CEO.com
Dispatches from the frontiers of leadership
CEO.com Podcast
How today's CEOs are thinking about tomorrow.
Why Tho
An ongoing series that delves deeper into the subjects and themes presented in CEO.com magazine.
Featured Essays
Why your dream job might not exist
In the spring of 2025, the American job market stands at a curious crossroads. Official statistics paint a picture of economic vigor, with low unemployment rates and steady job creation signaling a robust recovery from past disruptions. Yet, beneath this veneer of prosperity lies a more troubling reality: countless job seekers are mired in frustration, ensnared by a labor market that feels increasingly deceptive and inaccessible. This dissonance between macroeconomic indicators and individual experiences reveals a complex and evolving employment landscape, characterized by phenomena such as “ghost jobs,” structural shifts driven by automation, and outdated metrics that fail to accurately capture the actual state of economic well-being. To address this paradox, policymakers, employers, and workers must confront these challenges with clarity and innovation.One of the most insidious obstacles facing job seekers today is the proliferation of “ghost jobs” — job listings advertised without any real intent to hire. According to a 2023 study by Hunter Ng, a labor market analyst, up to 21% of job postings may be classified as ghost jobs, particularly in specialized industries and large corporations. These phantom postings serve various purposes: some companies maintain them to signal growth to investors, while others use them to build a pool of candidates for future needs or to appease overworked employees with the promise of forthcoming help. The consequences for job seekers are profound. Each unanswered application erodes confidence, wastes time, and distorts perceptions of market demand. As Ng notes, ghost jobs “create a false sense of opportunity, leading to burnout and disillusionment among applicants.” This phenomenon not only undermines trust in the hiring process but also muddles labor market signals, making it harder for workers to align their skills with genuine opportunities.Compounding this issue are the structural shifts reshaping the labor market. Automation and technological advancements, while driving productivity, are rapidly redefining job roles. A report from the McKinsey Global Institute projects that up to 30% of current jobs could be automated by 2030, with roles in manufacturing, retail, and administrative support facing the most significant risk. Simultaneously, demand is surging for skills in artificial intelligence, data analytics, and renewable energy — fields that require specialized training, which many workers lack. This mismatch leaves countless individuals in a state of flux, caught between obsolete roles and emerging opportunities they are not yet equipped to seize. For example, a former retail manager may find their experience irrelevant in a tech-driven economy, yet lack the resources or time to retrain in a field like cybersecurity. While automation holds long-term promise for economic growth, its immediate impact is disruption, leaving workers to navigate an uncertain transition.Further complicating the narrative is the inadequacy of traditional employment metrics. The unemployment rate, often heralded as the primary gauge of labor market health, stood at a historically low 3.8% in early 2025, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Yet, this figure obscures critical nuances. Underemployment — workers in roles below their skill level or desired hours — remains a persistent issue, with the BLS’s broader U-6 measure of labor underutilization hovering at 7.2%. The rise of gig economy roles and part-time positions further distorts the picture. A 2024 study by the Economic Policy Institute found that 15% of U.S. workers rely on gig or temporary work as their primary source of income, often without benefits or job security. These realities suggest that a low unemployment rate does not necessarily equate to economic well-being, as many workers grapple with precarious or unfulfilling employment.In this complex environment, job seekers face a labor market where appearances can be deceiving. The optimism of headline statistics belies a reality of ghost jobs, skill mismatches, and precarious work arrangements. To bridge this gap, a multifaceted approach is needed. First, employers must prioritize transparency in hiring practices. Regulatory measures, such as requiring companies to disclose the status of job postings or penalizing deceptive listings, could curb the prevalence of ghost jobs. Second, investment in reskilling programs is critical to prepare workers for emerging roles. Public-private partnerships, such as those piloted in states like California and Texas, have shown promise in providing accessible training for high-demand fields. Finally, policymakers must rethink how labor market health is measured. Incorporating metrics such as underemployment, wage growth, and job quality into public discourse would provide a more comprehensive view of economic realities.The American job market in 2025 presents a paradox of promise and peril. While macroeconomic indicators suggest prosperity, job seekers' experiences reveal a landscape marked by numerous obstacles. By addressing the issues of ghost jobs, structural shifts, and inadequate metrics, stakeholders can pave the way for a labor market that aligns statistical optimism with real opportunities. Only through such efforts can the American workforce navigate this terrain of illusion and emerge into a future of genuine economic security.
The hidden physics that sparked an AI revolution
In the mid-20th century, physicists exploring the enigmatic behaviors of spin glasses — metallic alloys with disordered magnetic orientations — could scarcely have anticipated that their theoretical investigations would later form the basis of artificial intelligence. These materials, seemingly lacking practical application, became the crucible for ideas that would revolutionize our understanding of memory and learning in machines.In 1982, John Hopfield, a physicist intrigued by the collective behaviors inherent in spin glasses, introduced a model that reimagined memory through the lens of statistical mechanics. His Hopfield network conceptualized memories as stable states within an energy landscape, allowing for the retrieval of information by simply moving toward these low-energy configurations. This approach not only revived interest in neural networks but also bridged the gap between physics and cognitive science, suggesting that the principles governing disordered materials could illuminate the workings of the mind.The significance of Hopfield’s contribution was formally recognized in 2024 when he, alongside AI pioneer Geoffrey Hinton, received the Nobel Prize in Physics. While some viewed this as a nod to advancements in artificial intelligence, the award underscored the profound impact of physical theories on our conceptualization of learning systems. The methodologies derived from the study of spin glasses have since become instrumental in developing neural networks capable of not only memory recall but also imagination and reasoning.Today, as we continue to refine AI models, the legacy of spin glass physics endures, offering insights into the emergent properties of complex systems. The once esoteric study of disordered magnets has thus found its place at the heart of technological innovation, exemplifying how abstract scientific inquiry can yield transformative applications.Source: The strange physics that gave birth to AI — QuantaMagazine
Grading Trump's first 100 days
The promise of Trump’s second term was rooted in a familiar refrain: “Make America Great Again,” now with an economic twist — “Make America Affordable Again.” His campaign painted a vision of strong growth, free from global trade imbalances and bureaucratic overreach. Investors, initially seduced by this narrative, propelled the S&P 500 to record highs in the weeks following his November 2024 victory. Yet, the euphoria was short-lived. As Morningstar’s analysis starkly illustrates, the first hundred days, culminating on April 30, 2025, saw stocks plummet nearly 8%, a stark contrast to the bullish optimism of late 2024. The catalyst? Tariffs, wielded not as a scalpel but as a sledgehammer, reshaped the economic landscape with a ferocity that caught even seasoned analysts off guard.Trump’s tariff strategy, unveiled with characteristic bravado, began with a salvo against America’s closest neighbors. In late January, he announced 25% levies on imports from Canada and Mexico, citing border security and trade imbalances. By April 2, the administration escalated with “reciprocal” tariffs targeting dozens of trading partners, including a staggering 125% duty on Chinese goods. These measures, intended to protect American industries and bolster domestic manufacturing, instead ignited a global firestorm. The S&P 500, as reported by Reuters, shed $5 trillion in market value over the two days following the April 2 announcement, marking its worst two-day loss since the pandemic-induced market panic of March 2020. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), Wall Street’s “fear gauge,” spiked to 60 points, a level unseen since the 2008 financial crisis, reflecting a market gripped by “extreme fear,” according to CNN’s Fear and Greed Index.The economic rationale behind Trump’s tariffs was rooted in a protectionist ethos: shield American workers from cheap foreign goods, force trading partners to the negotiating table, and fund domestic priorities through tariff revenue. Yet, as Preston Caldwell, Morningstar’s senior U.S. economist, noted, the policy’s execution was a masterclass in disruption. The average U.S. tariff rate soared to 20%, with China facing a de facto embargo at 125%. This was no mere tweak to trade policy; it was, as Caldwell described, “the most restrictive trade regime in over a hundred years.” The global economy, far more interconnected than in the era of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, reeled from the shock. Retaliatory tariffs from China (84% on U.S. goods), Canada, and Mexico further tightened the screws, threatening supply chains and inflating costs for American consumers.The bond market, typically a bastion of calm, became an unlikely epicenter of concern. Morningstar’s charts reveal a curious anomaly: U.S. Treasury yields, which typically fall during economic uncertainty as investors flock to safe-haven bonds, instead climbed sharply post-April 2. The 10-year Treasury yield, which had been hovering around 4.3% by April 10, reflected concerns about tariff-induced inflation. Caldwell projected a 0.6 percentage point increase in the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index for 2025, reaching 3.0%, and a 1.3-point jump to 3.2% in 2026. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, under relentless pressure from Trump to cut interest rates, warned that tariffs would likely stoke inflation while slowing growth — a toxic brew that could force the Fed into a policy bind. The New York Times likened the scenario to a “hurricane forming out in the ocean,” a slow-moving, self-inflicted storm with the White House at its eye.Amid the turmoil in the equity market, gold emerged as a beacon for skittish investors. Morningstar notes that the precious metal’s price soared from $2,755 per ounce in January to over $3,400 by April, a 26% surge that outpaced even the most optimistic forecasts. Gold, long a hedge against economic and geopolitical instability, became the “most crowded trade” in April, according to a Bank of America survey cited by CNN. Conversely, cryptocurrencies, despite Trump’s campaign pledge to make America the “crypto capital of the planet,” faltered. Bitcoin, which briefly touched $109,000 in late 2024, has slid double digits since Trump’s inauguration, trading more like a tech stock than a dollar alternative, as risk-off sentiment dominated markets.The human toll of this economic upheaval was palpable. Consumer sentiment, as The Economist reported, plummeted to a 12-year low, with pessimism transcending partisan lines. Small businesses, particularly those reliant on imported goods, faced crushing cost increases. The New York Times highlighted the plight of companies like General Motors, which withdrew its full-year forecast amid tariff uncertainty. Corporate earnings projections, once buoyant, were slashed; Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and UBS all lowered their year-end targets for the S&P 500, with Goldman revising its forecast from 6,500 to 5,700. The specter of recession loomed large, with Morningstar estimating a 40-50% probability over the next year, a view echoed by economists surveyed by Reuters who cited tariff disruption as a primary driver.Yet, Trump’s tariff gambit had its defenders. The administration, led by figures such as National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett, argued that the market’s reaction was exaggerated. Hassett, appearing on Fox News, claimed that over 15 countries had already tabled trade deal offers, with negotiations nearing 20 nations. The White House pointed to $1.75 trillion in investment commitments and a 90% reduction in border crossings as evidence of broader policy success. Scott Bessent, Trump’s treasury secretary, dismissed stock market corrections as “healthy” and “normal,” framing the tariffs as a necessary transitional pain for long-term gain. On X, voices like @Market_heretic celebrated the administration’s audacity, noting that a 90-day tariff pause announced on April 9 sparked a 9.5% S&P 500 rally, the index’s best single-day gain since 2008.Critics, however, were unsparing. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in an April 8 post on X, branded Trump’s tariffs “the largest tax hike on families since the Vietnam War,” accusing them of wiping trillions from retirement savings and pushing consumer confidence to a four-year low. The New York Times’ DealBook column dubbed the first hundred days a period of “market chaos and economic uncertainty,” contrasting sharply with the resilience of Trump’s first term, when the S&P 500 climbed nearly 70%. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, speaking on Bloomberg’s Wall Street Week, described the period as “the least successful 100 days of a new president since the Second World War,” a verdict rendered not by partisans but by the unforgiving judgment of markets.While a temporary salve, the tariff pause on April 9 did little to quell the underlying unease. Reuters noted that the pause applied to many countries but retained a 10% blanket duty on most U.S. imports, with China still facing punitive levies. The damage, as Deutsche Bank’s George Saravelos warned, was already done: “a permanent sense of unpredictability in policy” now haunted the economy. European nations, such as Ireland and Germany, which are heavily reliant on U.S. exports, braced for further pain. At the same time, China’s retaliatory measures and potential yuan devaluation signaled a protracted trade war. The dollar, once bolstered by expectations of Trump-fueled growth, shed nearly 10% against the euro in April, according to Reuters, as investors questioned America’s status as a safe haven.What lies beyond the hundred-day mark remains uncertain. Morningstar’s Caldwell warns of persistent inflation and a high risk of recession, while optimists like Bessent envision a restructured global trade order that favors American interests.For now, Trump’s second-term economic narrative is one of disruption and division, a high-stakes gamble that has left markets reeling and the nation on edge. As the next hundred days unfold, the question is not merely whether Trump’s tariffs will deliver on their promise but whether the American economy can weather the tempest he has unleashed.
Latest Articles
The startup rewriting adulthood
Genevieve Bellaire, the founder and CEO of Realworld, has a knack for spotting gaps that others overlook. At thirty-five, she’s built a mobile app and platform that guides young adults through the bureaucratic and financial maze of “adulting” — a term she uses with a knowing smirk, acknowledging its cultural weight. “It’s not about coddling,” she said in a recent interview with CEO.com. “It’s about giving people the tools to not get screwed over by life’s fine print.”Bellaire’s path to Realworld began with a costly lesson. A Princeton graduate with a joint J.D./M.B.A. from Georgetown, she seemed destined for a smooth climb through the corporate world. After a stint at Goldman Sachs, where she worked on strategic partnerships, she had the credentials to match her ambition. Yet, despite her education, she was blindsided by a $12,000 healthcare mistake tied to a misunderstanding of COBRA. “I was a lawyer, I had an M.B.A., and I still didn’t know how to pick a health insurance plan,” she told CEO.com. The error wasn’t just humbling; it was galvanizing. If someone with her resources could falter, what hope was there for others?That question gave rise to Realworld, which was launched in 2018 after Bellaire left Goldman Sachs. The platform offers “playbooks” — clear, step-by-step guides to mastering life’s practical challenges, from filing taxes to renting an apartment to decoding a 401(k). Unlike the myriad budgeting apps or financial literacy courses, Realworld takes a holistic approach, tackling the tangled web of finances, healthcare, career, and household management. Free to use and featuring nearly a hundred playbooks, the app has attracted over 100,000 users and partnered with more than forty universities, resonating with a generation wary of institutional fixes.Bellaire’s early career was a combination of calculated leaps and persistent doubts. At Princeton, where she studied politics and international relations, she envisioned a future in government or policy. Georgetown’s dual-degree program honed her skills, but her time at Goldman Sachs felt like a detour. “I was learning a lot, but I wasn’t solving the problems I cared about,” she said. The healthcare fiasco, coupled with stories from friends struggling with similar issues, clarified her mission. “I kept hearing the same thing: ‘I have a degree, I’m smart, why is this so hard?’”In 2017, Bellaire began sketching Realworld, fueled by late-night interviews with nearly a thousand recent graduates, university administrators, and parents. “I was obsessed,” she said, laughing. “I’d ask people about every dumb mistake they’d made.” The research revealed a glaring gap: no single resource existed to guide young adults through the practicalities of independence. Google was unreliable, parents were often outdated, and schools rarely taught students how to navigate a lease or budget for groceries. Bellaire saw an opportunity to create a new category— “real-world readiness.”Building Realworld demanded resilience. Bellaire initially focused on a B2B model, partnering with universities to distribute content to seniors and alumni. Feedback prompted a pivot to a direct-to-consumer app, a risky move that required retooling the platform. “It was terrifying,” she admitted. “You’re betting everything, and there’s no blueprint.” The gamble paid off: in 2021, Realworld raised $3.4 million, signaling investor confidence. Yet, with no direct competitors, Bellaire was navigating uncharted waters. “It’s great to be alone in your space,” she said, “but it means no one’s proven it can work.”Bellaire’s candor about entrepreneurship sets her apart. She spoke openly to CEO.com about the grind: investor rejections, the pressure to hire well, the need to constantly adapt. “You have to be okay with hearing ‘no’ a lot,” she said. “And you need people smarter than you, who’ll call you out.” Her first hire was an “athlete” — a versatile generalist who could thrive in a startup’s chaos. “I didn’t need a specialist,” she said. “I needed someone who could figure things out with me.”User experience drives Realworld’s evolution. The playbooks, crafted by experts in fields such as tax law and personal finance, are written in a conversational tone that resembles advice from a savvy friend. The platform also fosters a sense of community by enabling users to share stories and tips. “People don’t just want information,” Bellaire said. “They want to know they’re not alone in screwing up.” This focus on connection has helped Realworld cut through the noise of a crowded digital landscape.Beyond the app, Bellaire is committed to addressing broader issues, including women’s empowerment, educational equity, and expanded access to opportunities. She serves on the Pencils of Promise Leadership Council and the Acumen Fund Young Professional Committee, advocating for systemic change in how we prepare young people for life. “We teach kids to analyze literature or solve equations,” she said. “But we don’t teach them how to avoid a $1,000 medical bill. That’s a failure of imagination.”As Realworld grows, Bellaire aims to scale while staying true to her mission. She envisions the platform as a lifelong resource that guides users through milestones, such as buying a home or starting a family. “I want Realworld to be the place you turn to when you don’t know where else to go,” she said. For now, she’s focused on iterating and listening. “There’s no finish line,” she told CEO.com. “You just keep going, because the problem’s not going away.”Bellaire admits she’s still learning to navigate adulthood herself. “I don’t feel like a fully functioning adult,” she said, grinning. “But I’m getting better at faking it.” For the thousands relying on Realworld, that honesty might be the most valuable playbook of all.
Reinventing corporate relocation
In the intricate world of corporate relocation, where global workforces navigate hybrid work, visa complexities, and geopolitical shifts, Matt Tebbe, president and CEO of Cartus Corporation, is charting a new course. A subsidiary of Anywhere Real Estate, Cartus manages employee relocations for over a third of Fortune 100 companies. Since taking the helm in July 2023, Tebbe has brought clarity, akin to a systems thinker, to the role, as revealed in an interview with CEO.com. His vision — rooted in adaptability, technology, and human-centric solutions — aims to redefine how companies move people in an unpredictable era.Tebbe’s path to Cartus reflects a career spent solving complex problems. With an MBA from Yale’s School of Management, he began at Booz Allen Hamilton, sharpening his operational expertise. He later spent nearly a decade at Equifax, leading HR technology in Australia and New Zealand, where he integrated Veda, a major acquisition, and launched Australia’s largest native pre-employment screening business. Before Cartus, he served as general manager of group products at Riverside Insights, overseeing a business unit that supports over six thousand schools. “I’ve always been drawn to roles where you can make things better, not just bigger,” he told CEO.com.When Tebbe joined Cartus, the company faced a transformed landscape. The pandemic had upended traditional mobility, with remote work and global disruptions complicating relocations. Cartus held steady under interim CEO Eric Barnes, but Tebbe was tasked with accelerating its evolution. “Matthew has a gift for seeing around corners,” Don Casey, president and CEO of Anywhere Integrated Services, said in a 2023 press release announcing Tebbe’s appointment. Tebbe’s response has been to lean into the complexity. “We’re seeing trends that no one could have predicted five years ago,” he said in the interview. “Hybrid work is here to stay, but it’s not one-size-fits-all. Some employees want to relocate for opportunity; others need flexibility to stay put. Our job is to make both possible.”This philosophy underpins Cartus’s 2023 brand refresh, with the tagline “Where Mobility Meets Agility.” For Tebbe, it’s more than marketing—it’s a mandate. “The relocation industry isn’t just about moving bodies from point A to point B,” he said. “It’s about understanding what makes people thrive in a new place — culture, community, opportunity.” To achieve this, he’s betting big on artificial intelligence. “AI can analyze patterns—housing markets, cultural fit, even employee sentiment — and give us insights that make moves more successful,” he said. Cartus is piloting AI-driven tools to predict outcomes, from costs to employee satisfaction, though Tebbe emphasizes balance. “It’s not about replacing people,” he noted. “It’s about giving our experts better data to do what they do best: solve problems.”This blend of innovation and empathy defines Tebbe’s leadership. He speaks often of “unlocking growth,” a phrase that peppers his LinkedIn posts and Cartus’s communications. But growth, for him, transcends revenue. “I want Cartus to be the company that clients trust, not because we’re the biggest, but because we’re the most thoughtful,” he said. His track record — empowering teams at Equifax, championing equity at Riverside — suggests he means it. His focus on value over cost is deliberate. “Cost matters, but value matters more,” he said. “If we can show clients that a thoughtful move saves money in the long run — through retention, productivity, morale — they’ll listen.”
The market's fever: How Trump's Fed fight fuels volatility
The financial markets seem to have caught a fever, a jittery oscillation that’s sent stock indices lurching and bond yields twitching. The proximate cause, or so the headlines insisted, was a public spat between President Donald Trump and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. This clash felt less like a policy debate and more like a personal vendetta on the global stage. Trump, never one to shy away from spectacle, declared that Powell’s “termination cannot come fast enough,” a statement that sent ripples of unease through Wall Street and beyond. By Tuesday, April 22, he had backpedaled, denying any intent to fire the Fed chief, but the damage was done. The S&P 500 wobbled, the dollar dipped, and pundits fretted over the sanctity of central bank independence. Yet, as Fisher Investments’ MarketMinder argued in a sober analysis, the volatility was less about the specifics of Trump’s outburst and more about a more profound, almost primal market sentiment — a “fear morph” that thrives in moments of uncertainty.To understand this episode, one must first grasp the peculiar alchemy of markets in the Trump era. The former and now current president has always been a maestro of disruption, wielding tweets and offhand remarks like a conductor’s baton. His first term was a masterclass in this art: tariff threats against China would tank futures one day, only for a conciliatory phone call to send them soaring the next. In 2025, this pattern has returned with a vengeance. Fisher’s commentary notes that Trump’s tiff with Powell was not an isolated event but part of a broader narrative of policy unpredictability, from “Liberation Day” tariffs to musings on federal layoffs. Whether followed through on or not, each pronouncement acts as a spark in a tinder-dry market, igniting volatility that feels irrational and inevitable.This disconnect between the breathless narratives and the mundane data reveals a truth about markets: they are as much a psychological phenomenon as an economic one. Nobel laureate Robert Shiller has long argued that markets are driven by “narrative economics,” the stories we tell ourselves about what’s happening and why. In this case, the story was one of existential threat: Trump’s attack on Powell was framed as an assault on the Federal Reserve’s independence, a sacred cow of modern economics. The fear was not baseless. A 1935 Supreme Court precedent, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, underpins the Fed’s autonomy, stipulating that its members can only be removed “for cause.” Trump’s team has signaled an intent to challenge this, raising the specter of a politicized central bank. The historical context adds nuance. The Fed has not always been an untouchable institution. In the 1970s, President Richard Nixon pressured then-Fed Chair Arthur Burns to keep interest rates low ahead of the 1972 election, a move many economists believe fueled the decade’s stagflation. More recently, Trump’s first term saw him repeatedly criticize Powell, calling him “clueless” and lamenting high interest rates. For his part, Powell has maintained a stoic resolve, emphasizing the Fed’s data-driven mandate. In a December 2024 press conference, he described the economy as “strong,” even as markets fretted over fewer anticipated rate cuts. This resilience suggests that Powell is unlikely to bend to Trump’s bluster, but the mere suggestion of interference is enough to unsettle investors.Beyond the headlines, the market’s volatility reflects broader unease about the economic landscape. The Fisher commentary situates the Trump-Powell spat within a correction sentiment — a sharp, sentiment-driven drop of 10 to 20 percent, distinct from deeper, fundamentally driven bear markets. Corrections, they argue, are often fueled by “false fears,” exaggerated worries that lower expectations and set the stage for positive surprises. In early 2025, such fears abounded: tariffs on Mexico and Canada, announced with fanfare and then partially walked back, sparked volatility but failed to derail economic growth. The Atlanta Fed’s real-time GDP tracker showed continued expansion, even amid concerns about tariffs. Similarly, as measured by the University of Michigan’s gauge, consumer sentiment tanked in March, yet retail sales data suggested spending remained robust.This resilience points to a paradox: markets may thrash about, but the underlying economy often plods along. Of course, the U.S. economy has a remarkable ability to shrug off political noise. Markets are forward-looking, pricing in not just current events but expectations of future outcomes. In 2025, those expectations are clouded by uncertainty about trade policy, monetary policy, and the political will to navigate a narrowly divided Congress.Ultimately, the Trump-Powell tiff is less about the Fed’s independence than about the stories we tell ourselves in times of uncertainty. The markets, like a feverish patient, will eventually cool, driven not by headlines but by the slow grind of economic reality. For now, the volatility is a mirror, reflecting our anxieties and hopes. As Fisher Investments put it, “Patience and discipline generally prove wise and right.” In a world of soundbites and sell-offs, that may be the most radical advice of all.
Dispatches from the frontiers of leadership.