In 2021, two people you’ve probably never heard ofFaZe Rug and Adin Rossfaced off in a one-on-one basketball game at a Los Angeles gym. Winner gets $25,000. Sam Gilbert led a two-person team that streamed it live on YouTube from a single iPhone. The players weren’t professional athletes, and it was, Gilbert says, a very below average basketball game. Still, nearly 80,000 people tuned in live, most of them under 34 years old.
That was the biggest eye opener to me, says Gilbert, director of content for Bleacher Reports House of Highlights. Thats when I knew there was something here.
Gilbert saw that something fundamental had shifted in sports consumption. The names mattered in the same way fans tune in to watch Luka Doncic or Victor Wembanyama. But personality and creator fandom trumped talent and quality of play. FaZe Rug and Adin Ross command audiences of millions across YouTube and Twitchdeeply engaged fans who, when the two faced off in real time, showed up.
It was a test, Gilbert says. And its success became the foundation for Bleacher Reports Creator League, a sports league where social medias biggest personalities compete in basketball, dodgeball, and flag football for cash prizes that can stretch well into six figures.
[Photo: Warner Bros Discovery]
Young viewers are tuning in. A dodgeball match at DreamCon in 2022 generated over 80 million views with 7 million engagements and climbed as high as the No. 2 trending video on YouTube. In 2025 alone, the league generated 606 million viewsa 60% increase from the previous year.
So how does a made-up sports league that features average, amateur athletes regularly outperform mainstream sports and entertainment on social media, all while reaching the seemingly unreachable Gen Z demographic?
Meeting them where they are isn’t enough
Drew Muller had a numbers problem that didn’t make sense.
As Vice President and GM of House of HighlightsBleacher Report’s social-first sports vertical founded in 2014 and acquired in 2015he watched highlight consumption explode year over year. The brand was on its way to over 100 million followers across platforms, driving billions of monthly views.
But Muller also saw the other side of the equation. As part of Turner Sports (now TNT and part of Warner Bros. Discovery), he had a front-row seat to traditional sports broadcasting, and the data showed that the under-34 live sports viewing audience was collapsing. According to Bleacher Reports research, Major League Baseball’s median viewer is 56 years old. The NHL’s is 52. The NBA’s is 49. Even NFL viewers skew older47% are 55 and over, and only 17% are under 35.
“Something doesn’t add up here,” Muller recalls thinking back in 2020. House of Highlights’ numbers kept climbing. Gen Z’s appetite for sports content was undeniable. Yet they wouldn’t watch live games on TV.
But they would, Muller noticed, enthusiastically watch a four-hour livestream of a YouTube creator playing video games.
The solution to bridge that gap and satisfy that audience was the Creator League. And the hypothesis was simple: Meet Gen Z where they areon YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok. But also meet them with people they care about, and in formats they understand.
Creator League built rosters for reality TV, not sports
To build a sports league out of thin air, you have to start with the games, right?
No, says Gilbert. I think the creator content is first and foremost. We know the space we’re playing in. Were leveraging the biggest names in the creator space, so we always have to stay true and authentic to that space.
It makes sense. Traditional sports leagues have built fandom over generations through geographic loyalty and decades-long story arcs. Its why leagues like the XFL and USFL, which lack that history, continually sprout up and fold. So, rather than fight that same battleand risk the same fateGilbert and Muller dug into years of YouTube beef, Twitch streams, and TikTok drama. This is the new generations mythology, and the Creator League is built on it.
“You’re almost like a casting director for a Survivor-style show where you’re trying to introduce different personalities that could lead to controversy,” Muller explains. “You want someone that’s going to be the shit-talkerthe villain. You want the good guy. You want the underdog. You really need to cast for every role.”
[Photo: Warner Bros Discovery]
Casting creators goes beyond beef and personality. The league also needed creators who could actually move audiences. This meant targeting creators not with the largest followings, but with the most rabid, most engaged fans. lot of times, Muller says, we’ll prioritize working with someone who might have a fraction of the followers of someone elseif we see they can move 15,000 people to a video in an instant if they want to.”
How Creator League works
The 2025 season featured four team owners who exemplified this approach: JasonTheWeen, a 21-year-old FaZe Clan member known for viral IRL stunts; RayAsianBoy, who rose to fame after linking with Kai Cenat in Japan; YourRAGE, a veteran creator known for raw humor and live-streaming dominance; and Mark Phillips, the creative force behind RDCWorld1, the viral sketch comedy crew with over 1.7 billion YouTube views.
Each owner assembles a roster of fellow creators to compete across five sports from May through Novemberdodgeball, slamball (trampoline basketball), flag football, knockout basketball, and five-on-five basketballwith a $500,000 prize pool on the line. The rosters feature creators from each owner’s network: friends, collaborators, and fellow content creators who bring their own followings to their team. The competition unfolds like a season-long reality show where creators compete, trash-talk across platforms between events, and rally their fanbases to vote for in-game advantages.
They may not appear to be household names. But to Gen Z, theyre as recognizable as LeBron James and Lionel Messi.
These selections werent random, either. Gilbert and Muller looked for creators with strategic platform diversitymixing Twitch stars with YouTube and TikTok personalitiesall while hunting for preexisting storylines.
Mark Phillips and YourRAGE have been talking trash for years about who’s more athleticwho’s better at this, who’s better at that, Gilbert says. We were able to leverage that to give a history to something that was basically still brand new.”
Fast-paced, fluid rules, no dead air
Casting solved the who. The harder question was howhow do you design competitions that keep a digital audience locked in when it has infinite options to click away?
They started with a constraint: No inventing new sports.
“They had to be familiar,” Gilbert says, “because we knew that with this generation, you only have such a short amount of time to clearly articulate what you’re trying to get them to come and watch.”
They settled on basketball, dodgeball, and flag footballsports everyone recognizes and understands. But understanding doesnt equal engagement. For that, Gilbert’s team had to strip away everything that makes traditional sports drag so the pacing mirrors the live streams Gen Z already consumesconstant action, no lulls, face-forward intensity. One timeout instead of three. Running clocks. No halftime. Creators addressing the camera directly between plays. “We’re not trying to make any of these moments a dead period where we know the audience can look on the side of the screen, find another video, and click off pretty easily,” Gilbert says.
Even the rules themselves stay fluid. When a three-point conversion felt clunky during flag football’s regular season, Gilbert met with the creators, and they decided to pivot to a painted areaa conversion zonefor the championship instead. Problem solved.
Its our league,” Gilbert says. “We’ll change up rules as much as we need to to make it entertaining for the audience.”
The proof of concept came through incremental tests. In 2020 and 2021, House of Highlights created shows tied to major events like The Match, then tried standalone basketball knockout games. The FaZe Rug versus Adin Ross experiment in 2021 validated the core thesis. By 2022, they were ready for more structure: a one-on-one basketball tournament that culminated at the Final Four in New Orleans. The format kept evolvingtwo-on-two basketball at the 2023 Final Four, a one-on-one flag football season, and massive five-on-five events at DreamCon.
[Photo: Warner Bros Discovery]
“It really evolved from big event to big event into something that could feel bigger or have this continuity and through line,” Muller says.
The tentpole strategy became crucial. By tying Creator League events to TNT Sports’ biggest momentsMarch Madness, MLB playoffs, major soccer tournamentsthey gained access to production infrastructure and built-in audience attention. Bennett Spector, General Manager of Bleacher Report, saw the strategic advantage: “When TNT Sports is covering the college football playoff or Roland Garros or the MLB playoffs, he says, we thought that being able to power up Creator League events as a property and component of what those weekends feel like is where this could really blow up and grow from.”
Giving the fansand the creatorscontrol
The Creator League breaks a lot of rules that anchor traditional sports league modelsfocusing on creators instead of athletes being chief among them. But perhaps the biggest rule they’ve cast aside is not in how they’ve built the league, but in what they have given away.
Control.
Fans can vote in real-time on game-changing advantages. Which team gets an extra player in dodgeball? Fans vote. Who gets a power-up that makes all their baskets count for double the points for two full minutes? Viewers decide. Which teams two-point conversion will be worth four points?You get it.
Gilbert admits it’s “one of the most fun but most stressful parts of each live event” because outcomes become genuinely unpredictable. But that chaos creates the engagement that traditional sports can’t replicate. If enough supporters show up in the live chat at a given time, they can make sure that the creator they lovewhose team they supportgets a power-up or a boost that could help them win the game, and the prize money. This means the creators themselves become recruiters. During voting windows, team owners lean into their cameras, practically pleading: “Go vote, go vote, go vote!”
This is not a brand begging for eyeballs or a commentator asking for engagement. It’s someone fans have watched for years, with whom they feel they have a relationship, asking for helpand the fans respond.
[Photo: Warner Bros Discovery]
Control isnt all the Creator League has given away. Its given away some power, tooover both distribution and monetization. For 2025, team owners secured revenue-sharing deals and IP rights to create their own team merchandise.
“We really wanted to change the feeling of, Here’s a check, come and show up for a couple of hours, Muller says. “If we’re going to have you put your name on this team and your face and the logo, we want you to feel both incentivized and proud to be a part of it.”
And while most media companies would lock down their intellectual property, the Creator League encourages co-streaming. Creators stream the events on their own channels simultaneously alongside House of Highlights and Creator League channels, so fans can watch the main broadcast on one screen and Mark Phillips’s handheld sideline stream on another. The key is that, to participate in polls and voting, users need to migrate to the main Creator League stream.
The result is “a uniquely complementary distribution model,” Gilbert says, where multiple streams amplify each other rather than cannibalize.
And its working. In 2025 alone, the Creator League generated 606 million views. Events averaged 123,606 concurrent viewers, with 81% of that live audience under 34. On House of Highlights’ channel, Creator League content averaged 2.9 million cross-platform views per postoutperforming both college football and NHL content, and nearly matching NBA and NFL highlights.
That reach has attracted big brand partners. Pizza Hut signed a seven-figure deal to sponsor three events, joining a roster that includes Nissan, Apple, Samsung, Netflix, PlayStation, and Corona.
The insight: Giving away control doesn’t dilute the product. It multiplies it.
Bleacher Report systematized disruption
The Creator League is not a one-off success story. It’s the latest example in a pattern that Bleacher Report has repeated for nearly two decades: identify where audiences are going before they get there, build for that future, and don’t bind yourself to what worked yesterday.
“Bleacher has a rich history of disrupting itself,” Spector says. “You have to accept fate, that this is a reality. People have gone off-platform, and this is what fans want. And once you accept the reality that you might not have all of the ingredients owned, your world looks much more free. Its not only okay to disrupt yourselves, it’s actually encouraged within these walls.”
The companys late-2015 acquisition of House of Highlights, which has grown to 100 million followers across platforms, has given it an invaluable lab in which to make and test assumptions. The Bleacher Report brand caters to current consumption trends while House of Highlights operates as “a speedboat out in front,” Spector says, focused on young and emerging audiences. With access to the younger demo, House of Highlights tests. When something works, it scales.
The Creator League itself is proof. What started as a two-person iPhone stream in 2021 grew into a multi-event franchise that now, in 2025, generates more than 600 million views.
This, combined with access to TNT Sports infrastructure and a long-standing tradition of hiring from within target demographicspeople solving problems for themselves and their peers, not from textbooks or in theorypositions Bleacher Report to make big bets, which they often win.
In 2014, Spector greenlit Game of Zones, an animated NBA parody of Game of Thrones pitched by two freelance animators. At the time, no major sports media company had ventured into fictional, comedy-driven animation. Bleacher Report did, timing the show’s release to run alongside TNT’s NBA coverage, using the network’s reach to amplify the digital series. The show earned multiple Emmy nominations and ran for seven seasons.
Four years later, Bleacher Report launched The Champions, an animated series about UEFA Champions League players, strategically timed to Turner’s acquisition of Champions League broadcast rights. It became the publisher’s most-watched show ever. That formulabold, creative bets paired with TNT’s tentpole eventsbecame a blueprint for the Creator League.
The validation for the Creator League is in the competitors and copycats. The NBA has launched its own Creator Cup. The NFL brought creators to the Super Bowl. In Europe, Gerard Piqué’s Kings League and the Baller League are selling out stadiumstaking what Bleacher Report has proven digitally and translating it to physical venues packed with fans.
Which is exactly where Spector sees this heading. The Creator League has captured the digital, at-home audience traditional sports are losing. The next frontier, according to Spector, is bringing those 123,000 concurrent viewers81% of them under 34into actual arenas. Building the merchandise ecosystems. Creating destination events around TNT Sports’ biggest weekends that feel less like marketing activations and more like Coachella for sports fans raised on YouTube.
Money follows, Spector says. I think that is often the mantrathe ethosthat we try and apply to our content strategy and programming philosophy. If you can scale an engaged, scaled audience, the money will follow. Start with the audience problem. Solve that, and the business will take care of itself.
I was taught to use a so-called feedback sandwich to give constructive feedback: lead with a positive, share the negative, finish with a positive. The idea was . . . well, I dont know what the idea was. I guess to soften the room for improvement blow?
All I know is that the feedback sandwich rarely worked.
Especially on me.
Take the time a boss told me, I really appreciate how you always come prepared to the supervisor meetings. But you sometimes run over people with all your facts, and figures, and productivity results. Even so, youre a valuable member of the team.
The meat of the sandwich, the you sometimes run over people with your facts and figures, was admittedly true.
But the bread, the two positives, didnt soften the blow. In fact, the bread made me feel manipulated. And kind of pissed me off.
Thats because a sandwich in effect says, I need to give you negative feedback . . . but first Ill say something nice so you wont think I hate you. And then Ill say something nice so you wont be mad at me when you leave.
Thats the problem with the feedback sandwich. The recipients feel manipulated.
And even if at first they dont, give it time: Since our positive qualities tend to stay consistent, the same bread eventually starts to taste stale.
And as for the likelihood of positive change? According to research published in Learning and Motivation, the feedback sandwich almost always fails to correct negative or subpar behaviors if only becauseas in my caseI focused more on how the feedback was delivered, than on the quality and accuracy of the feedback itself.
The better approach is what the authors of a study published in Management Review Quarterly call benevolent honesty.
As the researchers write:
We propose that that a better approach is benevolent honesty, in which communicators focus on delivering negative information truthfully and directly, but also employ additional strategies to ensure that their words actually lead to long-term improvement.
For example, a professor might emphasize that a student is capable of achieving high standards when giving critical feedback. Though this strategy might seem intuitive, communicators often fail to make their benevolent intentions clear they seem to forget (at least in the moment) that (others) do not have access to that same information.
Their findings dovetail nicely with a Journal of Experimental Psychology study that shows including one sentence can make feedback up to 40% more effective: Im giving you these comments because I have very high expectations and I know that you can reach them.
According to Culture Code author Daniel Coyle, that phrase contains three distinct signals:
You are part of this group.
This group is special; we have higher standards here.
I believe you can reach those standards.
Instead of a feedback sandwich, the result is more like a relationship sandwich.
No manipulation. No platitudes. Not irrelevant compliments. No false hope.
Just clear, direct feedback, delivered inside a message of connection, belonging, and trust.
Thats the real difference between a feedback sandwich and benevolent honesty.
The feedback sandwich theoretically helps the feedback giver reduce the likelihood of conflict during a tough conversation. (If I throw in a few compliments, maybe he wont get mad.)
But how a difficult conversation might feel to the person giving feedback doesnt matter. The only thing that matters is whether the feedback helps the recipient improve his or her performance.
And thats something a feedback sandwich is terrible at producing.
The next time you need to have a difficult conversation with an employee, or with anyone, forget the feedback sandwich. Forget leading and closing with a compliment.
Instead, just be direct and truthful, while showing that you care about that persons performance or well-being because you care about them: that you want things to be better for them as a result of the conversation.
Not just to be easier for you.
Jeff Haden
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister publication, Inc.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
If youre planning on buying a PC, laptop, or cell phone in the coming months, a word of advice for you before Christmas: Buy now, not later. Prices are likely set to spike in the new yeardue to a shortage of memory chips.
Memory and storage for DRAM and NAND, two major types of computer memory, have seen costs rise between 30 and 40%, year-on-yearin some cases, theyre even doubling. This impacts the bill of materials (BOMs), or the cost of individual items to make, PCs, and especially low-end smartphones, where margins are thin and the proportional cost increase is more severe.
The sudden spike in memory prices is part of a decades-long pattern of semiconductor supply cyclesbut this one is coming unusually fast, driven by unexpected demand from big tech companies building data centers for AI training and inference.
There is an occasional cycle of supply shortages or some high demand bridges coming in once or twice a decadeit goes about 40 years back, says Runar Bjrhovde, research analyst at Canalys. He estimates that we’ve experienced seven “steep” cycles so far. What’s different now, he says, is the speed and the cause. This has developed really, really quickly.
As a result, the foundries manufacturing chips and memory are prioritizing the high-performance compute chips needed for data centers, as well as higher-paying customers like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon Web Services, because scarce raw materials and limited capacity force them to funnel resources to the most profitable segments.
As memory components become more limited and more expensive, manufacturers face increasing pressure to raise prices, says Anthony Scarsella, research director at IDC, which tracks cell phone shipments and sales. While some OEMs will inevitably be forced to raise prices, others will adjust their portfolio towards pricier models with higher margins to absorb some of the memory impact on BOM, he says. Next year will be a challenging time for the industry.
Because of that, the average price of a smartphone will rise to around $465 next year, up from $457 in 2025 according to IDC data, even as total shipments in 2026 dip slightly because some buyers are priced out or delayed by component shortages. The biggest squeeze is expected in the low-to-mid range Android segment, where customers are most sensitive to price rises and vendors have the least room to absorb higher memory costs. On PCs, the picture is similar. A PC makes up about 15 to 18% of the bill of materials that goes in putting together a PC, says Bjrhovde of the memory and storage share.
It entirely seems to be driven by the extreme data center demand that’s happening currently, says Runar Bjrhovde, research analyst at Canalys. So a lot of Nvidia investments are really pushing a lot of companies doing semiconductors forward.
Bjrhovde isnt convinced that therell be ludicrous price rises, estimating that costs to end users could rise by 10% or 20%. Nevertheless, on a several-hundred-dollar device, that can make an impact.
Some of that could be mitigated by smartphone companies stomaching some of the rise and reducing their margins, Bjrhovde says. That shift could also change what you actually get when you unbox a device. In some categories, especially budget phones, vendors are more likely to hold the price and trade down the quality of other parts outside of the memory, such as their camera, display, or processor.
But theres only so much they can trim before the device becomes so outmoded that its not worth buying. The list of components that can be downgraded is extensive, Scarsella reckons.
Most buyers may not notice the trade-offs. I think the average smartphone is upgraded every three years or so, Bjrhovde says. He suggests that at the point of upgrade, you might well have forgotten what you paid for your last device. But if youre the kind of customer who buys the latest iPhone Pro or top-end Android, youre likely to end up paying a little more, or getting slightly less storage for the same sticker price.
For now, prices have held steady, with the cost increase not yet feeding through to end-user pricing. But that will soon change, warn the experts. So if youre looking to upgrade your PC or phone, bringing that purchase forward could save money. Industry executives are warning the memory crunch has only just started.
The conversation about AI in the workplace has been dominated by the simplistic narrative that machines will inevitably replace humans. But the organizations achieving real results with AI have moved past this framing entirely. They understand that the most valuable AI implementations are not about replacement but collaboration.
The relationship between workers and AI systems is evolving through distinct stages, each with its own characteristics, opportunities, and risks. Understanding where your organization sits on this spectrumand where its headedis essential for capturing AIs potential while avoiding its pitfalls.
Stage 1: Tools and Automation
This is where most organizations begin. At this stage, AI systems perform discrete, routine tasks while humans maintain full control and decision authority. The AI functions primarily as a productivity tool, handling well-defined tasks with clear parameters.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/creator-faisalhoque.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/faisal-hoque.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Ready to thrive at the intersection of business, technology, and humanity? ","dek":"Faisal Hoques books, podcast, and his companies give leaders the frameworks and platforms to align purpose, people, process, and techturning disruption into meaningful, lasting progress.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/faisalhoque.com","theme":{"bg":"#02263c","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#ffffff","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#000000"},"imageDesktopId":91420512,"imageMobileId":91420514,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Examples are everywhere: document classification systems that automatically sort incoming correspondence, chatbots that answer standard customer inquiries, scheduling assistants that optimize meeting arrangements, data entry automation that extracts information from forms.
The key characteristic of this stage is that AI operates within narrow boundaries. Humans direct the overall workflow and make all substantive decisions. The AI handles the tedious parts, freeing humans for higher-value work.
The primary ethical considerations at this stage involve ensuring accuracy and preventing harm from automated processes. When an AI system automatically routes customer complaints or flags applications for review, errors can affect real people. Organizations must implement quality controls and monitoring to catch mistakes before they cause damageparticularly for vulnerable populations who may be less able to navigate around system errors.
Stage 2: Augmentation and Advice
As organizations grow comfortable with AI systems, they typically progress to models where AI not only executes tasks but provides analysis and recommendations that inform human decision-making.
At this stage, predictive analytics tools might identify emerging patterns in customer behavior, enabling more proactive business strategies. Risk assessment systems might analyze historical data to flag potential compliance issues. AI-powered diagnostics might suggest possible causes for equipment failures or patient symptoms.
The critical distinction is that while AI can generate insights humans couldn’t produce alone by finding patterns in datasets too large for any person to analyze, human judgment remains the final authority for interpreting and acting on these insights.
This is where new risks emerge. Over-reliance on AI recommendations becomes a real danger. Confirmation bias can creep in, with humans selectively accepting AI insights that align with their preexisting views while dismissing those that challenge their assumptions.
The responsible approach at this stage requires humans to understand how the AI arrived at its recommendationswhat data it was trained on, what might have changed since training, whether there is any reason to suspect bias. It can be just as problematic when humans reject good AI advice because they don’t understand or trust it as when they blindly accept bad advice.
Stage 3: Collaboration and Partnership
This stage represents a more fundamental shift. Rather than a clear delineation between machine tasks and human decisions, humans and AI work as teams with complementary capabilities and shared responsibility.
The relationship becomes fluid and interactive. AI systems actively adapt based on human feedback, while humans modify their approaches based on AI-generated insights. The boundary between AI work and human work blurs.
Consider emergency response scenarios in which human teams work alongside AI systems during crises. The AI continuously monitors multiple data streamsweather patterns, traffic conditions, resource availability, historical response dataand suggests resource allocations. Humans accept, modify, or override these suggestions based on contextual knowledge not available to the system. The AI learns from these human interventions, improving its future recommendations. The humans develop intuitions about when to trust the AI and when to rely on their own judgment.
This is where accountability becomes genuinely complicated. When outcomes result from humanAI teamwork, who bears responsibility for errors? If an AI recommends a course of action, a human approves it, and things go wrong, the question of fault is far from straightforward.
Organizations operating at this stage need new governance frameworks that maintain clear lines of human accountability while enabling productive partnerships. This goes beyond the need to determine legal responsibility; it is fundamental to maintaining trust, both within the organization and with external stakeholders.
Stage 4: Supervision and Governance
The most advanced relationship model involves humans establishing parameters, providing oversight, and managing exceptions while AI systems handle routine operations autonomously.
This represents a significant evolution from earlier stages. Humans shift from direct task execution or decision-making to a role focused on setting boundaries, monitoring performance, and intervening when necessary.
An AI system might autonomously process insurance claims according to established policies, with humans reviewing only unusual cases or randomly sampled decisions to ensure quality control. A trading algorithm might execute transactions within defined parameters, with human supervisors monitoring for anomalies and adjusting constraints as market conditions change.
The efficiency gains can be enormous. But so can the risks.
The danger of automation complacency grows substantially at this stage. Human overseers may fail to maintain appropriate vigilance over AI systems that usually perform correctly. When you are supervising a system that makes the right call 99% of the time, it is psychologically difficult to stay alert for the 1% of cases that require intervention. Organizations must therefore implement robust oversight mechanisms that keep humans meaningfully engaged rater than performing a purely nominal supervisory role. Gamification of error identification and correction may offer a valuable path forward here, with a game layer of errors to catch sleeping overseers overlaid onto highly reliable systems that rarely err.
Navigating the Progression
Not every organization needs to progress through all four stages, and not every function within an organization should be at the same stage. The appropriate level of humanAI collaboration depends on the stakes involved, the maturity of the AI technology, and the organizations capacity for governance.
High-stakes decisionsthose affecting peoples rights, safety, or significant financial interestsgenerally warrant more human involvement than routine administrative tasks. Novel applications of AI, where the technologys limitations are not yet well understood, require closer human oversight than established applications with proven track records.
But regardless of where your organization sits on this spectrum, certain principles apply universally:
Understand the AIs capabilities and limitations. At every stage, effective collaboration requires humans who grasp not just what the AI can do, but where it is likely to fail. This understanding becomes more important, not less, as AI systems take on greater autonomy.
Maintain meaningful human accountability. The fundamental principle that humans must remain accountable for consequential decisions does not change as AI becomes more capable. What changes is how that accountability is structured and exercised.
Design for evolution. The relationship between humans and AI systems isnt static. Organizations should build governance frameworks that can adapt as AI capabilities advance and as they develop greater understanding of how humanAI collaboration works in their specific context.
Invest in the human side. The most sophisticated AI system delivers limited value if the humans working with it dont understand how to collaborate effectively. Training, cultural development, and organizational design are as important as the technology itself.
The organizations that thrive in the AI era wont be those that simply deploy the most advanced systems. They will be those who master the art of human-AI collaborationunderstanding when to rely on AI capabilities, when to assert human judgment, and how to create partnerships that leverage the distinctive strengths of both.Adapted from Reimagining Government: Achieving the Promise of AI, by Faisal Hoque, Erik Nelson, Tom Davenport, et al. Post Hill Press. Forthcoming January 2026.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/creator-faisalhoque.png","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/10\/faisal-hoque.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Ready to thrive at the intersection of business, technology, and humanity? ","dek":"Faisal Hoques books, podcast, and his companies give leaders the frameworks and platforms to align purpose, people, process, and techturning disruption into meaningful, lasting progress.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/faisalhoque.com","theme":{"bg":"#02263c","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#ffffff","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#000000"},"imageDesktopId":91420512,"imageMobileId":91420514,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
What can a pair of pants tell you about leadership? Much more than you think.
How do you feel when you pull a pair of non-stretch jeans straight from the dryer? Theyre stiff. Way too tight. The waistband digs into your belly. Now picture trying to work an eight-hour day in them. That discomfortand sense of restrictionis exactly what it feels like to work for a micromanager.
On the other end of your closet are those oversized sweatpantstheyre comfy, but theres no shape (or direction) to them at all . . . kind of like a workplace where everyone might like the manager, but no one has any idea whats actually expected or where theyre headed.
Between those two extremes sits the gold standard of workplace comfort: cozy joggers. Stretchy. Supportive. They move with you, not against you. If youve ever worked for a leader who gives you the right balance of support and freedom, you know exactly how good that kind of fit feels.
Because managers not only usually fall into one of these categoriestight jeans, oversized sweatpants or cozy joggersbut their teams respond accordingly. Heres what those leadership styles look like, why they matter and how to move toward the cozy joggers approach that gets the results that every style of leader is looking for.
The Tight Jeans Manager: Restrictive, Rigid and Always Tugging at the Seams
We all know that managerthe one who wants to sign off on every sentence, join every meeting and get updates so frequently you spend more time summarizing your work than doing it. Tight jeans managers often dont mean to restrict their teams. In fact, they usually come from a good place: they care deeply about the work and want to maintain high standards.
But like those freshly washed jeans, this style leaves no room to move.
How to spot a tight jeans manager:
They jump in to fix work instead of guiding.
They insist on approving even the smallest decisions.
They monitor progress constantly.
They prefer their way over any new approach.
They struggle to let go of tasks they used to do themselves.
And the impact on the team is real. People feel stressed and stuck. They stop speaking up or trying new things because theyre afraid of getting it wrong. Meetings turn into long status updates instead of actually solving problems. Everything slows (way) down because nothing can happen without the manager weighing in on every little thing.
To loosen the metaphorical waistband, tight-jeans leaders can ask themselves:
Is this about quality, or is it about control?
Whats the actual risk if I step back?
If I never delegate, am I prepared to own this forever?
Micromanagement might feel productive in the moment, but it turns leaders into bottlenecks and employees into order-takers. Great managers recognize when theyre clinging too tightly and intentionally make space for others to stretch.
The Oversized Sweatpants Manager: Comfy but Directionless
If tight jeans restrict movement, oversized sweatpants eliminate shape altogether. These are the managers who pride themselves on being hands-off, but in their quest to avoid micromanaging, they end up providing almost no guidance at all.
Once again, the intention is usually goodtrust your people, give them room, empower thembut empowerment without clarity quickly turns into ambiguity.
How to spot an oversized sweatpants manager:
They assume teams will figure it out.
They dont have regular 1:1 meetings, just find me if you need me (but never seem to be available).
They dont set clear expectations or deadlines.
They rarely give feedbackunless something goes wrong.
They avoid hard conversationsso the team ends up side-texting about it.
At first, this style can feel freeing, especially for high performers. But after the initial cozy comfort wears off, people get frustrated. They arent sure what good looks like. They dont know how decisions are being made. They cant get any (much-needed) help. Even top talent needs an idea of the what, how, and why.
To add structure without sliding into micromanagement, these managers can focus on:
Clear expectations: What does success look like?
Lightweight checkpoints: Not every project needs a meetingbut a text, Slack message, or short huddle goes a long way.
Actionable feedback: Not looks good, but This direction works because . . .
Its not about controlling every moveits about making sure everyone has what they need.
The Cozy Joggers Manager: Flexible, Supportive, and Built for Real Work
The magic of cozy joggers is their blend of stretch and structure. They hold their shape, but they dont hold you back. Theyre comfortable without being sloppy. Theyre supportive without being stiff.
Cozy joggers managers operate the same way.
They encourage autonomy while offering guidance. They give direction but dont dictate. Theyre not hovering, but theyre not disappearing. Theyre reliable, predictable and consistentthree qualities that transform team culture (and dont require any extra budget).
Signs youre working with a cozy joggers manager:
They communicate expectations clearly, including context (not just instructions).
They ask questions instead of giving orders.
They check in without it feeling like surveillance.
They help employees grow instead of doing the work for them.
They trust their teamsand their teams trust them back.
Most importantly, these managers create environments where people feel both supported and capablethe real sweet spot of leadership.
Managers who want to move into this style can build three simple habits:
Communicate the why: Great managers explain the purpose behind the work. It builds alignment and better decision-making.
Replace answers with questions: Guiding questions help employees think critically instead of relying on the manager for every answer.
Build autonomy gradually: Start with more structure and intentionally pull back as confidence grows.
This is leadership thats effectivebecause it builds your people up instead of adding more to their plates.
You Wont Be Cozy Joggers Every DayBut You Can Always Adjust
Managers are human. We all have tight-jeans days when stress makes us hold on too tight, and oversized-sweatpants weeks when were stretched thin so we cant be as present. The goal isnt to be perfectits to be aware and make the small adjustments that matter.
The question every leader should ask is: What does my team need from me right nowstructure, space, or a blend of both?
Effective leadership is about finding that in-between spacegiving enough support to guide without taking over, and offering enough autonomy without disappearing. Your team doesnt need perfect; they need steady, clear, human direction and room to do their best work. Because in the end, leadership is a lot like what we wear: The right fit changes everything.
Some studies show that the interview process can take up to six weeks. But there are ways that might help speed up the process and get those final hiring managers to land on you as the one they offer the job to.
