 |
|
|
|||||
President Donald Trump said he plans to announce his choice for chairman of the Federal Reserve on Friday morning, a long-awaited decision that could set up a showdown on whether the U.S. central bank preserves its independence from the White House and electoral politics.For the past year, the president has aggressively attacked Fed Chair Jerome Powell, whose term as the head of the U.S. central bank ends in May. Trump maintains that Powell should cut the Fed’s benchmark interest rates more drastically to fuel faster economic growth, while the Fed chair has taken a far more judicious approach in the wake of Trump’s tariffs because inflation is already elevated.“I’ll be announcing the Fed chair tomorrow morning,” Trump told reporters Thursday night as he went into a screening of the documentary “Melania” about his wife. “It’s going to be, somebody that is very respected, somebody that’s known to everybody in the financial world. And I think it’s going to be a very good choice. I hope so.”Trump stayed relatively cryptic about his pick. His search was led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent with four known finalists: Kevin Warsh, a former Fed governor; Christopher Waller, a current Fed governor; Rick Rieder, an executive with the financial firm BlackRock; and Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council. Trump previously suggested Hassett was the frontrunner, only to recently say that he wanted him to remain in his current post.Trump did say on Thursday night that “a lot of people think that this is somebody that could have been there a few years ago,” fueling speculation that he had chosen Warsh, who was a finalist in the 2017 search for Fed chair that led to Powell’s selection.Tensions between Trump and the central bank had been steadily mounting as the president used the renovation costs of the Fed’s headquarters to further lambaste Powell, a campaign that resulted in the Fed getting subpoenas from the Justice Department earlier this month. The Fed chair took the rare step of issuing a video statement in which he said, “The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president.”Trump has long teased his Fed choice while saying his nominee would slash interest rates that influence the supply of money in the U.S. economy, the rate of inflation and the stability of the job market.On the cusp of Trump’s announcement, Powell might have the ability to block him in an effort to ensure the Fed preserves its credibility by staying away from political considerations.While his term as chair ends in roughly three months, Powell’s term on the Fed’s board of governors runs through 2028 and he could choose to remain in that post, likely blocking Trump’s ability to have his nominees control the majority of the seats on the board. Of the seven Fed governors, former President Joe Biden picked three of them in addition to renominating Powell to a second term as chair.If Powell stays on the board, he could also create a small procedural hurdle for Trump’s ability to nominate someone new to the board. This would mean Trump would either have to choose an existing board member as chair or replace Stephen Miran, who is on leave from his job as chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers to fill a term as governor that technically ends on Saturday. If Trump chooses to replace Miran, he could name someone new to the board.At a Wednesday news conference, Powell declined to say whether he would leave the board. But he did offer some advice to any successor about balancing the need for independent judgment with public accountability.“Don’t get pulled into elected politics don’t do it,” Powell said. “Another is, that our window into democratic accountability is Congress. And it’s not a passive burden for us to go to Congress and talk to people. It’s an affirmative regular obligation.” Josh Boak and Darlene Superville, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Hello, and welcome back to Fast Companys Plugged In. When Amazon announced this week that its shutting down Amazon Go, its 8-year-old chain of cashierless convenience stores, the news did not come as a shocker. Almost two years ago, the company shuttered all its Go stores in San Francisco, along with some locations in New York and Seattle. Another round of closures came in 2024. Now its going from a few stores to no stores, a footnote given that the same day brought the news that Amazon is laying off 16,000 people across the company. Having shopped at the Amazon Go near my San Francisco office almost 200 times, I counted myself as a fan. Even back then, though, it felt like the company either didnt understand what it had created or had already lost interest. The piece I wrote when the San Francisco stores closed felt like an obituary, even though other locations remained in business. I said at the time that regardless of what happened to Amazon Go, I hoped startups would pursue the goal of freeing us from the drudgery of waiting in line to pay for stuff. One I mentioned in that piece, Grabango, folded the following year. Reportedly, the expense and complexity of equipping stores with its technologywhich, like Go, involved a bevy of cameras using AI to keep track of shoppers and the products theyd plucked from shelvesplayed a part in its demise. I should note that cashierless retail is not entirely dead. Amazon is still working on the Just Walk Out technology that powered the Go stores, which it makes available to other retailers. Some of its Whole Food Market stores continue to offer a variant of the tech in the form of smart shopping carts called Dash Carts, which it recently upgraded. Startups that remain in the game include Zippin, whose Go-like technology is widely used at sporting and concert venues, and Mashgin, which eliminates the need to configure an entire store with cameras by having shoppers place items on a tray for AI-assisted checkout. The one place Ive encountered checkout-free shopping lately is at airports, where Ive bought items using both Amazons and Mashgins platforms. My experiences were positive. Lets be honest, though: It isnt tough to improve on airport retail in its traditional form. Cashierless checkout surviving for niche applications would be a dramatic reversal from the days when the first Amazon Go stores opened and I wondered whether human-dependent checkout was on its way to becoming as quaint as sales transactions involving someone eyeballing price tags on items and laboriously punching keys on a cash register. Maybe it will someday. But surely not in this decade, and I wouldnt bet on the one after that. Why is that? Along with the cost of the tech, theres the question of how well it works at all. In 2023, The Informations Theo Wayt reported that Amazon had 1,000 people in India reviewing transactions from its stores, and that 70% of sales required a human in the loop. That made it sound like the main thing the company had achieved was to remote-control the checkout process rather than eliminate it. It was also a reminder that shopping in Amazon Go stores involved being monitored by cameras, giving the whole process a Big Brother vibe. Amazon disputed details of Wayts report. And the fact that considerable human labor was required to train the Just Walk Out AI doesnt mean it would be so forever. Still, the more you know about how technology of this sort works, the more daunting it soundsespecially in the context of retail, a business that has traditionally been resistant to experimentation and long-term thinking. Back when I was popping into my neighborhood Amazon Go several times a week, I thought of what it was doing as being centered on making my life slightly better. Ultimately, though, retail technology is not about direct customer satisfaction. Its about increasing sales. Making shoppers happier is only one way to accomplish that, and probably not the easiest one. In 2018, my colleague Sean Captain wrote about Standard Cognition, which had opened a 1,900-foot demo cashierless shop in San Francisco and had plans to help retailers take thousands of stores cashierless in just a couple of years. That didnt happen. Now known as Standard AI, the company has pivoted away from grab-and-go toward using cameras to understand what shoppers actually see and respond to, its website says. Our proprietary models continuously track awareness, engagement, and conversion to prove media impact, refine promotions, and optimize performance across every in-store placement. Standard AI is not performing facial recognition or otherwise associating this data with specific identifiable individuals. But even in anonymized form, the idea of being monitored as I shop for the purpose of maximizing sales makes me wince. The companys sitewith close-up imagery of shoppers contemplating products, overlaid with stats Standard has collected about themdoesnt help. (Yes, I am aware that club cards have long tied shoppers to purchases, and that online shopping has always been a minefield when it comes to merchants spying on customers.) Much has changed since Amazon Go was a novelty. AI is now everywhere in our lives, and the list of areas where its impact is potentially transformative is almost literally endless. I still like the concept of grab-and-go shopping. For now, however, it seems most useful as a case study in why technology that workskinda, in certain circumstancescan fall so short of working as a real-world business. Youve been reading Plugged In, Fast Companys weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to youor if you’re reading it on fastcompany.comyou can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky,
Category:
E-Commerce
From the outside, it looks like a generational standoff. Baby boomers are retiring earlier than expected, frustrated by workplace change, technology shifts, and growing tension with younger colleagues. At the same time, Gen Z talks openly about quitting jobs that feel misaligned or draining. Many leaders interpret this as a clash of values. Older workers cannot adapt. Younger workers lack commitment. The data tells a more complicated story. New research from Clari and Salesloft, conducted in partnership with Workplace Intelligence, surveyed 2,000 U.S. sellers and sales leaders across industries. The study found that 19% of baby boomers are planning to retire early because they are tired of dealing with Gen Z at work. At the same time, 28% of Gen Z respondents said they are actively searching for a role where they will not have to interact with baby boomers as much. The cost of that friction is not abstract. The research estimates that generational conflict is costing organizations roughly $56 billion each year in lost productivity, driven by miscommunication, burnout, and uneven adoption of new technologies like AI. On its own, that data suggests a workplace pulling itself apart. But another study complicates the narrative. Research from Southeastern Oklahoma State University, based on a survey of 1,000 employees, found that 71% of Gen Z workers are staying in a job or career longer than they want simply because they do not know how to leave. Nearly half say they are actively transitioning toward something new, while 68% report that their employer has no idea they are planning a change. Taken together, these findings reveal something leaders often miss. Baby boomers are leaving because they can. Gen Z is staying because they do not know how not to. This is not a motivation problem. It is a clarity problem. A shifting environment For many boomers, the workplace they are navigating today barely resembles the one they mastered. AI tools, shifting communication norms, and changing definitions of productivity have disrupted identities built on decades of experience and institutional knowledge. When those changes arrive without context or support, frustration grows. Early retirement becomes less about age and more about opting out of an environment that no longer feels coherent. Gen Z is facing the opposite challenge. They entered a workforce defined by constant change, but very little guidance. Career paths are opaque. Loyalty feels risky. Advice is often abstract. While they are often labeled as eager to quit, the reality is that many are stuck in roles they have already outgrown, unsure how to move on without harming their future. AI has intensified this divide rather than resolving it. For example, the same Clari and Salesloft research found that 39% of Gen Z would rather be managed by AI than by a baby boomer, while 25% of boomers say they would prefer working with AI over a Gen Z colleague. This preference is less about technology being superior and more about predictability. In environments where expectations feel unclear or inconsistent, AI can appear easier to work with than people. The leadership factor That is where leadership enters the equation. Engaged empathy is not about lowering standards or avoiding difficult conversations. It is about understanding how different generations experience the same systems and responding with clear, actionable communication. Without that effort, organizations allow frustration to turn into disengagement. For Gen Z, engaged empathy shows up as explicit career navigation. Not platitudes about growth, but concrete conversations about skills, timelines, and options. Many young employees are not afraid of hard work. They are afraid of making irreversible mistakes in a system that rarely explains the rules. For baby boomers, engaged empathy means recognizing that resistance to new tools is often rooted in identity, not stubbornness. When experience feels discounted rather than translated, trust erodes. Leaders who intentionally connect new technologies to existing strengths reduce defensiveness and preserve institutional wisdom. However, none of this works without clarity. High-performing organizations do not assume alignment across generations. They create it. They explain what success looks like now, how it is measured, and how employees at different stages can contribute and grow. They introduce AI as a shared resource rather than a silent evaluator. Boomers retiring early and Gen Z wanting to quit are not signs that work is fundamentally broken. They are signals that employees are responding rationally to unclear systems and inconsistent leadership. The solution is not fewer generations in the workplace. It is leaders willing to practice engaged empathy and communicate clearly enough that fewer people feel the need to escape in the first place.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||