Wall Street is acting like America didn't just strike Iran
Investing in US markets lately is akin to spinning plates while riding a unicycle balanced on a bowling ball. Traders have to contend with rapidly changing tariffs, mixed economic signals, uncertainty over rates and now an escalating conflict in the Middle East.
So you might assume that the United States' historic strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend would send stocks lower and oil prices higher, for fear of retaliation and a potential Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping lane through which about a fifth of the world's oil flows. Yet stocks are basically flat. Oil gave up most of its earlier gains. Bonds are quiet.
What's going on?
Investors are maintaining their balancing act: It's just not clear what happens next — or what position to take. If the US and Israeli strikes are largely over, and Iranian retaliation is muted, this could be a net positive for markets, lessening volatility and the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. If the conflict escalates — particularly if Iran cuts off oil supplies to the West — that, combined with a growing trade war, could reignite inflation and a global recession.
In the meantime, with equal bets on both sides of the argument, Wall Street trades are barely budging.
'So far, so muted,' said Kit Juckes, chief FX strategist at Societe Generale. 'Mostly, we will be waiting for any communications from Ayatollah Khamenei, or any other indications of retaliation.'
Dow futures were unchanged. S&P 500 futures rose 0.1% and Nasdaq futures were 0.1% higher early Monday. CNN's Fear and Greed Index, which measures market sentiment, was stuck right in the middle: Neutral.
US crude oil rose 1% to $74.50 a barrel — far less than the 5% gains in traders' initial reaction Sunday evening, which threatened to send oil to its highest level since January. Brent crude, the global benchmark, was up 1.2% to $73 a barrel.
Safe-haven trades, which tend to boom in times of global strife, were also muted: Gold fell 0.1% to $3,380 a troy ounce. Treasury yields were barely changed.
The dollar, by contrast, gained 0.7%. America's currency has tumbled after the Trump administration put in place historic tariffs on foreign imports as investors feared a looming inflation-induced economic downturn. The dollar, widely referred to as the world's reserve currency, tends to rally in times of global unease and conflict, but some market observers questioned if that would happen again under Trump's 'America First ' policies.
It's not clear that fear of conflict in the Middle East is lifting the dollar, though — it is more likely getting a boost from higher oil prices, since oil globally is traded in dollars.
'While the broader bias still leans toward structural dollar weakness, escalating Middle East tensions are injecting support for the greenback via the commodity channel,' said George Vessey, lead FX and macro strategist at Conerva, in a note to investors Monday morning. 'That channel will remain central in the days ahead, as Iran — according to state-run TV — has vowed to retaliate by closing the Strait of Hormuz.'
So there's a risk that an escalation sends oil and gas prices surging and the economy slowing just as higher global tariffs kick in. The Federal Reserve may be hamstrung if inflation surges, unable to lower its key interest rates that tend to lift the economy and markets.
But Wall Street traders currently believe there's an equal chance that the worst of the Middle East conflict is now over. More trade deals could be on their way soon. And the Fed could cut rates later this year — maybe even twice.
In the meantime, Wall Street is acting like it went to bed Friday, slept straight through the weekend and woke up Monday morning as if nothing happened.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
24 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Senate's Byrd Rule Upends Trump's ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
She wasn't elected and she doesn't cast votes. But over the past week, Elizabeth MacDonough, the quietly powerful Senate parliamentarian, may have had more influence over Donald Trump's legislative agenda than anyone else in Washington. After meeting with Republicans and Democrats behind closed doors, MacDonough in recent days has significantly shrunk the size of the President's sweeping tax-and-spending package known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' by striking several measures that violated an arcane, decades-old Senate rule known as the Byrd Rule, which prohibits provisions considered 'extraneous' to the federal budget in the kind of legislation Republicans are trying to craft. One of the main GOP provisions the parliamentarian said did not satisfy the Byrd Rule was a measure to push some of the costs of federal food aid onto states, sending Republicans back to the drawing board to find the billions in savings that provision would have yielded. MacDonough also rejected measures to bar non-citizens from receiving SNAP benefits and one that would have made it more difficult to enforce contempt findings against the Trump Administration. MacDonough could issue additional guidance this week. The spate of rulings from the Senate parliamentarian, an official appointed by the chamber's leaders to enforce its rules and precedents, has significantly complicated the prospects of passing Trump's tax and spending bill by the July 4 deadline he imposed on Congress. Republicans have been scrambling for months to secure enough votes for Trump's megabill, which centers on extending his 2017 tax cuts and delivering on several of his campaign promises, such as boosting border security spending and eliminating taxes on tips. Support for the package has softened this month as more Republicans warn that it would add trillions of dollars to the deficit without further spending cuts. But the parliamentarian's latest rulings will force Republicans to either strip those provisions from the bill or secure a 60-vote supermajority to keep them in, a nearly impossible hurdle given that Senate Republicans only hold 53 seats. MacDonough ruled that some of the provisions have little business in a budget reconciliation bill, which can make big changes to how the federal government spends money but, under Senate rules, isn't allowed to substantively change policy. MacDonough's rulings came about after days of behind-the-scenes meetings between her office and Senate staff. They illustrate the often-overlooked power of Senate procedure—and the person tasked with interpreting it. MacDonough, a former Justice Department trial attorney and the first woman to ever serve as Senate parliamentarian, is Washington's ultimate rules enforcer. She was appointed in 2012 and has struck prohibited measures from reconciliation bills several times under both Republicans and Democrats. Now, the parliamentarian's rulings may force Republicans back to the drawing board just as they were hoping to finalize their legislative centerpiece. Here's what to know about the rejected measures. What is the Byrd Rule? The Byrd Rule, adopted in 1985, is a procedural constraint named after the late Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia to prohibit 'extraneous' provisions from being tacked onto reconciliation bills, which are fast-tracked budget packages that allow legislation to pass with a simple majority, bypassing the 60-vote filibuster threshold. The rule makes it so that every line of a reconciliation package must have a direct and substantive impact on federal spending or revenues. Provisions that serve primarily policy goals—rather than budgetary ones—are subject to elimination by a parliamentary maneuver known as a point of order. Whether a point of order is sustained is ultimately made by the parliamentarian, who is essentially the Senate's umpire tasked with providing nonpartisan advice and ensuring that lawmakers are complying with the Senate's rules. Parliamentarians often face backlash during the budget reconciliation process, when they determine whether policy proposals comply with the constraints of the Byrd Rule. What's been cut so far? MacDonough's rulings have invalidated a number of headline-grabbing GOP provisions, including a plan requiring states to pay a portion of food benefits—the largest spending cut for SNAP in the bill. The SNAP measure, which the parliamentarian said violated the Byrd Rule, would have required all states to pay a percentage of SNAP benefit costs, with their share increasing if they reported a higher rate of errors in underpaying or overpaying recipients. Some lawmakers warned their states would not be able to make up the difference on food aid, which has long been provided by the federal government, and could force many to lose access to SNAP benefits. Republican Sen. John Boozman of Arkansas, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, said in a statement that he's looking for other ways to cut food assistance without violating Senate rules. Another rejected provision would have zeroed out $6.4 billion in funding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, effectively shuttering the agency. The bureau was created by Democrats as part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act in the aftermath of the financial crisis as a way to protect Americans from financial fraud. Republicans have long decried the CFPB as an example of government over-regulation and overreach. 'Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill,' said Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who said the GOP plan would have left Americans vulnerable to predatory lenders and corporate fraud. The Senate parliamentarian also blocked a GOP provision intended to limit courts' ability to hold Trump officials in contempt by requiring plaintiffs to post potentially enormous bonds when asking courts to issue preliminary injunctions or imposing temporary restraining orders against the federal government. Democrats hailed that decision by the parliamentarian, noting that it would have severely undermined the judiciary's ability to check executive overreach. Senate Democrats 'successfully fought for rule of law and struck out this reckless and downright un-American provision,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. MacDonough also nixed provisions to reduce pay for certain Federal Reserve staff, slash $293 million from the Treasury Department's Office of Financial Research, and dissolve the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which is tasked with overseeing audits of publicly traded companies. Each of these proposals, she ruled, either lacked sufficient budgetary impact or were primarily aimed at changing policy, not federal revenues or outlays. MacDonough also rejected language in the bill drafted by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that would have exempted certain infrastructure projects from judicial review under the National Environmental Policy Act. The rejected proposal would have allowed companies to pay a fee in exchange for expedited permitting, a move Republicans argued would streamline bureaucratic delays. Also disqualified was a measure to repeal the Biden Administration's tailpipe emissions rule for cars and trucks manufactured after 2027. MacDonough ruled that the environmental provisions were either insufficiently tied to federal spending or failed to meet the Byrd Rule's strict thresholds for inclusion. Are the parliamentarian's rulings final, or could they be overturned? The parliamentarian's decisions could, in theory, be overturned. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota has the authority to ignore her ruling by calling for a floor vote to establish a new precedent—essentially overruling the Senate's referee. Parliamentarians have been ignored in the past, though it is quite rare. In 1975, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller ignored the parliamentarian's advice as the Senate debated filibuster rules. MacDonough has been overruled twice before: in 2013, when Democrats eliminated filibusters to approve presidential nominees, and in 2017, when Republicans expanded the filibuster ban to include Supreme Court nominations. But Thune has signaled he has no intention of going down that path this time. 'We're not going there,' the Senate Majority Leader said on June 2 when asked by reporters about overruling MacDonough. Thune could also fire the Senate Parliamentarian and replace her with one willing to interpret the rules more in line with how Senate Republicans view them.
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Side Hustle Or Salary Bump? How Gen Z And Millennials Are Doubling Their Income In 2025
In 2025, Gen Z and millennials are approaching financial growth with bold new strategies. Faced with rising living costs, shifting job security, and a changing relationship with work, many young professionals aren't waiting around for promotions or cost-of-living adjustments. They're taking income into their own hands—either by asking for more at work or by building something outside of it. While some are successfully negotiating raises, others are diving into freelance gigs or microbusinesses. So which strategy actually works better, and which one is right for you? Let's look at the data behind each approach and what Gen Z and millennials should consider when deciding how to increase their income this year. Gen Z is entering the workforce with less patience and more pragmatism. They want purpose, but they also want pay. Nearly two-thirds of 18–35-year-olds in the U.S. already have or plan to start a side hustle, driven by rising costs and gig flexibility, according to a recent Side Hustle Nation report compiling U.S. demographic data. At the same time, younger workers are becoming more assertive about their worth in traditional employment. According to NASDAQ, 55% of Gen Z negotiated their starting salary – more than any other generation. Whether through entrepreneurship or self-advocacy, the trend is clear. Young professionals are getting louder about money. 1. The salary negotiation route Best for you if: You're established in your role, want to grow internally, and prefer a stable income stream. Negotiating your salary may not be glamorous, but it's one of the most powerful tools you have to increase earnings, especially in roles where your value is proven. According to a Pew Research summary, two-thirds of people who asked for a raise received a better offer. In fact, 38% were offered more than they requested. MorningStar reports that Gen Z graduates are aiming for starting salaries between $75,000 and $100,000. Career advisors say negotiation is one of the only ways to bridge that gap early. As Forbes contributor Benjamin Laker advises, aiming for a realistic target, like a 5–10% raise, is key to negotiation success, especially when aligning your request with business goals. Pros of negotiation: Raises can compound over time, increasing long-term earnings Builds confidence and self-advocacy skills Strengthens your brand within the company Challenges: May feel uncomfortable if you lack leverage or support Requires preparation, research, and timing Doesn't solve job dissatisfaction or stalled growth If you're performing well and haven't had a compensation review recently, it may be time to start the conversation. Whether it's a bold ask at work or a business built after hours, Gen Z is taking control of how they ... More earn. getty 2. The side hustle strategy Best for you if: You want flexibility, creative freedom, or feel limited in your current role. Side hustles have evolved beyond Etsy shops and rideshare gigs. Today, they include everything from digital consulting and online tutoring to resale businesses and niche content creation. According to Scripps News, 26% of Gen Z already hold a side job. Over half expect to manage multiple income streams within the next five years. The income can be significant. A LendingTree study found the average side hustle earns around $1,200 per month, although the median is closer to $400. More importantly, 61% of respondents said their side hustle income was essential to making ends meet. Forbes recently highlighted how pairing gig roles like tutoring and content creation has helped some earn up to $5,000 per month, demonstrating what's possible when combining high-demand gigs. Pros of side hustling: Offers creative control and financial autonomy Builds marketable skills you can carry into other roles Could grow into a full-time business Challenges: Requires time and discipline outside your 9 to 5 Income can be inconsistent or delayed Risk of burnout if poorly managed If you're already spending evenings helping friends with social media or running an online store, you may be further along than you think. 3. Choosing what works for you Instead of asking which strategy is better, consider which is more realistic and beneficial for your current situation. Questions to reflect on: Do I have leverage at work or standout results I can use in a raise conversation? Is my current role a long-term fit or a stepping stone? Do I have available time, even in short blocks, to dedicate to a side project? Am I more motivated by career progression or creative ownership? Answering these questions can help point you toward a path that plays to your strengths and fits your lifestyle. 4. Can you do both? In many cases, yes. But it takes strategy. Some professionals negotiate for better pay at work while launching a consulting gig on the side. Others use their side hustle to fund certifications that increase their earning power at their day job. Done carefully, this hybrid approach can create more financial flexibility and professional momentum. Just make sure to set boundaries. Time-box your side projects. Check for conflict-of-interest clauses. And be honest with yourself about what you can sustainably manage. Take control of your income story In a job market shaped by automation and changing values, Gen Z and millennials are no longer relying on annual reviews or climbing one rigid ladder. They're carving income paths of their own—sometimes inside the office, sometimes outside of it, and often both. You don't need to pick the 'right' path. You just need to pick the one that works for you. Whether that means having a bold conversation with your manager or turning your skills into something marketable after hours, the most important step is choosing to act.
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
Why CEOs Should Make AI Their New Leadership Coach
President Donald Trump's tariff policy has sent nearly every company that produces goods scrambling. The race is on to shift sourcing and streamline supply chains in a way that reduces both potential costs and risks. Proxima, part of Bain & Company, recently compiled its detailed Global Sourcing Risk Index which ranks countries according to their risks as sources for goods and manufacturing. The report was developed in partnership with Oxford Economics. This index, unlike many of the quick deliberations conducted in the past months, is not all about the presumed amount of President Trump's so-called reciprocal tariffs. Proxima took a much wider view of all risks, including many of those that countries may have faced in the pre-Trump trade-friendly period. They examined geopolitical conflict, climate exposure, compliance and governance, human rights, trade barriers, labor and input price volatility and supplier concentration—all factors that might matter more in the next decade than the numbers displayed on the chart Trump showed at his 'Liberation Day' press conference announcing the new tariffs. While the tariffs-first analysis of supply chain risk tends to put China at the top, Proxima's analysis doesn't even put it in the top five. The largest supply chain risk comes from Mexico, the study found, mainly because of compliance and governance risks, the country's economic reliance on a small number of foreign partners, and risks associated with geopolitical conflict and climate exposure. The other countries in the top five include Turkey, Russia, India and the Philippines. Mexico, the largest trading partner for the U.S., is seen as particularly risky due to its role as a pass-through for Chinese goods into the U.S., and also because of its heavy reliance on the U.S. market. Its geographic location makes it vulnerable to climate change impacts—though the country has shown remarkable resilience here. Rapid increases in Mexico's manufacturing economy, the report says, have also strained the country's infrastructure and energy grid. However, Mexico isn't the only country finding itself at a surprisingly high position on the risk index. The U.S. ranks 13th, which gives it a greater risk profile than Brazil, Malaysia and South Africa. This positioning on the list largely comes from the labor costs here, as well as the nation's involvement in geopolitical conflict and exposure to risks from climate change. AI can do many things in business, but its potential to help enhance your leadership skills is often overlooked. I talked to Jacqueline Carter, a senior partner and North America director at global leadership development firm Potential Project, about how AI can help you out in that area. An excerpt from our conversation appears later in this newsletter. This is the published version of Forbes' CEO newsletter, which offers the latest news for today's and tomorrow's business leaders and decision makers. Click here to get it delivered to your inbox every week. ECONOMIC INDICATORS A general view of the Port of Kharg Island Oil Terminal, off the Iranian coast in the Persian Gulf and northwest of the Strait of Hormuz. Fatemeh Bahrami/President Trump's Saturday night announcement that the U.S. inserted itself into the current Middle East conflict by bombing three Iranian nuclear sites didn't seem to shake markets in Monday morning trading, as investors stayed in wait-and-see mode. In fact, the Nasdaq, the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 were all up less than a percentage point on Monday morning. However, Goldman Sachs warned, oil prices may rise up to 30% and hit multiyear highs if Iran decides to close the Strait of Hormuz—a vital global shipping lane—in retaliation for the U.S. attacks. At the conclusion of last week's meeting of the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee, Chairman Jerome Powell said the looming uncertainty from Trump's tariffs led them to hold baseline interest rates at the 4.25% to 4.5% they've been at since December. This decision was widely anticipated, though Trump continued to bash Powell as a 'stupid person' for not cutting rates. And while Federal Reserve staff downgraded its economic projections—increasing projected unemployment in December to 4.5%, inflation moving up to 3.1%, and decreasing GDP growth to 1.4%—it maintained its projection of two quarter-point rate cuts this year. Consumers are feeling the economic malaise. Retail spending dropped for a second straight month in May, down 0.9% month-over-month, according to Census Bureau figures. Analysts say part of this decline may be due to purchases surging at the beginning of the year as consumers feared the impact of impending tariffs. However, some of it—including a 0.9% decrease in spending at bars and restaurants—likely indicates that consumers are being more cautious. Forbes senior contributor Erik Sherman writes other measures of consumer behavior show attitudes and outlooks are retrenching, with historically high use of credit cards and other forms of revolving credit. FROM THE HEADLINES A prototype of the Tesla Cybercab stands in a showroom in the Mall of Berlin. Hannes P Albert/picture alliance via Getty Images To the surprise of very few observers of the robotaxi industry—if any—Tesla did not launch its self-driving vehicles in Austin, Texas, over the weekend as anticipated, writes Forbes senior contributor Brad Templeton. What the company did launch was a limited ride service that features a 'safety driver' in the passenger seat, available to take the controls if something goes awry. Tesla's service also has limited hours—6 a.m. to midnight—a restricted service area that avoids downtown Austin and complex intersections and streets, and no service in inclement weather. Templeton writes that the removal of a 'safety driver' is the biggest milestone in robotaxi development. The slower-than-projected rollout puts Tesla at a disadvantage in the robotaxi race—which currently appears to be led by Waymo. But Forbes' Alan Ohnsman writes Amazon's Zoox is the market entrant to watch. Zoox has a custom-designed van-line vehicle loaded with sensors and cameras. It has no steering wheel, pedals or external mirrors, and is designed as a bidirectional vehicle with an identical front and rear. It's electric, with transit-like sliding doors, and will be able to operate for up to 16 hours per day on a single charge. Ohnsman toured Zoox's California factory, where the Amazon subsidiary is producing vehicles, to launch its ride service late this year in Las Vegas. Pilot programs in San Francisco, Austin, Miami, Los Angeles and Atlanta are also planned. BIG DEALS The Los Angeles Lakers celebrate after LeBron James's buzzer-beating tip-in beat the Indiana Pacers at a game in pending major transactions dominated sports talk last week. (Well, until the Oklahoma City Thunder won the team's first-ever NBA championship late Sunday night.) On Wednesday, several sources reported that the Los Angeles Lakers would be sold to Mark Walter, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, for a record valuation of $10 billion. The team is currently owned by the Buss family, which ESPN reports will maintain a 15% share for an unspecified period of time. Walter, who bought the Dodgers in 2012, has owned a share in the Lakers since 2021. Walter, CEO of Guggenheim Partners, has invested heavily in the Dodgers since buying the team, and it's paid off through two World Series titles. Forbes senior contributor David Bloom writes that the sale—which shatters the record NBA franchise price of $6.1 billion, set by last year's purchase of the Boston Celtics by Bill Chisholm—shows the trend of deep-pocketed private equity moving into professional sports ownership, previously dominated by family owners. Bloom writes that the kind of investment someone like Walter can bring could help the NBA powerhouse team remain at the top of the rankings and continue attracting big-name stars both to play for the Lakers and root for them. In Major League Baseball, homebuilding billionaire Patrick Zalupski is leading a group of investors exclusively negotiating to buy the Tampa Bay Rays for $1.7 billion, writes Forbes' Thomas Gallagher. Zalupksi, founder and CEO of publicly traded Dream Finder Homes, says his business has been profitable every year since its founding in 2008. The other investors negotiating to purchase the Rays include Union Home Mortgage CEO Bill Cosgrove and Fast Forward Sports Group founder Ken Babby. TOMORROW'S TRENDS How To Make AI Your New Leadership Coach Potential Project Senior Partner and North America Director Jacqueline Carter. Foto: Søren Svendsen Business leaders are embracing AI tools to help them be more efficient, perform detailed analysis of financials, engage with customers and do research. But what about as a leadership tool? Jacqueline Carter, a senior partner and North America director at global leadership development firm Potential Project, says many are missing this highly effective use of AI tools. She recently co-wrote a book on the topic, 'More Human, How the Power of AI Can Transform the Way You Lead.' I spoke with Carter about how to make AI your new leadership coach. This conversation has been edited for length, clarity and continuity. How can AI be used to help with leadership effectively? Carter: It can save us time. As a leader, time is one of the most valuable commodities. I can more quickly draft an email. It can take notes for me at a meeting so that I don't have to worry about being able to remember what the priorities were. A lot of organizations right now are looking at implementing systems that do what AI does best, which is collect data, collect information and consolidate. That can be really amazing for leaders to be able to step out of management activities and lean more into leadership. The big question is, what are you going to do with that time saved? What we're concerned about is, 'It helped me write this email faster. I'm going to just write more emails.' There's a real opportunity to use that time to be able to have more human connections, and be more present with your people. AI can help with that, too. For a performance review, there's some amazing AI tools. You can say, 'Here's some of the things that I know about [an employee]. Here's what I need to talk to her about. What would be a good way to approach this conversation, because I think it's going to be a little bit challenging.' AI can consolidate that information. But the key thing is to be able to make sure that I'm really focusing on you and having that really personalized experience using the technology, and leveraging it to be able to be more human. We've also seen amazing tools that can identify sentiment analysis, help a leader to be able to understand: I sent out a message about a major communication last week. What's the sentiment in the organization? That's data that we would never be able to have. That's what AI does well, and it can be gold for leaders. The final thing that we see is that it can be a great coach. A lot of leaders that we work with are creating their own AI avatars where they share a lot of personal information about themselves. But then they can have a coach in the pocket. It can be like, 'I'm about to have a conversation with [an employee]. Based on what you know about me, what do you think could be some of the blind spots?' From your perspective, what would the ideal AI-augmented leadership look like? There's three core qualities of effective leadership. The first one is awareness: being aware of what's going on inside and outside. Wisdom: the ability to be able to make good decisions and discern. And finally, the ability to bring compassion to the table: Being able to do hard things, but do them in a human way. There [are] key ways that we can enhance our awareness, our wisdom, our compassion. From an awareness perspective, we know that human beings are amazing at context. Who am I talking to? Why is this important? Do I care? Should I care? Am I tired? Should I not have this conversation if I haven't had enough sleep? This is context. AI is amazing at content. That's a real way to be able to move from my limited awareness to be able to leverage AI, which has amazing content to be able to help me in terms of enhancing my awareness. Content would be, 'Hey, that email that you sent out last week about the organizational change, people don't like it.' That's adding to my awareness. On the wisdom side, human beings are amazing at being curious and asking questions. AI is amazing at giving answers. That interplay, and then questioning the answers is a great way to play with the tool. It actually enhances our ability to make good decisions. If you ask questions like, 'What am I not thinking?' or 'What's a really bad way to go about what I'm about to do?', this is a way to expand our wisdom. On the compassion side, because AI systems are designed to embed human empathy, human intelligence and models of good leadership, we can use those algorithms to be able to bring our human heart to the table. I want to be able to support my team in feeling more connected. Use those algorithms. Those algorithms can really help you to be able to enhance it. The augmented leader of the future—which is really now—is a both/and leader. They look at ways to be able to leverage the technology to be able to support their awareness, wisdom, compassion, and they also double down on being more aware, wise, compassionate. Where would you tell a business leader who has been thinking of using AI to enhance leadership to start? There's two important places to start. We believe that in the age of AI, we need to make sure that we're developing the best of our human capabilities and human qualities. As AI gets more and more advanced, we need to make sure that equally we're being the best versions of ourselves. The starting point should always be your own humility, your own awareness of your limitations, your own ability to be able to set your vision? What kind of a leader do I want to be? Those are kind of the foundational questions that then will enable you to use the tools better. The starting point is around you and your own ability to be able to really know yourself well and [figure out] what are your opportunities? Then start playing around. Start experimenting with the tools, because the tools are fun to play with. Make it an adventure. And really challenge yourself to be creative about how you start to leverage the tools. If you're asking questions and it's giving answers that you think are not very helpful, there's two things that I would say to that. The first is that the AI that you're using today is already the worst AI that you'll ever use. A lot of times when we don't get good answers, it's because we're not asking good questions. If you're asking a simple question—draft an email for me—and you're not providing context [or] saying what you want, the outcomes, how do I want [the recipient] to feel, you are not providing enough context to be able to then get good content. If you get a bad answer, challenge yourself to be able to provide more context, ask better questions, bring more heart to the table. COMINGS + GOINGS Food production giant Hormel Foods will tap Jeffrey Ettinger as its interim chief executive officer, effective July 14. Ettinger worked in the same role from 2005 to 2016, and is currently board chair for the Hormel Foundation. He was selected for a 15-month appointment after a search to replace retiring CEO James Snee. will tap as its interim chief executive officer, effective July 14. Ettinger worked in the same role from 2005 to 2016, and is currently board chair for the Hormel Foundation. He was selected for a 15-month appointment after a search to replace retiring CEO James Snee. Luxury group Kering appointed Luca de Meo as chief executive officer, effective September 15. De Meo joins the company from Renault, and current CEO and son of the founder François-Henri Pinault will continue in his board chair role. appointed as chief executive officer, effective September 15. De Meo joins the company from Renault, and current CEO and son of the founder François-Henri Pinault will continue in his board chair role. Children's entertainment company Spin Master selected Christina Miller as its next chief executive officer, effective July 7. Miller has served on the firm's board for the last five years, and she will succeed Max Rangel. Send us C-suite transition news at forbescsuite@ STRATEGIES + ADVICE The Trump Administration is ramping up its crackdown on immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally or are no longer authorized to work. Here's what employers should know to prepare for potential impacts on your employees and company. Part of what's making work feel burdensome could be carrying the weight of problems that are actually keeping you from advancing. Here are five ways to get beyond doing things the way you've always done them and move toward improving your business. QUIZ The U.S. had the highest number of new millionaires in the world last year, according to the UBS Global Wealth Report 2025. How many Americans earned millionaire status for the first time in an average day? A. 100 B. 500 C. 1,000 D. 1,500 See if you got it right here.
