this offer is both fair and sustainable.”

Despite the enhancements, the proposal still falls short of the union’s demand for a 40% wage increase and the restoration of the pension plan. Brian Bryant, President of IAM, said, “Boeing executives have always known they could do better, and this proposal shows that the workers were right all along. However, there are still critical areas where Boeing has missed the mark.”

Union Reaction: Frustration and Defiance

For many machinists, the latest offer has failed to address their core concerns—primarily the pension and wage increases that keep pace with the rising cost of living in the Pacific Northwest.

“This is complete garbage,” said one machinist on the picket line in Everett, Washington. “They think they can throw some money at us and we’ll just take it, but they need us. If they want skilled labor, they’ll have to do better.”

Boeing’s decision not to reinstate the pension plan has been a significant sticking point. A machinist from the Renton facility noted, “We sacrificed a lot when they took away the pension in 2014. Now they expect us to accept a 401(k) match that doesn’t come close to what we used to have. That’s not going to cut it.”

The union has also expressed frustration with Boeing’s decision to bypass traditional negotiating channels by sending the offer directly to the members. “This is a non-negotiated offer from Boeing,” the union said in a statement. “They’re trying to divide our members, but it won’t work. We’re standing strong.”

Day 11 – Strike Update
September 23, 2024

Attention IAM 751 Members,

This morning, at 9 AM, Boeing notified us of what they call an "improved best and final offer." While your Negotiating Team was still reviewing the details, Boeing took it upon itself to disrespect our entire… pic.twitter.com/UMeXEjGf7c

— IAM Union District 751 (@IAM751) September 24, 2024

Financial Pressure Mounts on Both Sides

The strike, which began on September 13, has already cost Boeing nearly $1 billion, according to some estimates. The company is burning through cash at a rate of $50 million to $100 million per day, a financial strain that is likely to worsen if the strike continues. Boeing’s largest commercial plane programs, including the 737 Max, 777, and 767, have all seen production halted. Although work on the 787 continues at Boeing’s non-unionized facility in South Carolina, the strike’s impact is being felt across the company’s operations.

Breaking: @Boeing significantly boosts offer seeking to end IAM strike pic.twitter.com/IYyWm5caRb

— David Shepardson (@davidshepardson) September 23, 2024

“We’re facing significant financial challenges,” Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg said in a memo to employees. “We’ve had to implement furloughs, freeze hiring, and make difficult decisions to preserve cash flow. This strike is costing us, and we need to resolve it quickly.”

The union, however, remains undeterred. Many machinists have turned to temporary jobs in the tight labor market to make ends meet, taking advantage of gig work and side jobs to supplement their income. “I’ve been driving for Uber and picking up warehouse shifts,” one machinist said. “We’re prepared to sit this out as long as it takes.”

What’s at Stake for Boeing?

Beyond the immediate financial hit, Boeing risks long-term damage to its reputation and credit rating. Bank of America has warned that if the strike persists, the company’s credit rating could be downgraded to junk status. “This strike is a pivotal moment for Boeing,” said Ron Epstein, an aerospace analyst. “If they can’t reach a deal soon, it will impact not just their bottom line, but also their ability to deliver planes on time, which could have a ripple effect on their relationships with airlines.”

Boeing has already implemented cost-saving measures, including temporary furloughs of non-union employees, a hiring freeze, and cuts to executive pay. Additionally, the company has halted non-essential business travel, eliminated first-class tickets for employees, and paused marketing and donations. These moves reflect the seriousness of the situation, but they also highlight the limited options Boeing has to manage its cash flow without resuming production.

The Path Forward

As the strike enters its second week, both Boeing and the union face mounting pressure to reach a resolution. Boeing has set a deadline of September 27 for the union to ratify the contract, but it remains unclear whether the membership will accept the offer or continue the strike.

“The ball is in their court,” said a Boeing executive who spoke on condition of anonymity. “We’ve put forward a fair and reasonable offer, and we’re hopeful that the union will come to the table and agree to end the strike.”

However, union leaders remain cautious. “We’re reviewing the offer carefully, and we’re going to make sure that our members have all the information they need to make an informed decision,” Bryant said.

For now, the standoff continues, with no clear end in sight. Boeing, one of the world’s largest aerospace companies, finds itself in a battle that could have profound implications for its financial future and its relationship with the workforce that builds its planes.

As one union member put it, “We’re ready to go back to work, but not until we get the contract we deserve.”

Teams is Slack’s primary rival in the business communication and collaboration market, with Team passing Slack’s user base years in no small part as a result of being bundled with the rest of Microsoft’s software ecosystem.

Catch our chat on why Disney ditched Slack for Microsoft Teams!

Following a breach that saw some 44 million messages from Disney’s Slack channels leaked online, the company decided to drop Slack in favor of other tools. What was not immediately known was which option Disney decided to adopt, with reports simply saying the company was rolling out “enterprise-wide collaboration tools.”

According to Business Insider, it appears Microsoft Teams is the winning solution, although many users are not happy with the change. In fact, a number of them have been voicing their discontent on Blind, the anonymous forum for individuals to discuss their jobs.

“Teams is horrible,” wrote one employee.

“So terrible,” added another.

Some employees evidently also voiced concern over losing access to archived content and communications as part of the move.

Disney CFO Hugh Johnston said the transition would target Q1 FY25 for most use cases, with “more complex use cases” transitioning away from slack in Q2 FY25.

Microsoft’s Teams Problem

The comments by Disney employees underscores the issues Microsoft has with Teams. While the software may technically have more users than Slack, Slack remains the favorite option among many users—both current and former. Teams is often criticized for being more cumbersome and less intuitive than Slack.

Despite Slack being the preferred option for many, Teams is more widely deployed thanks to its integration with the rest of Microsoft’s products. As early as 2019, Teams had nearly double Slack’s daily users when it topped 20 million. From that point on, Teams’ usage skyrocketed, with the app boasting 270 million monthly active users in early 2022.

Teams’ unfair advantage became so pronounced that Slack lodged a formal complaint with the EU, prompting Microsoft to stop bundling Teams with Office. Despite Microsoft’s actions, rumors circulated in late 2023 that the EU was preparing to move forward with a formal complaint against the company.

Ultimately, Microsoft needs to improve Teams to the point where people actually want to use it, rather than being forced to use it because it was bundled with their other software, or because corporate leadership is abandoning a Teams competitor in response to a data breach.

Until Microsoft improves Teams to that degree, Slack will continue to be the more popular option among users, even if Teams has the bigger user base.

Disney’s Memo In Full

Below is the full memo that was sent to employees, courtesy of Business Insider:

Fellow Employees and Cast Members,

Collaboration is at the heart of our employee culture. It connects us to each other, our work, and ultimately our guests and consumers — fueling the creativity required to make Disney magic.

How we work and collaborate together is equally important, and where we have opportunities to leverage more integrated tools and platforms we should. As some of you are aware, many teams have already begun their transition to streamlined enterprise-wide collaboration tools.

As part of this work, I would like to share that senior leadership has made the decision to transition away from Slack across the company. Our technology teams are now managing the transition off Slack by the end of Q1 FY25 for most businesses, with DX and more complex use cases following in Q2 FY25. This will help integrate our collaboration tools with some of the new platforms already being put in place. These teams are planning and overseeing key workstreams to support this transition, with a focus on reinforcing current TWDC policies for work-related collaboration.

We are excited about the alignment and productivity that will be unlocked as we streamline our collaboration platforms, and we appreciate your patience as we navigate new ways of working together.

Much more information, training resources, and best practices for optimal work-related collaboration and reinforcement of policies regarding secure handling of sensitive information will be shared over the coming weeks by your respective technology teams.

Thanks,

Hugh

Reports surfaced Friday that Qualcomm was making a friendly takeover offer for Intel, a move that could revolutionize Qualcomm’s business. At the time, there were lingering questions about whether Intel’s leadership would be open to such a deal, but subsequent reports indicated the beleaguered company is open to a deal. At the same time, rumors portrayed Broadcom as having at least a passing interest in purchasing Intel before scrapping the idea over concerns about gaining regulatory approval.

Catch our convo on the buzz around Apollo Global eyeing an investment in Intel!

The latest report from Bloomberg says that Apollo has offered to make a massive investment in the chipmaker to the tune of billions of dollars. Unlike Qualcomm’s interest, Apollo’s offer would be an effort to prop Intel up and give it the funds and time it needs to complete its turnaround.

As a result, Apollo’s offer could be far more appealing option than being bought out by Qualcomm, giving Intel a shot at remaining independent. In contrast, Qualcomm could end up selling off parts of Intel and absorbing the rest in such a way that whatever was left would largely be unrecognizable.

An Apollo deal would likely face less regulatory hurdles, in contrast to a Qualcomm takeover. Bloomberg Intelligence analysts Kunjan Sobhani and Oscar Hernandez Tejada wrote about the challenges the latter deal would face.

“The deal faces significant regulatory, financial and execution challenges,” they wrote. “With only $13 billion in cash on hand, Qualcomm would likely need additional investors and asset divestitures to make the purchase feasible. The deal’s strategic fit could also raise concerns.”

Apollo’s Track Record Reviving Tech Companies

Although Apollo’s traditional investments usually revolve around credit, hedge funds, real estate, and other financial-oriented markets, the company does have an existing track record investing in—and turning around—tech companies.

Most notably, Apollo purchased Yahoo from Verizon in 2021, giving the company a chance to reclaim its former glory.

“We look forward to partnering with Yahoo’s talented employee base to build on the company’s strong momentum and position the new Yahoo for long-term success as a standalone consumer internet and digital media leader,” Reed Rayman, Partner at Apollo, said at the time. “We couldn’t be more excited about this next chapter for Yahoo as we look to invest in growth across the business, including accelerating its customer-first offerings and commerce capabilities, expanding its reach and enhancing the daily user experience.”

“This is a new era for Yahoo,” Guru Gowrappan, Yahoo CEO, added. “The close of the deal heralds an exciting time of renewed opportunity for us as a standalone entity. We anticipate that the coming months and years will bring fresh growth and innovation for Yahoo as a business and a brand, and we look forward to creating that future with our new partners.”

In the time since Apollo acquired Yahoo, the company has teased a return to the search engine market, spun Vespa.ai into an independent company, used AI to improve some of its most popular products, and purchased a number of startups to help improve its products. A Yahoo IPO is even on the table once again.

By all accounts, Yahoo is firing on all cylinders and doing better than it has in years, thanks largely to Apollo’s involvement.

If Apollo is able to bring that same level of assistance to Intel—in addition to the multibillion-dollar investment—it could help Intel finally turn things around without destroying the Intel that has been a significant force in the industry for decades.

Andy Greenaway, a seasoned creative leader in Asia, took to LinkedIn to voice his thoughts on the leadership shift. In his post, Greenaway didn’t mince words: “CHOOSE THE RIGHT LEADER (BECAUSE IF YOU CHOOSE THE WRONG ONE, YOU’RE SCREWED).” He pointed to Donahoe’s lack of experience in the apparel business as a primary reason for his failure to steer Nike toward continued growth. “Donahoe is an outsider who didn’t really have any knowledge or expertise in the apparel business,” Greenaway wrote, adding that the former CEO’s focus was more on financial metrics than on the culture and vision that made Nike a global leader.

Catch our take on why John Donahoe wasn’t the right fit for Nike and its brand:

The Numbers Don’t Lie

Under Donahoe’s stewardship, Nike’s stock took a significant hit, wiping out $28 billion of its value. Profit margins tumbled, which led many to question the brand’s long-term strategy. This decline was particularly troubling for a company that had consistently been a top performer in its industry, with a track record of cutting-edge product lines and innovative marketing campaigns. Nike’s allure, built on its “Just Do It” ethos, seemed to lose its edge under Donahoe.

One of Donahoe’s most controversial moves was slashing sales teams and reducing investment in research and development (R&D). Additionally, he shifted much of Nike’s focus from its traditional retail partners to its direct-to-consumer channels, a pivot that many industry experts argue didn’t play to Nike’s strengths. As Greenaway put it, “He shifted products from Nike’s retail partners to its own stores. He also laid off hundreds of marketers who had an intimate knowledge of Nike’s customers, intending to replace them with data-driven insights.”

Former Nike branding executive Massimo Giunco weighed in on the strategic shift, pointing out that Donahoe’s focus on cutting costs and ramping up digital sales ultimately diluted the brand’s purpose. “For the first time in Nike history, long-term vision wasn’t about sustainable growth anymore… it was about the supremacy of Direct To Consumer, led by digital.” Giunco’s remarks highlight the tension between Donahoe’s digital-centric vision and Nike’s roots in performance-driven product development.

Innovation Takes a Back Seat

One of the defining characteristics of Nike’s success has been its relentless focus on innovation, particularly in sports-specific products that resonate with athletes. Yet, under Donahoe’s leadership, product creation shifted from a performance-based focus to one centered on broad demographics. Instead of designing footwear and apparel for specific sports such as basketball, football, or tennis, Nike began producing generic products for men and women—more in line with fast-fashion brands like Zara or H&M. This change alienated some of Nike’s core consumers, especially athletes who have long been at the heart of the brand’s identity.

Hubert Rau, a business and marketing professor, echoed this sentiment in his LinkedIn comment: “Brands like On, Hoka, New Balance, and Lululemon are making a dent in Nike’s market share.” While Rau acknowledges that Nike still holds a dominant position, he argues that the company’s move toward generic product lines has opened the door for niche brands to gain ground. “The Swoosh aren’t going anywhere anytime soon, but the competition is more fierce than ever,” he added.

Stephen Drummond, a brand strategy consultant, was even more critical of the company’s leadership choices. “He was chosen by their board, and they chose to support those key decisions too. Boards too often duck responsibility for their own poor calls,” Drummond wrote, pointing to a broader systemic failure at Nike’s highest levels.

Financial Wizardry Over Purpose

At the core of Donahoe’s leadership was a focus on financial performance rather than brand vision. Many, like Greenaway, believe this approach was a fatal flaw. “Fundamentally, Donahoe was a number cruncher. He didn’t believe in brand, he didn’t believe in innovation, and he didn’t believe in partnerships,” Greenaway asserted in his post. The focus on cost-cutting and short-term gains, rather than long-term brand-building, seems to have backfired.

Pascal O’Neill, a strategic marketing advisor, offered a similar critique, stating, “When the culture of true Consumer Insights vs Consumer Needs will be re-established, these managers will be out of a job.” His comment underscores the growing frustration among brand strategists with leaders who prioritize data and analytics at the expense of authentic consumer engagement.

The sentiment was also echoed by Kate Neale, a creative partner and producer, who commented, “Bean counters’ objectives are different; they’re job is to record history, they don’t make it.” Neale’s words encapsulate the widespread perception that Donahoe’s emphasis on numbers ultimately stifled Nike’s ability to innovate and stay ahead of its competitors.

Lessons in Leadership

The fall of Donahoe at Nike is a stark reminder that even the most successful brands can falter if they lose sight of what made them great in the first place. As Andy Greenaway concluded in his post, “Donahoe has exited Nike with millions in his pocket, while Nike itself is billions out of pocket.” The disconnect between leadership and brand purpose, he argues, is a warning to companies everywhere: Choose your leaders carefully, or risk long-term damage.

In hindsight, Donahoe’s downfall might have been inevitable. As Richard Beaumont, a leadership expert, quipped, “Wonder if he got to keep his laptop.” While that remark may have been made in jest, it points to a broader truth—leadership at a brand like Nike is about more than just the bottom line. It’s about understanding and nurturing the culture, innovation, and legacy that made the company iconic.

Nike’s story under Donahoe serves as a cautionary tale for leaders across industries. In a world where competition is fierce and consumer loyalty is fragile, numbers matter—but they aren’t everything. Vision, purpose, and innovation remain critical to staying ahead in the game.