Fast-fashion clothing chain Forever 21 is reportedly getting ready to shutter hundreds of locations as it considers filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. If it does, it would be the second wave of mass store closings and second bankruptcy that the chain has undergone in less than six years. Heres what you need to know about Forever 21s reported closures.
Forever 21 may close 200 storesor all of them
This week, Bloomberg reported that Forever 21 may close 200 locations in the United States as part of a potential second bankruptcy process that the retailer is considering. If Forever 21 can’t find a buyer during the bankruptcy process, the chain would reportedly close all of its remaining U.S. stores.
The situation mirrors what’s been happening with the fabric-and-crafts chain Joann, which is in the process of trying to find a buyer and may be forced to go out of business if it is unsuccessful.
A count on Forever 21s store locator tool reveals that is has 359 stores in the United States.
Forever 21s intellectual property is owned by brand management firm Authentic Brands Group, while its operations are run by Catalyst Brands, a joint venture operated by retail group SPARC and, as of this month, JCPenney.
Catalyst Brands owns other retailers including Aéropostale, Brooks Brothers, Eddie Bauer, Lucky Brand, and Nautica. Last month, it said publicly that it was “exploring strategic operations” for Forever 21.
Fast Company reached out to Forever 21 and Catalyst Brands for comment. Catalyst Brands has not confirmed that it will initiate bankruptcy proceedings for Forever 21.
In a statement provided to Bloomberg, the company said, Forever 21s operating company, which is the brand licensee in the U.S., continues to explore strategic options, including a potential sale, while also reducing costs and optimizing its store footprint. The efforts are ongoing and no final decisions regarding the outcome of the process have been made.
Forever on the brink
Forever 21 has been struggling for years with slowing sales, a weakening brand image, and increased competition from online retailers. In September 2019, the chain filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. At the time, the company said it would be closing about 350 of its 800 stores worldwide.
Less than six months later, it was announced that two of Forever 21s biggest landlords, Simon Property Group and Brookfield Property Partners, were teaming up with Authentic Brands Group to buy the struggling chain for $81 million.
But since then, Forever 21 has continued to face existential pressures, including declining foot traffic and the rise of online fast fashion retailers like Temu and Shein.
In 2023, Forever 21 entered a partnership with Shein that allowed its clothes to be sold on the Chinese shopping platform and saw Sheins clothing being sold in Forever 21 stores.
Still, the partnership doesn’t seem to have been enough to turn Forever 21s fortunes around. Shein is more popular than ever, while Forever 21 still continues to struggle with much of the same pressures it has for years.
Forever 21 did not respond to a request for more information about a potential bankruptcy timeline or which locations might be closed. We will update this post if we hear back.
However, as Bloomberg notes, if Forever 21 does file for bankruptcy and go out of business it will not affect Authentic Brands Groups ownership of the brand’s IP. The publication reports that Authentic already plans to license the Forever 21 brand to other parties.
The layoffs of roughly 7,000 IRS probationary workers beginning this week likely mean the end of the agency’s plan to go after high-wealth tax dodgers and could spell disaster for revenue collections, experts say.The majority of employees shown the door at the federal tax collector are newly hired workers focused on compliance, which includes ensuring that taxpayers are abiding by the tax code and paying delinquent debts, among other duties.The IRS layoffs, one of the largest purges of probationary workers this year across the government, could also hurt customer service and tax return processing during tax season this year, the union representing Treasury Department employees warned Thursday.The upheaval comes less than two months before the tax filing deadline and as the Department of Government Efficiency under Trump adviser Elon Musk seeks to shrink the size of the federal workforce in an effort to radically cut spending and restructure the government’s priorities.Vanessa Williamson, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, said on a Thursday call with reporters that the layoffs at the IRS will disproportionately harm enforcement efforts.“When you underpay and understaff the IRS, the agency doesn’t have the power or the resources it needs to go after wealthy tax evaders with their high priced lawyers,” she said, adding, “The result is, of course, a disaster for revenue.”The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in 2022, gave the IRS $80 billion and the ability to hire tens of thousands of new employees to help with customer service and enforcement as well as new technology to update the tax collection agency, though congressional Republicans later clawed back some of the money.Former IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, appointed by Biden, placed a particular focus on aggressively auditing high-income tax cheats as well as executives who use business aircraft for their personal use while still writing it off as a tax expense and wealthy people who sought to get favorable tax treatment through Puerto Rico without meeting certain tax requirements.A Congressional Budget Office report issued last year describes how rescissions in funding for the IRS affect baseline projections of future revenues, offering a variety of scenarios depending on the severity of the cuts.A $5 billion rescission would reduce revenues by $5.2 billion from 2024 to 2034 and increase the deficit by $0.2 billion. A $20 billion rescission would reduce revenues by $44 billion and increase the deficit by $24 billion for the same period. A $35 billion rescission would reduce revenues by $89 billion and increase the cumulative deficit by $54 billion.“If you starve the IRS, you’ll be providing a feast for the tax evaders,” Williamson said.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said during his confirmation hearing last month that “we do not have a revenue problem in the United States of America, we have a spending problem.”However, both revenues and spending will be an ongoing point of contention for congressional Republicans, who are trying to come up with how to pay for extending provisions of President Donald Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The Penn Wharton Budget model estimates that permanently extending Trump’s tax cuts would increase deficits by $4 trillion over the next decade.Chye-Ching Huang, executive director of NYU’s Tax Law Center, called the layoffs “misguided” and said they “will hurt everyday Americans who pay their taxes and count on the IRS to pay refunds on time while encouraging wealthy people and large businesses to cheat on their taxes.”Doreen Greenwald, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said: “In the middle of a tax filing season, when taxpayers expect prompt customer service and smooth processing of their tax returns, the administration has chosen to decimate the whole operation by sending dedicated civil servants to the unemployment lines.”The union representing IRS workers has already filed multiple legal challenges over the administration’s mass layoffs.Mark Mazur, a former assistant secretary for tax policy at Treasury, said that since most of the laid-off workers were in the IRS’ small business and self-employment division, employees who had handled bigger corporate enforcement cases will be forced to stop their work and handle easier small-business cases.“For sure this mean less enforcement activity,” and the deterrence effect of audits will be diminished, he said.Representatives from Treasury, the IRS and the White House did not respond to Associated Press requests for comment on Thursday.
Associated Press writer Josh Boak in Washington contributed to this report.
Fatima Hussein, Associated Press
I was watching comedian and political commentator Bill Maher talk about Reverse Improvement (RI), and it struck me how profoundly relevant this idea is to the leadership challenges highlighted in this article and the themes weve explored in my upcoming book, TRANSCEND: Unlocking Humanity in the Age of AI. Reverse Improvement, as Maher describes it, occurs when technological progress unintentionally diminishes core human skills and values. Mahers idea of RI isnt just about clunky tech updates or frustrating software upgradesits about a much larger, more insidious phenomenon: how technological advancements can subtly, and sometimes drastically, lead to the erosion of fundamental human skills and values.
The concept of RI highlights a key dilemma facing leaders in the age of AI: When does technological progress stop being an improvement and start becoming a regression? As AI and automation handle tasks once dependent on human creativity, intuition, and problem-solving, we risk outsourcing not just labor but also our intellectual and emotional core. RI warns us of this subtle decaya decline that happens not in obvious ways but slowly, through overreliance on tools meant to help us.
As AI transforms the workplace, its easy to view automation as a form of progress. But if AI makes us less self-aware, less creative, and less empathetic, are we truly improving? Or are we succumbing to RIreplacing meaningful human effort with efficiency at the cost of long-term growth? This tension is exactly why mindful leadership, grounded in principles like self-awareness, right intention, and resilience, is more important than ever.
AI, Reverse improvement, and the risks of dependency
Not all technological upgrades lead to better outcomes. Many improvements, particularly in the context of AI, can unintentionally diminish the very skills that made us successful in the first place. A leader who once relied on keen observation and strategic thinking may, over time, rely on AI-generated insights without questioning their validity. An employee who once developed persuasive narratives may now rely on AI to draft content, losing the ability to connect ideas creatively.
This erosion of skills is why leaders must maintain mindfulness in how they integrate AI into their workflows. Mindfulness, as taught by Eastern and Buddhist philosophy, emphasizes the importance of being present, aware, and intentional. Leaders who embody these qualities recognize when AI is genuinely enhancing their abilities versus when its causing stagnation.
Reverse Improvement occurs when leaders fail to pause and evaluate whether technological progress aligns with long-term human development. AI may offer convenience, but convenience can come at the cost of resilience, problem-solving, and self-reflectionskills critical to effective leadership.
Recognizing when AI helps vs. when it hurts
We dont lose skills all at oncewe lose them gradually, as dependency on AI subtly erodes our mental muscles. Self-awareness, a core tenet of mindfulness, helps leaders recognize when this erosion is happening. Self-aware leaders evaluate whether they are engaging with AI as a tool or relying on it as a crutch.For example, a marketing leader who once crafted compelling campaigns may now rely on AI-driven algorithms to optimize strategies. Without self-awareness, they may stop developing their storytelling abilities, assuming the AI will always know best. But self-aware leaders pause, reflect, and ask: Am I still growing, or am I letting AI take over my creative instincts?
Action Plan: Leaders should integrate mindfulness practices directly into their daily routines and team interactions. This can include short reflective meetings where leaders and teams pause to evaluate decisions and their alignment with long-term goals. Additionally, conducting regular assessments of AI’s role within workflows will ensure leaders remain in control, using AI to complement rather than override human judgment. By fostering an environment of ongoing reflection, leaders can continuously recalibrate their strategies to balance innovation with intentional decision-making.
Leading with purpose, not automation for automations sake
Purpose-driven leadership ensures that leaders consider the ethical, human, and long-term consequences of their decisions. RI occurs when leaders pursue technological upgrades without questioning their value beyond short-term productivity gains.
AI should free up human potential for higher-order tasks, such as creative problem-solving and relationship-building. However, when AI is implemented without the right intention, it can lead to the opposite effectde-skilling employees and fostering dependency. Leaders with the right intention ask: How does this technology enhance, rather than replace, human growth?
Action Step: Leaders should develop a structured framework for evaluating new AI tools by integrating key criteria such as ethical considerations, employee impact, long-term strategic alignment, innovation potential, and risk management. This framework should assess the tools ability to foster creativity and innovation while identifying potential operational disruptions, ethical risks, and unintended consequences. To ensure comprehensive evaluation, governance protocols should be established to monitor compliance with organizational policies, data privacy standards, and ethical guidelines. In addition, diverse stakeholders across departments should be involved to assess both short-term efficiency gains and long-term human development outcomes.
By embedding periodic reviews of AIs effectiveness, leaders can balance technological progress with sustainable, human-centered growth while mitigating risks and driving continuous innovation.
Building human strengths alongside technological progress
Resilience in leadership means embracing change without losing core strengths. Technological progress can undermine resilience when we allow machines to do the hard work that builds character and cognitive stamina. Leaders who embrace resilience understand that problem-solving, creativity, and emotional intelligence are developed through struggle, effort, and reflectionnot instant solutions.AI can certainly assist with repetitive tasks, but leaders must ensure that the hard, growth-oriented work of leadership remains intact. For example, instead of relying solely on AI to analyze market trends, resilient leaders involve their teams in brainstorming sessions to sharpen their strategic thinking.
Action Step: Leaders can prioritize activities that involve manual problem-solving, creative brainstorming, and team collaboration. These exercises help maintain and strengthen cognitive and strategic thinking abilities, preventing skill atrophy in a tech-driven world. Resilience also requires leaders to create a culture that values learning through experience. Rather than shielding teams from challenges by automating solutions, resilient leaders encourage problem-solving, risk-taking, and adaptive learning. By facing difficultieshead-on, teams can strengthen their critical thinking and innovation skills.
Balancing AI and humanity: Avoiding RI through the middle way
Buddhist philosophys middle way teaches us to avoid extremes and seek balance. In the context of AI and RI, this means integrating technology thoughtfully, ensuring that it complements human effort rather than replacing it. The key to leadership in a tech-driven world is not to reject AI, but to integrate it in ways that amplify human strengths while preserving creativity, empathy, and resilience.
Leaders who follow the Middle Way avoid the extremes of either over-relying on AI or rejecting its benefits entirely. They understand that technology can enhance human potential, but only when used with mindful intention and purpose.
From reverse improvement to mindful progress
Technological progress sometimes can be deceptive. What appears to be an upgrade may, in fact, be a step backward if it causes us to detach from our core human capacities. True progress isn’t measured by how much we automate or accelerateit’s measured by how much we grow, both individually and collectively.
Mindful leaders will recognize that AI is a tool, not a replacement for human creativity and judgment. We must remain devoted to creating a future where technological innovation drives genuine improvementnot just in productivity but in the development of resilient, purposeful, and empathetic individuals.
Disability rights could be under threat. People with disabilities are protected from discrimination and given equal access to education, healthcare, employment, and public services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
However, Republican attorneys general in 17 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia) have sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), asking courts to declare Section 504 unconstitutional.
Last May, HHS required that 504 services be provided to people experiencing gender dysphoria. The lawsuit argues that gender dysphoria doesnt fall under the definition of who should get 504 services. However, it then goes on to ask that 504 be eliminated entirely.
Because Section 504 is coercive, untethered to the federal interest in disability, and unfairly retroactive, the Rehabilitation Act is not constitutional, the lawsuit argues.
What will happen if 504 is eliminated?
If 504 is rolled back, it would be up to individual states to decide how much they want to protect people with disabilities from discrimination, as well as which servicesif anythey want to provide.
This includes services like 504 plans, in which schools lay out the individual accommodations that students with disabilities will receive (for example, extra time on tests or braille notes) so these students can participate in class. Currently, 8.5 million students in public schools have 504 plans.
The first round of legal briefs is due on February 25.
How to support disability rights
ADDitude magazine is encouraging people to contact their state representatives and senators and voice their support for 504. If you live in a state thats suing to eliminate 504, you can also contact your attorney general and request that your state withdraw from the lawsuit. If you live in a state thats not suing to eliminate 504, you can contact your attorney general and ask that your state submit a brief on the importance of 504 protections.
Yellowjackets is back with more chaos, more wildernessand a main title that is grungier than ever.Ever since the first season premiered in 2021, the shows opening credits have been one of the most frenetic on television. Blink and youll miss something. Set against the grungy song No Return by Craig Wedren and Anna Waronker, the title is meant to feel like an assault on the senses. It is 90 seconds long, and the longest frame lasts about a second.This makes for a tense intro, in which our brains are bombarded with flickering images faster than we can process them. And thats precisely the point. We want this to be glitched so much that if someone takes a still, they cant really figure it out, says Mason Nicoll, executive creative director of creative studio Digital Kitchen.Digital Kitchen, which has designed main titles for True Blood, Narcos, and Dexter, first dreamed up the concept for the Yellowjackets main title in 2021, when season one premiered. The show is set in the 90s, and the team drew inspiration from 90s skater videos, and drew from the jittery, low-fi aesthetic of the 1999 film The Blair Witch Project. The result was borderline chaotic, but the distressed look provided an additional benefit: it helped disguise key shots by distorting them beyond recognition.[Image: courtesy Digital Kitchen]The team has replicated this approach ever since. But with each season, they swap old frames for new ones that hint at whats to come. Season one teased the shows mysterious symbol, season two introduced eerie snowy landscapes and blood-soaked imagery. Season three now features dark caves, an upside-down image of a bleeding Jesus, and a lot of screaming faces. Its also glitchier than ever. We went to town, says Nicoll, noting that the first cut was about 30% more hectic than the final version.Does this hint at even more madness to come? It seems like it, he says. It does feel like every season just escalates and gets crazier.Season 3 title sequence: No context, just vibes The truth is, Nicoll doesnt know what will happen this season. Not exactly. Sometimes, main title designers get a full synopsis to help them sprinkle in clues. Other times, they only see the pilot and work with the showrunners to create the right tone. With Yellowjackets, Nicoll says he knew the most in season oneand the least in season three. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Digital Kitchen (@digitalkitchen)This year, the showrunners sent the team a whopping 70 shots to work with, but Nicoll explains the shots were all out of context, so his team had to piece the story together and interpret it themselves. It goes without saying they have more insight than the average viewer, but when the shots arrive at random, some mystery remains inevitable.[Image: courtesy Digital Kitchen]Sometimes, the team gave away too much without even realizing it. Thats what happened when the team initially included a new shot of the Antler Queen from season three in the title sequence. If you remember, the identity of the Antler Queen was shrouded in mystery for the first two seasons. At first, we thought it was Lottie. Thenspoilers aheadwe learned it was actually Natalie.So, when Digital Kitchen added this new shot of the Antler Queen, the showrunners reaction, as Nicoll remembers it, was something along the lines of: hell no! The team quickly reworked the shot, glitching it so much that viewers could no longer tell who was under the antlers. The obscured frame now appears around the one-minute markand we are left to wonder: has the wilderness chosen a new Antler Queen?A Blair Witch Project fever dreamAbout half of the shots in the main title come from the show, but the intro wouldnt be the disquieting fever dream it is today without the other half. From the very beginning, Digital Kitchen leaned into The Blair Witch Projects found footage aesthetic, making it seem like the images were filmed by the high school girls themselves.[Image: courtesy Digital Kitchen]To make this footage appear authentic, the team hired lookalike actors in L.A. and shot additional scenes with an old DV camcorder from the 90s. In one scene, art director Rachel Brickel filmed the actors running into a parking lot while she was crouched inside a shopping cart that Nicoll was pushing. I remember thinking I see a speed bump in front of us, and Im like oh man this is going to hurt,' she recalls with a laugh. It did hurt, but she got the shot.[Image: courtesy Digital Kitchen]To achieve the look of a worn-out VHS tape with a corrupted signal, Brickels team played the footage through a really old tube TV from the 90s and ran it through special equipment to further remix and distort the picture. Then, they took that altered footage and glitched it even more on the computer. We wanted to show the beauty of glitches, she says.[Image: courtesy Digital Kitchen]The resulting aesthetic of the Yellowjackets season 3 title sequence may not be ideal for someone prone to migraines. I, for one, cant watch it more than twice in a row without needing to rest my eyes. But for the average viewer who isnt poring over every single frame, the intro isnt meant to be fully absorbed in one sitting. Its designed to reveal itself as the season unfoldsand to keep you away from that dreaded skip button.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has updated its website, and in theory, it’s a model of government transparency. The site lists savings the department claims to have made from cuts, along with bar charts and tables that purport to show the department’s work and the size and scope of the federal government. But there’s a big problem: You can’t trust the numbers.
The website’s homepage is a feed of DOGE’s X posts, and there are pages that claim to show savings, list government spending, and number the size of the executive branch workforce, its total wages, and federal regulations. When the site was updated this week with new data, DOGE initially showed what it claimed was more than $16 billion saved from spending cuts. But the biggest line item in the department’s so-called wall of receipts incorrectly stated an $8 million contract canceled for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was for $8 billion. That error alone cuts the savings DOGE claims to have achieved roughly in half.
Screenshots of various infographics on the doge.gov site, taken February 20, 2025 [Images: Doge.gov]
Elon Musk, who President Donald Trump tapped to lead DOGE’s efforts, attempted to inoculate himself from errors while speaking last week in the Oval Office, acknowledging, “We will make mistakes, but we’ll act quickly to correct any mistakes.” Still, the site doesn’t make it easy to fact-check DOGE’s work. Though its “wall of receipts” co-opts the design of a spreadsheet and includes links to Federal Procurement Data System receipts, it isn’t sortable by column, and it front-loads cuts that are red meat to Trump’s base, like media subscriptions for Politico Pro and Bloomberg Terminal that government officials used to stay informed about their jobs.
An NPR review of the more than 1,100 contracts DOGE initially listed found just $2 billion in savings from contracts that it could confirm were canceled, a number that grew to $6.5 billion in savings when accounting for contracts that hadn’t yet been canceled as of Wednesday but that DOGE included in its total nonetheless. NPR and current and former federal contracting officers it spoke to found other examples where DOGE data may be inaccurate, like line items that claim to be for a contract’s maximum-though-not-necessarily-actual value or that don’t take into account contracts that have been partially spent already.
In the grand multitrillion scheme of government spending, $2 billion is actually quite minuscule. In fact, SpaceX, just one of Musks businesses, has contracts with the Defense Department worth roughly $22 billion.
The DOGE website’s data visualization includes bar charts with a hover effect, so bars change colors when users move their mouse over data like federal employee salary or years of tenure, and tables for spending list columns like “agency,” “description,” and “value.” Visually, the effect is one of authority and accuracy.
Beyond the flash, however, is a site that claims to show citizens what DOGE is doing but does more to obscure the facts and overwhelm with details than it does to inform. It’s a shrewd political play that creates the perception of methodology and empirical fact, but is really just data visualization as propaganda.
After years of working in PR and branding for luxury beauty, Jaimee Lupton decided to break away and disrupt the space by making beauty products that are accessible. With her business partner and real-life partner Nick Mowbray, she launched Monday haircare in 2020.
Lupton saw a gap in the market for a brand that was targeted toward a younger demographic. There were few haircare brands that addressed the needs of younger customers, and even fewer who knew how to speak to those customers through their branding, messaging, and packaging. Lupton knew the power of a personalized message, and she created Monday with that in mind.
The haircare company has received its fair share of accolades since it launched. Beauty outlet Glossy named Monday Haircare Brand of the Year for 2024, and the company has 21 other major beauty awards to its name, including from Allure, Glamour, Cosmopolitan, and InStyle. Its currently the number-one haircare brand globally on TikTok, according to statistics from the platform measured by the most liked and most followed haircare brands. The brand is on track to reach half-a-billion dollars of retail salesno easy feat for five years of business.
The success of Monday then set her up to self-fund other brands. It also put her on the radar of retailers, which began to ask Lupton to work with them to create new bespoke brands. She has since done so with retail partners including Target, Walmart, and Ulta. In the span of five years, Lupton founded five other beauty brands, with more currently in development, maker her a kind of big box Gen Z beauty whisperer in the process.
[Photo: Monday]
Lupton’s bespoke portfolio of accessible brands
Luptons most recent brand launch is Daise, a range of playful, mood-matching fragrance and bodycare, which launched February 1 at Target.
Its a clear play for younger, emerging markets, Lupton says, referring to the specific spending potential of Gen Z. They’re in control of $450 billion of spending power, and that’s set to increase by 48% before 2030, so they’re a huge demographic that we need to be able to target, says Lupton, referring to a 2021 World Economic Forum statistic cited by Snapchat and November 2022 Gen Z report by Afterpay. She also notes, referring to a report by consumer insights platform aytm, that Gen-Alpha is now the fastest emerging group of beauty consumer. Daise is a way to tap into that purchasing power early, too.
[Photo: Daise]
It seems to be working. The brand had $1 million in retail sales in just one week, according to Daise sale statistics, and is forecasting over $50 million in retail sales in the first year. The company hit $400,000 of sales in the first four days of launch in Ulta. On February 1, Daise launched at Target. Lupton says that the number of sales are looking more impressive every day as the brand builds.
Lupton described Daises creation as a way to build a fun self-care brand where beauty could meet play, and isnt taken too seriously. This manifests in the fragrances many form factors, like spritz, mists, and foams, all with youthful appeal. The visual brand is all very Gen Z-oriented, utilizing many of the visual tools of brands targeting similar demographics. It includes bright, sunny colors, like yellow and light purple, with a sans serif all caps type, and bold gradients with combinations such as pink and orange or blue and green that seem to speak to a younger generation.
Its form factors also stand out on the shelf. The body foam, which comes in a uniquely styled body whip, is one example. Daise is one of the first brands to do this at Target and Ulta, creating a product range that is unique to consumers, especially for younger consumers. (Suncare brand Vacation is perhaps most known for popularizing this novel form factor, with its whipped sunscreen that comes in a spray can.) The body mist, bath bombs, and lip balm come in the shape of a flower, with designs including sprinkles or daisies.
[Photo: Being]
Prior to Daise, Lupton launched Being Haircare in July of 2024 with Walmart, after the mega-retailer asked Lupton to create a haircare brand that was in one aisle and on one shelf, and that could target everyone across demographics and for every hair type. The brand has vivid, color-on-color packaging that carries through to its website, type, photography, and styling.
Being was the number-one brand for the retailer in the haircare space in the first three months of its launch. Similarly to Daise, Lupton harnessed Instagram and TikTok marketing as they launched in store aisle endcaps. It’s all around being you, says Lupton. And it’s not a segregation of brands. Were a unisex brand, and the products are shopping arranged for each hair type, noting it will expand into masks and treatments.
[Photo: Being]
Lupton has a few other brands in her portfolio. Theres Châlon, which according to its website, she made with a leading Parisian perfumer to create scents that convey elegance and tradition but fit into modern life. Then theres Osna Naturals, which is described on its website as a skin- and haircare range crafted with care to nourish both body and mind. Both ranges are free from sulfates, phthalates, and parabens, and are certified cruelty-free, dermatologically tested, and suitable for all skin types.
While the brands may target different sectors, the mission across her portfolio of brands stays the same: providing accessible beauty for everyone.
Digital-first with a major retail footprint
Luptons North Star is to be a modern day LOreal: creating accessible brands that modern consumers want. To do so, Lupton has taken a two-prong approach: the brands have an in-house digital team, but they are also partnering with big retailers. With this strategy, she taps into a beauty business model that has proven success: launching a digital-first brand with a brick-and-mortar retail footprint.
I would say we’re 90% digital in terms of our marketing spend, and we create really unique ways in which we speak to [consumers] on digital platforms, Lupton says, citing the brands creator studios, influencers its consumers naturally migrate toward, and UGC content which together creates a multiplatform digital brand destination.
Though Lupton markets her brands as a direct-to-consumer, the digital-first marketing approach is complimented by physical presence in stores like Target, which she views as tween destinations. She explained that the goal is to make the products accessible in terms of price point and purchasabilitybeing able to go to a store and grab a product off the shelf. Retail partners are a big part of how far they have been able to go.
Lupton plans on continuing to grow her brands and expand her portfolio into a bigger range, including treatments and styling. There is a lot in the pipeline for Lupton. She has about 22 brands in development, and intends to roll out all of them in the next three years.
Branded is a weekly column devoted to the intersection of marketing, business, design, and culture.
Not so long ago, Jeff Bezos seemed on the cusp of a triumphant second act. Handing off the CEO reins to his Amazon empire, he shifted attention to his rocket company, Blue Origin, with a mission to help humanity colonize the solar system; a couple of years ago, he even personally rode one its rockets into space. Meanwhile, he was treated as a hero for buying an ailing Washington Post, and under his ownership, the reenergized paper greeted the first Trump presidency with a dire but defiant new slogan: Democracy Dies in Darkness. Even in the rarified realm of tech centibillionaires, Bezos seemed pretty alpha.
These days . . . not so much. In the past couple of weeks alone, Blue Origin announced it would lay off 10% of its workforce, and the Post attracted attention for declining to publish an ad critical of the second Trump presidency and the murky role of fellow (or rival) mega-billionaire Elon Musk. Whether Bezos had any direct role in the latter decision (the Post isnt talking), it adds to a series of incidents that suggest an effort to stay on the administrations good side. In other words, Bezoss personal brand seems to have faded from hard-charging, fearless visionary to just another rich guy trying to stay relevant.
To be sure, Jeff Bezos isnt exactly in danger of losing his mega yacht. Amazon is still thrivingits share price hit a record high earlier this month, and its revenue just surpassed Walmart’salbeit under its new CEO. But consider the contrast to Musk, whose portfolio also includes a rocket company (SpaceX) and a media platform (the former Twitter). Even before the new Trump administration took office with Musk practically riding shotgun, SpaceX had established itself as a fixture in Americas space program, and notched achievements like a space walk and the furthest-out orbital flight in 50 years.
The Bezos brand, meanwhile, has bogged down. Blue Orbit’s layoffs of an estimated 1,000 employeesthe company pointed to a workforce that had become bloated during a period of fast growthfollowed a successful launch of its 320-foot New Glenn reusable rocket. But that launch was about five years later than originally planned, and the company is widely seen as lagging behind SpaceX (even though it is actually a couple of years older). It will surely remain in the hunt for NASA and Department of Defense contracts, but not in the lead. Were obviously huge fans, Blue Origins CEO has said of the new Trump regimes seemingly space-friendly agenda.
Lots of tech leaders seem to be jockeying to be perceived as, if not already huge fans, then at least optimistic and noncritical players in whatever the Trump agenda turns out to be. But few have attracted more critical blowback for this apparent attitude shift than Jeff Bezos.
Again, Musk is the most glaring contrast, having become a de facto-power player within the administration, a role he both amplifies and leverages with his X social media network. Bezos was just one tech titanalongside Metas Mark Zuckerberg and Google CEO Sundar Pichai, among othersattending Trumps inauguration, donating to his inaugural fund, and joining the crowd of chief executives seeking to curry favor with, or at least escape the spite of, the president. But while many have been accused of shamelessly displaying fealty, Bezos has taken the most lumps.
This traces back to his ownership of the Post and the surprising decision that the paper would not make a presidential endorsement, just as it was poised to endorse Kamala Harrisand shortly before Blue Origins CEO was to have a meeting with Trump. Bezos denied any quid pro quo, but critics saw the incident as kowtowing. Subsequent episodesa cartoonist quitting the Post when one of her anti-Trump pieces was rejected, and now the papers decision to turn away ads from the nonpartisan advocacy group Common Cause’s calling for Musks ouster from his ill-defined government rolehave only added to a sense of caution and vulnerability that feels like the opposite of vintage Bezos.
As the Post itself has reported, it’s not just Blue Origin that will need smooth government relations. Amazon (where Bezos remains executive chairman) has major federal contracts for its cloud division, with billions more in Pentagon contracts up for grabs in the years ahead. And in the past, Trump hasnt been shy about blaming Jeff Bozo for Post coverage he didnt like, and other perceived slights. The main criticism of Peak Bezos was that he could be severely demanding and hypercompetitive. Given the presidents penchant for retribution, maybe the most competitive move Bezos still has is not antagonizing him.
And for the moment, at least, that seems to be working. Trump certainly hasnt had anything negative to say about Jeff Bezos lately. Maybe with this version of Bezos, he neednt bother.
In recent months, weve seen a wave of companies (including Amazon, JPMorgan, and Dell) and the federal government announce plans for a full-time return-to-office for workers. Other companies have slowly increased the numbers of the days they require in-office weekly.
The subsequent pushback from many employees has been intense, with workers signing petitions, opting into coffee badging routines (where they swipe their badges, grab a coffee, and head home), or quitting all together.
As multiple elements of psychological safety are broken by actions such as these, there is often some collateral damage. After accepting countless changes needed to survive and thrive over the past few years, employees thought they had found their grooves. Therefore, when changes that were viewed as working well are amended or even nullified, workers feel justified in being upset.
If up to 70% of team engagement can be attributed to ones manager, how, then, should managers guide teams who are feeling let down by the organization? When companies remove the remote flexible work arrangements they have come to enjoy and expect, how can you remain an authentic leader when your teamand youmay be feeling let down?
Does anybody care what we like?
One of the greatest tools leaders can employ to demonstrate their respect toward their employees is how they validate their emotions. Employee engagement has long been measured at an organizational level as an indicator of organizational effectiveness and workforce retention. Whether via large scale annual surveys or team-based conversations, employees will usually respond if asked how they are feeling.
In aggregated findings, flexible work arrangements and ability to work remotely (at least some of the time) have shown positive correlations to employee happiness, augmenting this sentiment by as much as 20%. Combined with other studies that indicate that happier workers are up to 20% more productive, many thought that hybrid and flexible work arrangements were here to stay.
However, for as many different means as executives use to determine levels of employee satisfaction, they seem to be ignoring sentiments that support flex-work and flex-time sentiments. Beyond this, as many companies are eliminating their diversity, equity, and inclusion practices, employees are not only feeling their opinions are unheard, but they are also not feeling welcome.
This sentiment has the potential to create significant ripple effects since, when employees share whats on their mind, they will only feel heard if listeners meet their subjective needs and expectations. Thus, despite many reports indicating flexible work has increased productivity and job-value satisfaction, employers are catching the RTO wave and calling employees back to the office. Employees are, therefore, apt and justified to feel resentment.
This may be an indication that companies are not listening, or perhaps employers simply believe that being in the office will (eventually) equate to higher productivity and/or engagement. Whatever the reason, companies initiating RTO do not appear to be weighing employees desire to continue to have flexible working arrangements. Gallup reports that overall, U.S. employees daily negative emotions have been and remain elevated above pre-pandemic levels.
If employers were really listening to their people, they would likely hear that workers have settled into flexible work and appreciate its attributes. There are likely opportunities to fine-tune or tweak how it is managed, but abrupt RTO announcements have made the news most often because employees did not see the change coming.
When employees are happy with how things were but sense a change is underfoot, they will look to leaders to make sense of it all. This can be extra tricky with RTO policies, especially if you also appreciated your own flexible work arrangements. Thus, when it comes to leading the initiative to return to the office, a first step will be to determine how members of your team feel. Next, it will be to remain empathetic during the process, rather than trying to manage the change.
Change Versus Transition: Making Sense of Whats Happening
In 2020, the world hit a pivot point: Life as we knew it changed and, as a result, how and where we worked did, too. However, as managers we need to ask: Did we change, or did we actually transition to our new reality? Determining this distinction is quite relevant, as identifying what is happening bears significant influence on effective management.
We tend to interchange the ideas of change and transition. But they actually have a slightly different meaning. We know when were experiencing change when external events impact how we live our lives and/or interact with others. Interrupting how work is done with a policy shift is therefore a change. Thus, when the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated people to stop working together in formal office settings, this was a change. Meanwhile, according to the Bridges Transition Model, a model focusing on phases of emotional experiences and reconciliations, a transition is an inner psychological process that we experience when we internalizeand then come to terms withthe new situations that change brings about. Learning to regulate individual productivity and the cadence of remote-office workdays was therefore a mental transition.
While the change to remote work was almost impossible to plan for, developing a longer-term management plan was encouraged in tandem. However, in retrospect, it seems that many of these suggestions focused on the macro/organizational level, such as codifying company standards and practices and instituting training. Helping workers to become comfortable with their new reality was not a priority, and many fell into ruts of anxiety, burnout, and depression. However, those who elected to stay in their roles made mental adjustments, got into a new groove, and transitioned into a comfortable new-normal.
The Center for Creative Leadership, a nonprofit focusing on leadership development, advises leaders who manage change to bring their team members together to create a shared vision around desired goals. This was not done with the switch to remote work, as workers were abruptly sent home because of health risks. And now employers are again sending this signal with blanket RTO initiatives.
Some leaders may view changing work modalities as just going back to how things were, but for employees who had mentally transitioned to their new normal, its more than that. For the second time in five years, employees are realizing that what they want and like about how they work does not matter to their supervisors. If they are not willing to return to the office, their jobs will not be theirs. So its no wonder that many employees are sending their own signal: They are not happy being called to the office and many are indicating they would rather quit.
Putting It Together: Transitioning Through Change
While there are surely some organizations that are bringing people back to work just because they can (and do not have more of a rationale than that), most companies will have done some due diligence to make the RTO decision. Whatever the reason, if your company is going to institute a change in work modality, you will need to accept the decision, and then lead your people through.
What if, instead of trying to manage the team through a change, you are empathetic to the unique needs, wants, and levels of acceptance the individuals on their team are experiencing? In other words, instead of focusing on the RTO change, focus on helping the team transition through the ending of what they are used to and will likely miss?
Employees who were given the opportunity to work from home or who had flex-time or flex-space work arrangements have become comfortable in how they do their work. Whether they adjusted post pandemic or were hired into remote or hybrid roles, employees established a comfortable rhythm of work and felt trusted and empowered to work remotely. No matter how well justified RTO initiatives may be, individuals will feel shocked and angry, and may even try to deny that their old way of life is ending. It is very likely that they will grieve the loss of what they had become accustomed to which may manifest in sadness or anger if gone unattended.
To approach a change that impacts a way of life by using company policyobjectively saying this is what has been decidedwill not feel good. At the same time, trying to make people feel comfortable by telling them it is not a big deal or that they will not notice the change after a while will also not likely work. In times of transition, a leaders imperative is actually to help people feel like they can be successful despite being uncomfortable and temporarily unhappy.
Empathetic leaders who recognize their team members are struggling with a transition will create opportunities to foster dialogue. This may entail acknowledging that the situation is difficult and reminding the team that they have experienced challenges in the past, but the commitment to working together toward organizational goals while upholding organizational values has never waivered and will not change now. Then, leaders will listen to concerns while seeking to abate confusion and uncertainty by answering questions about what a change means, what it means to them, and how it will impact interactions with systems and with their colleagues.
They will also not hesitate to offer direct feedback to their team members about how the change is going to impact things at an organizational level. For example, if RTO is a company-wide ordinance, leaders will want to explain how office space will now be managed in a way that may enhance team interactions and/or encourage team building. If relationships are nurtured in this way, it is reasonable to expect that most employees will progress to a calmer state of acceptancewhat Bridges calls a neutral zone.
As a leader, you can follow up on what you hear as an employee advocate. You can find the right time and ask your own supervisor your why, what, and how questions such as: Why is the company doing this now? What metrics/data demonstrates that returning to the office is appropriate? And what lift do we expect to see (productivity, efficiency, retention, etc.) with RTO? How will we accommodate employees who have made plans assuming we were going to stay remote/hybrid as we said we would?
If you do not feel the answers you receive make sense, its also okay to talk with Human Resources. Remember, you are not only asking for yourself, you are asking for the people you are leading.
Authentic reconciliation: You and the change
Change is never easy, but it can be the impetus for a new beginning. Leaders who take the time to respectfully listen to how team members are feeling will also need to remember that what they do with what they hear matters. The goal will be to help team members make sense of what is changing, then determine how they can effectively contribute as part of the new environment.
When climate disasters strike, funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is just one part of the response. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) also plays a significant role by helping cities and states rebuild after hurricanes, wildfires, and other climate impacts. The Trump administration, which has already taken aim at FEMA, now plans to drastically reduce the HUD office that funds disaster recovery.
Its a move that threatens the entire countryand some Republican-led districts more so. Every single state has had at least one federally declared major disaster due to extreme weather since 2011, according to Rebuild by Design, a project at the Institute for Public Knowledge at New York University that focuses in part on climate resilience.
That means all Senate districts have been affected by fires, floods, tornadoes, or hurricanes (though extreme heat can be deadly and continues to be a growing climate threat, heat waves have not yet initiated a federal disaster declaration). Meanwhile, 99.5% of congressional districts in the U.S. include a county that has had at least one such disaster, with only two unscathedthough that figure doesnt include statewide disaster declarations, the organization notes, which if counted would have raised the number to 100%. Still, that 99.5% figure has amounted to at least $117.9 billion in federal post-disaster assistance from FEMA and HUD.
[Screenshot: Atlas of Accountability]
Since 2011, 22 congressional districts have been struck by 12 or more disasters, and 77.3% of those are represented by Republican House members, while 22.7% are represented by Democrats. When it comes to the most affected states, California tops the list with 39, but Oklahoma, Tennessee, Iowa, Vermont, Alaska, and Mississippi all have had more than 25 disaster declarations each. Still, nearly every American has been affected in some way: 99.5% of U.S. residents live in counties with recent disaster declarations, per Rebuild by Designs analysis.
Rebuild by Design began as a HUD-launched design competition in 2013 to respond to the devastation caused by Hurricane Sandy. It has since become a broader organization to help governments collaborate on climate preparedness. It has also created an Atlas of Accountability, an interactive map that catalogs county-level disaster declarations, overlaying that information with details on congressional districts. The tool is meant to help communities and policymakers understand their exposure to disasters and the benefits of investing in climate resilience.
This week, Rebuild by Design updated the tool with its latest data, highlighting how disasters have impacted the country. This update continues to show that disasters impact everyone, said Jeff Stevens, EVP and general manager at iParametrics, an emergency management organization, in a statement. We need to invest in resilience before and after disasters to reduce the disaster impacts on communities and their critical infrastructure.
