 |
|
|
|||||
Lawyers for social media companies will be working overtime in the coming weeks as several major trials get underway addressing the potential harms to children caused by popular sites and apps. At the same time, efforts to deflect at least one major future case have fallen short, increasing pressure on tech giants to agree to an independent assessment of how they protect teen users. The convergence of these developments creates a potential perfect storm for the industry, one that could result in both financial damages and changes to the algorithms that encourage users to keep scrolling for longer and longer periods of time. Much of the focus is on a bellwether trial in Los Angeles that seeks to hold Meta and Google responsible for harms suffered by children who use their products. Plaintiffs allege that services like Instagram and YouTube are designed to keep users, especially kids, engaged. Opening statements were held Monday, with the plaintiffs lawyer arguing that Meta and Google have engineered addiction in childrens brains. The case is widely seen as a test for future lawsuits with similar claims, of which there are approximately 1,500. Meta and Google deny the charges. TikTok and Snap were also named as defendants but settled before the case went to trial. As that suit began in Los Angeles, opening arguments were also heard in Santa Fe in a case brought against Meta by New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez in December 2023. The lawsuit accuses the companys platforms of being a breeding ground for sexual predators, a claim Meta denies. That trial, expected to last seven weeks, will determine whether Meta violated the state’s consumer protection laws. If we can win in this action and force them to make their product safer in this state, it changes the narrative completely about what they say is possible for everyone else, Torrez said. Meanwhile, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California rejected a request by Meta, Google, Snap, and TikTok for summary judgment in a case brought by Kentuckys Breathitt County School District. That case is part of a consolidated multidistrict litigation that seeks to hold social media companies accountable for engineering addictive features that negatively affect student mental health. Section 230 At the heart of all these cases is how far courts are willing to extend the protections granted by Section 230, the federal law that shields social media companies from liability over content posted by users. The Los Angeles trial, along with the upcoming case in Northern California, argues that jurors should be able to consider whether the algorithms used by these companies are responsible for mental health harms, rather than focusing solely on the content shown on users screens. Perhaps as a preemptive measure, TikTok, Snap, and Meta have agreed to undergo a series of tests overseen by the National Council for Suicide Prevention to evaluate how effectively they protect the mental health of teen users. Among the issues that will be examined are whether the platforms force users to take a break and if they offer a way to turn off endless scrolling. Companies that perform well will receive a badge signaling that they offer a pathway to mental health support. Potential ramifications This is hardly the first time that social media companies have been taken to court over mental health claims. To date, none of those cases has resulted in any sort of major overhauls, however. At the same time, efforts in Washington and by state governments to regulate the industry have fallen short. Further complicating matters is a lack of consensus in the scientific community on whether social media is harmful for teens and kids on the whole. Still, successful outcomes in these cases could force companies to change how people interact with their platforms, potentially reshaping the social media landscape. Victories for plaintiffs could also expose companies to significant liability payouts for harms linked to their services.
Category:
E-Commerce
If the size of your failures isnt growing youre not going to be inventing at a size that can actually move the needle. Jeff Bezoss wordswritten in a 2019 letter to shareholderssuggest a more clear-eyed view of the innovation process than the paradoxical perspectives of many other senior executives. Oh sure, CEOs agree that innovation is important. In fact, 92% say its a top priority, according to a recent McKinsey article. But at the same time, more than 90% of CEOs say they do a lousy job at innovation. The reason for this confusing response can be boiled down to one major point, alluded to by Bezos: Fear of failure. Yes, fear of failureand wariness of the mixed messages they get from management. You cant expect people to take risks, challenge the status quo, and explore new ways of doing things when you measure them on hitting near-term targets with near-perfect accuracy. Innovation requires curiosity, experimentation, and learningthe trifecta I call, try, fail, learn. Inevitably, projects will fail; people will fail, too. Its normal, and its high time we normalized it in business. Below are five ways you can put meaningful metrics in place to incentivize healthy risk-taking and smart failure in your organization. 1. Start Small: Create Rituals That Normalize Failure Changing culture starts with small, visible experiments that make failure feel safe, expected, and even energizing. One of the simplest and most effective practices Ive implemented is what I call Fail-Free Fridays. These are dedicated 60-minute blocks of time where teams meet weekly to talk about whats not working and share ideas about things they want to try. No PowerPoints. No success criteria. No approvals. The goal isnt to solve the problems or produce a breakthrough; its to openly discuss whats not going well and experiment with new ideas. Without fear. How to make it measurable: Track the number of problems discussed Track the number of ideas generated Track self-reported psychological safety (before and after) Track cross-functional collaborations initiated during these sessions 2. Define What a ‘Good Failure’ Looks Like Not all failure is equal: Experimental failure is necessary for learning and invention, whereas operational failure is due to poor execution, lack of discipline, or not following processes and procedures. Help your team by painting a picture of what good failure looks like. Find a recent example and do a post-mortem analysis by showing how the initiative: Was aligned with strategic priorities Was based on a clear hypothesis Was a controlled experiment with defined parameters Produced a documented learning Informed future decisions The next step is to measure the proportion of failures that meet these criteria. Sample metrics might include: % of failed projects with clear hypotheses % of failed projects that produced specific, documented learnings Estimated resource savings from ideas invalidated early Time saved by early no-go decisions compared to traditional project lifecycles 3. Reward Learning Behaviors, Not Just Outcomes Traditional performance reviews reward outcomes: sales targets met, product launches delivered, efficiency increased. These metrics reinforce predictabilitywhich is essential for operations but corrosive to innovation. To incentivize smart failure, organizations must introduce behavior-based performance metrics tied to learning and experimentation. Examples include: Number of experiments initiated or proposed Willingness to challenge outdated assumptions or raise contrarian ideas Speed of testing a new ideahow quickly a team can test, learn, and adapt Cross-functional collaboration and knowledge-sharing One technique Ive used is integrating a Learning Objectives section into performance goals. Employees must identify one or two areas where they will experiment, explore, or test new approachesand leaders evaluate how intentionally and transparently they learn from the results. Behavior-based metrics shift attention from Did you succeed? to How did you learn, and what value did that learning create? 4. Build Transparency Into the System: Share Failures Publicly with Leaders as Role Models For failure to be normalized, it must be visible and leaders must be role models showing how it leads to learning and growth. Examples of transparency-building mechanisms: Town Hall or All Hands Meetings where the leader dedicates 15 minutes of the agenda to allow an employee to share a story of failure and learning (leaders can share their stories, too) Monthly Lessons Learned Roundtables where teams briefly share one failed experiment and one insight A digital Failure Dashboard highlighting experiments run, hypotheses tested, learnings extracted, and next steps Internal newsletters profiling teams who tried something bold, failed smart, and moved the organization forward Metrics here can include: Number of learnings shared across business units Participation rates in roundtables or learning forums Cross-team adoption of insights Repeat failure rate (a powerful metricif it decreases, organizational learning is improving) 5. Make Failure Economically Visible: Track the ROI of Learning We talk a lot about Return on Investment (ROI) of new projects. Similarly, the most important, and most neglected step is quantifying the Return on Failure (ROF). Leaders know that invalidating a bad idea quickly is just as valuable as scaling a good idea. In many cases, its more valuable. Early failure prevents wasted resources, prevents misaligned investments, and accelerates strategic focus. Organizations can track: Cost savings from early project termination Time-to-decision (how fast the organization can rule in or rule out an idea) Increase in pipeline throughput (better quality ideas lead to more opportunities making it to market) Portfolio health metrics (percentage of projects in exploratory vs. execution mode) The Cultural Shift: From Fear to Learning and Growth The goal is not to create a workplace where failure is unbounded or unexamined. The goal is to create a workplace where learning is measured, rewarded, and operationalized. When failure is treated as datanot deficiencyorganizations accelerate innovation, attract bolder thinkers, and build resilience into their strategy. They become more adaptive, mre opportunistic, and more capable of navigating uncertainty. Leaders who want sustained growth dont ask, How do we avoid failure? They ask, How do we create more opportunities to learnand how do we measure the value of that learning? The takeaways? Start small. Measure early. Reward curiosity. Make learning visible. Treat disciplined failure as a strategic asset. Organizations that do this consistently dont just innovatethey grow, consistently and over time. Thats what successful failure can do for your business.
Category:
E-Commerce
When COVID-19 hit, our business came to a sudden halt. One moment our calendar was full, the next, meetings and engagements were disappearing. Companies wed worked with for years shifted their focus overnight, pouring their energy into keeping doors open and team members safe. Like so many others, we found ourselves sidelinedand facing some hard conversations. While uncertainty hung heavy in the air, our small team was unusually open with each other. We talked candidly about the challenges, the personal toll, and what it might all mean for the business. Without setting out to do so, we had built a foundation of psychological safetyone that made navigating a global crisis far less stressful than it might have been otherwise. We questioned our plans, admitted what we didnt know, and challenged each other with care. And in doing so, we learned something thats shaped how I work ever since: Psychological safety isnt a climate to be fostered when things are easy; its an operating condition that must be designed into the teams DNA for when things get hard. The true test isnt harmony, its conflict. Its about making it safe enough for people to be uncomfortableto disagree, to challenge the status quo, and to admit when theyve failed. Gartner found that highly psychologically safe teams identify and address critical issues 15% faster. And while many people understand the concept, far fewer know how to make it real when trust declines and tension rises. Too often, its treated as a passive state instead of an active practice. The difference between the two is simple: A climate is a vibe, but an operating condition is a blueprint. So, how do you move from a vague aspiration to a daily practice? It all starts with putting psychological safety first. Whether or not you manage people, each of us influences how safe it feels to speak up. Here are three ways to embed psychological safety into daily work, at any level: MAKE DISAGREEMENT PART OF NORMAL WORK Psychological safety has to be embedded into the way work gets done, not just something you hope people embody. That responsibility doesnt sit solely with managers. Anyone can help shape norms around how ideas are challenged, discussed, and improved. When I start working with someone new, I hold a candid one-on-one conversation to set mutual expectations. I might say, My promise to you is transparency and a willingness to provide proactive feedback. You can also expect me to ask for your ideas and input on every major decision. Then I turn it over to them and ask, What do you need from me to feel successful and able to do your best work? This simple act changes the dynamic, communicating that their voice matters from the outset. Once expectations are clear, safety can be operationalized through everyday rituals. For example, instead of presenting a plan for approval, introduce a new idea by asking people to poke holes in it. This isnt an invitation to complain, but a specific, constructive task. People are naturally good at identifying risks and blind spots, and this reframes that critical eye as a valuable contribution. Even without formal authority, you can model this by asking better questions in meetings, inviting alternative perspectives, or naming risks others may be hesitant to raise. SHIFT FROM ANSWERING TO FACILITATING Even with the best intentions, our behaviors can unintentionally undermine psychological safety. One of the most common mistakes is jumping in too quickly to solve a problem. Many of usespecially those seen as experienced or go-to peopleare conditioned to have the answers. When someone brings a challenge, the impulse is to immediately provide a solution. But doing so can unintentionally signal, My ideas are more valuable than yours. The fix? Instead of being the problem-solver, become the problem-solving facilitator. Your opportunity, regardless of role, is to create space for dialogue rather than rushing to be the smartest voice in the room. When someone raises a concern, try asking a question instead of offering a solution. It signals curiosity, respect, and trust. Facilitation also means reading the room: paying attention to whats being said and what isnt. You might say, I can sense this decision is making you uncomfortable. Lets talk about whats behind that. Or, Lets consider this from all angles. What might be missing? These moments of curiosity build trust and surface insights that wouldnt emerge in a more top-down exchange. Over time, this changes the dynamic from quiet compliance to shared ownership. USE FAILURE TO FUEL LEARNING One of the fastest ways psychological safety breaks down is when we cant learn from our mistakes. After any project or experimentsuccessful or notI incorporate a simple set of questions into debriefs: Whats working? Whats not working? What did we learn? What would we do differently next time? This shifts the focus from blame to learning and makes reflection a core output, not an afterthought. Even when youre not running the meeting, you can reinforce this mindset by asking these questions yourself and inviting others into reflection. When failures are treated as data rather than personal shortcomings, people stop hiding missteps and start sharing insights that make everyone better. When psychological safety becomes a baseline operating condition, new possibilities open up. People take calculated risks because they know their ideas are valued and that missteps wont be punished, but used for learning. The team moves faster, decisions get stronger, and accountability becomes shared instead of feared.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||