(As published here, with pictures, in November 2022.)

Elon Musk demanding Twitter employees roll up their sleeves or toddle off hasn’t gone down well, with a spate of resignations reported late on Thursday.

What does this mean?

When Musk told his Twitter employees to go big or go home, he was probably counting on them sucking it up and sticking around. But instead, a bunch of key engineering kingpins have called his bluff and are bidding farewell to the birdhouse. And that spells trouble: engineers are the mechanics who keep Twitter’s engine well-oiled, after all, and their sudden sayonara prompted whispering that the platform could grind to a halt. That forced the world’s richest man to soften his stance on remote working – but he’ll probably need to backpedal even further than that.

Why should I care?

Zooming out: What a difference a year makes.

Musk’s rough-and-ready approach at Twitter has caused chaos, but his wrecking-ball style would probably have left an even bigger trail of destruction a year ago. Tech’s wave of success was at its crest back then, meaning tech workers were a hot commodity. And faced with an ultimatum like Musk’s, staff would have found it a doddle to jump ships to a rival firm. But this year’s been hard on Big Tech, and with jobs rapidly disappearing, maybe those coders shouldn’t be so hasty.

The bigger picture: How to lose a team in 10 days.

The usual employee-retention playbook is pretty straightforward at tech firms: hail and hold employees with hard cash and perks galore. But if dough’s the only thing on offer, companies will come unstuck the minute rivals offer lusher terms. That’s why culture matters: we aren’t just money-making machines, we need a sense of belonging and pride in our work to stay motivated. Right now, Twitter might be showing its rivals exactly how not to crack the culture code.

(As published here, with pictures, in February 2023.)

The streets of London have got emptier, with renters fleeing the uber-expensive city at a record pace.

What does this mean?

You know something’s wrong with the rental market when people start making houses out of dumpsters – but with the average London renter paying 9.1% more last month than in January 2022, that move almost seems sensible. That said, a more practical and popular option is simply upping sticks, with over 90,000 rental households leaving the city last year – the biggest exodus in over ten years. And it seems those ex-Londoners made the right call, with the average rent in the capital now at a wallet-thinning £2,141 ($2,588) a month – more than double the national average. That’s a steep asking price, especially when nearly 10% of private tenants are already falling behind on housing costs across the wider country.

Why should I care?

Zooming in: Ghost town.

More than three quarters of the tenants who fled the capital kept their jobs, which means that it's a tale of two cities these days: you’ve got the real Londoners who still live in the city, plus the pseudo-urbanites who work London-based jobs from laptops further afield. Thing is, you can’t eat and drink over Google Meets – so with fewer people swilling and snacking after the office, the city’s economy is poised to take a hit. It's a similar story across the pond: it’s estimated Manhattan workers alone are spending $12.4 billion less each year now that they’re in the office less.

The bigger picture: Dominoes.

This trend isn’t about to fix itself. After all, when white-collar workers cut back on spending, it doesn't just mean there's less need for employees to offer them products and services: it also means that local tax revenues take a hit. And when that happens, there's less money to fund public services like sanitation and education – which could make the situation snowball.

(As published here, with pictures, in February 2023.)

What’s going on here?

Chinese internet giant Baidu announced on Tuesday that it’s planning to launch its own artificial intelligence (AI) tool.

What does this mean?

Tech's having something of a midlife crisis right now, but instead of bagging motorbikes, graying firms have seized on something much more exciting: AI. Earlier this week Google revealed it’s got an AI-powered chatbot called Bard in the works, and Microsoft’s already poured $10 billion into OpenAI – a higher price tag than the Harley-Davidsons most midlife crises involve. And now that Baidu’s heard the neighborhood dads revving their brand-new engines, China’s biggest search engine’s decided to test drive some wheels of its own: after spending billions on AI research, the firm’s planning to roll out Ernie, China’s answer to ChatGPT, next month. That was all investors needed to hear: they jacked shares up 15% to give Baidu its best day since March.

Why should I care?

For markets: Rare riches.

Investors everywhere have caught artificial intelligence fever, snapping up AI-related shares like it’s 1997 and the mall just stocked new Beanie Babies. That enthusiasm also means that startups aiming to overtake OpenAI are flush with funding, creating a rare bright spot in the otherwise dim tech space. Case in point: less than three months into 2023, multiple AI companies have either already raised or are on track to raise almost a cumulative billion dollars in funding – no mean feat these days.

For you personally: Dare to doubt.

Let’s be real: the ChatGPT hype is really about the platform’s potential, and less about what it’s delivering in the here and now. After all, there are examples aplenty of the chatbot spitting out straight-up errors with serene robotic self-confidence. That’ll probably change over time, as lively competition forces companies to improve their offerings, but for now, think of ChatGPT and its ilk as useful but fallible tools, whose efforts need sharp-eyed fact checking and a healthy dose of common sense. In short, don’t be like CNET.

(As published here, with pictures, in March 2023.)

Upmarket British retailer John Lewis reported piling losses on Thursday.

What does this mean?

When the British middle classes collapse on the sofa after a long day of tennis and farmer’s markets, there’s a strong chance that piece of velvety furniture came from one particular shop: John Lewis. But these days, even well-heeled folk are cutting costs, and that’s driving them to cheaper fashion and homeware stores, and even – good heavens – to discount grocers. To be fair, the retailer didn’t do itself any favors: competitors stole a march on its upmarket supermarket Waitrose, which was snail-slow in capping grocery prices. That meant that 2022’s overall sales came in lower than the year before – and with inflation adding $200 million to costs, the chain ultimately lost over $280 million.

Why should I care?

The bigger picture: Losing Money 101.

Take note, CEOs: John Lewis has just delivered a masterclass on how not to do business. In choppy times like these, companies should be playing to their strengths, but John Lewis is making forays into housing and expanding its financial services offerings – distraction projects, which could still go either way. Then there’s the issue of cost-cutting: John Lewis just announced that it’s probably going to shed even more workers, which will further hit its once-renowned customer service. That won’t put a smile on the faces of high-earning Pippas and Hugos, who’ll buy their organic pâté somewhere else, thank you very much.

Zooming out: Prepare for worse.

As if life wasn't hard enough for UK consumers, a think tank predicted this week that the coming years will see the country's tax burden jump to its highest level in 75 years. See, while the government hasn’t announced any income tax hikes, they've cleverly frozen tax thresholds. And with inflation upping salaries, folk are going to be pushed willy-nilly into higher tax brackets, where they’ll wind up paying more – even as their purchasing power declines.