When The Going Gets Tough, Keep Calm
Illustration
Go ahead and panic.
Go outside and scream.
This advice was from Michelle Singletary, who spoke on NPR's 1A about the angst and fear that many of us are feeling about the wavering state of our economy. Singletary is the nationally syndicated personal finance columnist for the Washington Post. She has held that post for more than 20 years, and for one good reason: She offers common sense.
And so her caveat to her comments speaks volumes. Don't act on your panic.
Singletary's advice is suitable not simply for consumers and investors but for anyone in a management position. The uncertainty we are feeling now is palpable. The economy seems in stasis. Job cuts to government employees fuel anxiety. Contracts are not being let.
Employees in the private sector are looking over their shoulders. Am I next? They wonder.
No one—certainly not this leadership correspondent—knows what is coming next, but one thing I do know is that what will steady us now and enable us to meet the challenges of the future will be remembered. How leaders respond to the unease of those they lead now will be remembered. So, having lived through more than a few economic uncertainties, let me offer a few tips.
Take the temperature. What are people saying about the situation?
Listen to your team. It's easy to listen to what is said out loud, but it's tough to decipher what is not said. When fear takes hold, people shut down. Read the room. Ask open-ended questions. Reveal what you are feeling. Make it safe for people to speak up.
Recognize their efforts. Compliment the team on what they have accomplished to date and can achieve in the future.
Will these steps—collectively or individually—improve the situation? No. Your leadership actions will demonstrate that you care, that you understand the issues and challenges, and that you know how they feel.
Decades ago, I witnessed an example of reassurance from a VP executive whose company was about to be purchased by a larger entity. It was a surprise move, and everyone seemed on edge except the VP. Straight out, he told employees that he did not know what would come next, but he did offer one assurance. He told the managers in the room to invite him to their regular staff meetings. He would listen and take questions. In short, he would be present.
Tough times are terrible to endure. For leaders, they have an opportunity to show their mettle for the benefit of those they serve. We cannot control the situation around us, only how we react to it. 'When you have peace in yourself and accept, then you are calm enough to do something," wrote the Vietnamese monk and poet Thich Nhat Hanh, 'but if you are carried by despair, there is no hope.' In short, face the situation with a sense of calm and resolve to help yourself and your team persevere.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Judge Rejects Corporation For Public Broadcasting's Motion To Block Donald Trump From Removing Board Members
A federal judge on Sunday declined to issue an order to prohibit Donald Trump from removing three board members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as the administration seeks to zero out funding for public media stations, PBS and NPR. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss wrote that the CPB had failed to meet the threshold to issue a preliminary injunction to halt Trump's effort to remove Sony's Tom Rothman, as well as Laura Ross and Diane Kaplan. More from Deadline ABC News Suspends Terry Moran Over X Post That Called Trump Official Stephen Miller A "World-Class Hater" '60 Minutes' Correspondent Scott Pelley Says Trump Lawsuit Settlement & Apology Would Be "Very Damaging" To Reputation Of CBS And Paramount Trump Deploys 2,000 Troops To L.A. As Backlash & Protests To ICE Raids Surge; POTUS Action "Purposefully Inflammatory," Newsom Warns But Moss' ruling does not mean that Trump will be able to wrest control of the board. The judge also cautioned that Trump could not unilaterally appoint their replacements, and noted that the corporation had recently changed its bylaws that restricts the president's actions. Moss wrote, 'Although the case presents important questions regarding the status of the Corporation and its relationship with the federal government, the Court must leave those questions for another day. For present purposes and on the present record, it is enough to conclude that Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating that they are likely to prevail on the merits of their claim for injunctive relief or that Plaintiffs are likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief.' Read the judge's public broadcasting decision. The CPB is the nonprofit corporation set up by Congress to distribute funds to public media, largely radio and TV stations. The CPB sued the Trump administration in April, after three board members got notices that they were being removed. The CPB cited the Public Broadcasting Act, which forbids 'any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States' from exercising 'any direction, supervision, or control over . . . the Corporation.' PBS and NPR have filed their own lawsuits against the Trump administration over the president's executive order to restrict further funding for their networks. Rothman, Ross and Kaplan were among the five current board members of the CPB. There are four vacancies. The board members are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. Moss, an appointee of President Barack Obama, wrote that one of the arguments presented by CPB lawyers was 'novel,' that removal of a board member also required Senate approval. CPB attorneys also argued that the president was an 'officer' of the United States, and therefore was restricted from exercising control over the corporation. Moss write that he need not resolve that question here. For present purposes, the Court can assume (as seems likely) that Congress intended to preclude the President (or any subordinate officials acting at his direction) from directing, supervising, or controlling the Corporation. But Congress did provide the President with appointment power, and that authority carries with it at least some ability to influence the affairs of the Corporation.' The judge cautioned that Trump cannot just install replacement board members. He wrote that 'the President is not free to remove directors and then unilaterally to appoint their replacements, thereby using his power to remove as an effective tool for altering Board policy. Rather, the President's appointment authority is tempered by the requirement that he proceed only with the advice and consent of the Senate.' He added, It is unlikely, moreover, 'that the President can shortcut this process by filling vacancies on an interim basis. To start, if the Corporation is private entity, as Plaintiffs posit, the directors are not 'officers' of the United States, and it is thus doubtful that the President could fill a vacancy in any manner other than that prescribed in the statute, in the D.C. Nonprofit Corporation Act, or in the Corporation's articles of incorporation or bylaws. The PBA is consistent with that premise and provides that '[a]ny vacancy in the Board . . . shall be filled in the manner consistent with' the Act.' After a court hearing in the case last month, the CPB board changed its bylaws to try to put further safeguards on its independence. The new bylaws read, 'No Director may be removed from the Board by any person or authority, including the President of the United States, without a two-thirds vote of the other Directors confirming such removal. In the event the Corporation's President appoints one or more members of the Designated Body, such members may not be removed from the Designated Body by any person or authority, including the President of the United States, without a two-thirds vote of the other Directors and serving members of the Designated Body confirming such removal.' Perhaps more urgent for public media advocates is a pending congressional vote on whether the $535 million in annual federal funding to public broadcasting should be clawed back. The White House last week sent a package to Capitol Hill to rescind the funding for CPB in fiscal year 2026 and 2027. The corporation gets an advanced appropriation from Congress, so the money for those years already was allocated. More to come. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series
CBS News
12 hours ago
- CBS News
What went wrong for Democrats in 2024? Massachusetts party chairman on what needs to change.
Steve Kerrigan, the chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said his party needs to listen to voters more, because it cost them elections in during the 2024 campaign cycle. The headline on a Washington Post column last week summed up the identity crisis preoccupying Democrats these days: "LET US COUNT THE 3,515 WAYS IN WHICH DEMOCRATS ARE LAME." The piece went on to compile a list of the multitude of advice Democrats are getting, things like "go on the offensive," "find plausible candidates," "sound less judgmental," "rethink the words they use," "take a 'specific and granular' approach," and "nominate someone who is 'more mainstream.'" What are Democrats doing different? WBZ-TV asked Massachusetts Democratic party chairman Kerrigan what he takes away from it all. "It's not surprising to me that that article or those lists come out of Washington," he said. "The word that matters most to me is win. And if you look at all of the elections that have taken place since November of 2024, Democrats have outperformed and, in many cases, we have flipped seats from Republicans to Democrats in state legislatures all across the country." What are they doing differently in from the debacle of the fall of 2024? "We're continuing to organize and talk to people where they are and, frankly, listen more, which is what our party, and any party who wishes to win elections needs to do. You have to be willing to talk to the voters and to listen," says Kerrigan. "What we didn't do in the wake of 2016 was listen to why a Trump voter existed in the first place, how he got elected in the first place. I really think we fell down on the job. We took data points throughout time, the midterms of '18, the win in '20 and the no-red-wave in '22 and figured out that we had figured it out, when, in fact, we hadn't." What have they figured out now? The Trump voters "feel like they did not have their voice heard," Kerrigan said. "We've got a Washington, DC [where] the last time they fought for or increased the minimum wage, my former boss, Ted Kennedy led that battle, and he died in August of 2009. You've got a Congress that doesn't pass a budget through regular order since 1997. The American people are frustrated, and they're showing it by saying 'You're in power, we now are going to try the other guy,' even though they knew what the other guy was up to," Kerrigan said. Should Maura Healey re-elected? On the local front, Kerrigan was asked about recent polling showing only 37% of Massachusetts voters believe Gov. Maura Healey deserves re-election next year. He waved off that results and cited other pols that are more favorable for the incumbent. "Governor Healey is going to earn re-election because she understands Massachusetts people need someone who's going to fight to lower costs for them, going to fight to increase housing opportunities for them, going to fight back against Donald Trump. And frankly, neither Mike Kennealy nor Brian Shortsleeve [the two announced GOP candidates for governor] are willing to do any of that," Kerrigan said. Kerrigan also discussed the impact President Trump and his policies are likely to have on the campaign here, and gave his reaction to recent reporting on the handling of then-President Joe Biden's decision to seek re-election. You can watch the entire conversation here, and join us every Sunday morning at 8:30 a.m. for more discussion with political and policy newsmakers on the weekend edition of "Keller At Large." Next week's guest will be Massachusetts GOP chair Amy Carnevale.
Los Angeles Times
17 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
How ‘Cali' became a slur among Vietnam's growing army of nationalists
HANOI, Vietnam — Last fall, Vietnam opened a sprawling new military museum here, and among thousands of artifacts in the four-story building and a courtyard filled with tanks and aircrafts, one exhibit quickly became the star attraction: the flag of South Vietnam. The government regards the yellow banner with three red stripes as a sign of resistance to the communist regime, violating laws about inciting dissent. With few exceptions, it is not displayed. Reactions to the rare sighting soon went viral. Young visitors at the Vietnam Military History Museum posted photos of themselves next to the flag with deep frowns, thumbs down or middle fingers raised. As the photos drew unwanted attention, the flag was unpinned from a wall and folded within a display case. Social media content featuring rude hand gestures was scrubbed from the internet. But the phenomenon persisted. Several weeks ago, schoolchildren who were on tour made it a point to check out the flag. Every few minutes, a new group crowded around the banner — also known online as the 'Cali' flag — holding up middle fingers or crossing their hands to form an 'X.' In Vietnam, Cali — sometimes written as 'kali' — has long been a reference to the Vietnamese diaspora in California, where many Vietnamese-Americans still fly the flag of the south to represent the fight against communism and the nation they lost with the war. People who live in Vietnam, however, are more likely to view it as a symbol of American imperialism, and as nationalistic sentiment here has swelled in recent years, evoking the Golden State has become a shorthand of sorts to criticize those opponents. 'They use that as a label against anyone who disagrees with state policy,' says Nguyen Khac Giang, a research fellow at Singapore's Yusof Ishak Institute, known for its political and socioeconomic research on Southeast Asia. There have been other signs of growing nationalism in the past year, often in response to perceptions of American influence. In addition to animosity toward the 'Cali' flag, a U.S.-backed university in Ho Chi Minh City was attacked over suspicions of foreign interference. And an aspiring Vietnamese pop star who'd been a contestant on 'American Idol' was savaged on social media last summer after footage of her singing at the U.S. memorial service of an anti-communist activist surfaced. Vietnamese nationalism, Giang said, is bolstered at every level by the country's one-party rule. The government controls education and public media; independent journalists and bloggers who have criticized the government have been imprisoned. In addition, the party's ability to influence social media narratives has improved over the last several years, particularly among the nation's youth. Since 2017, Vietnamese authorities have employed thousands of cyber troops to police content online, forming a military unit under the defense ministry known as Force 47. In 2018, the country passed a cybersecurity law that enabled it to demand social media platforms take down any content that it deems anti-state. The resulting one-sided discourse means that views that don't align with official propaganda often draw harassment and ostracism. At times, the government has also used that power to try and rein in nationalism when it grows too extreme — though banning posts about the South Vietnam flag did little to quell enthusiasm at the museum. Some visitors who were making hand signs said they were expressing their disapproval of a regime that, they'd been taught, oppressed Vietnamese people. One teenager unfurled and held up the national flag — red with a yellow star — for a photo. 'It's hard to say if I agree or disagree with the rude gestures,' said Dang Thi Bich Hanh, a 25-year-old coffee shop manager who was among the visitors. 'Those young people's gestures were not quite right, but I think they reflect their feelings when looking at the flag and thinking about that part of history and what previous generations had to endure.' Before she left, she took a selfie with her middle finger raised to the folded cloth. ::: Five years ago, when a student from a rural region of the Mekong Delta earned a full scholarship to an international university in Ho Chi Minh City, it seemed like a dream come true. But last August, when the school was caught up in the growing wave of nationalism, he began to worry that his association with Fulbright University Vietnam could affect his safety and his future. 'I was scared,' said the recent graduate, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution. He had just started a new job in education and avoided mentioning his alma mater to coworkers and wearing shirts marked with the school name. 'You had all kinds of narratives. Especially with the disinformation spreading at the time, it had some negative impacts on my mental health.' The attacks included allegations that Fulbright, which opened in 2016 with partial funding from the U.S. government, was cultivating Western liberal and democratic values that could undermine the Vietnamese government. Nationalists criticized any possible hint of anti-communist leanings at the school, such as not prominently displaying the Vietnamese flag at commencement. Even last year's graduation slogan, 'Fearless,' sparked suspicions that students could be plotting a political movement. 'You are seeing new heights of nationalism for sure, and it's hard to measure,' said Vu Minh Hoang, a diplomatic historian and professor at the university. Hoang said the online allegations — none of which were true — led to threats of violence against the university, and there was talk that some parents withdrew their children because of them. Several students said their affiliation drew hate speech from strangers and distrustful questions from family members and employers. Academics said the Vietnamese government likely acted quickly to shut down the backlash against Fulbright in order to prevent the anti-American sentiment from harming its ties with the U.S., its largest trade partner. But some of the original accusations were propagated by state media and bots associated with the Ministry of Defense, hinting at a schism within the party. Hoang said that while nationalism is often utilized as a uniting force in Vietnam and beyond, it also has the potential to create instability if it grows beyond the government's estimation or control. 'For a long time, it has been the official policy to make peace with the overseas Vietnamese community and the United States,' Hoang said. 'So this wave of online ultranationalism is seen by the Vietnamese state as unhelpful, inaccurate and, to some extent, going against official directions.' ::: Last summer, footage of Myra Tran singing at the Westminster funeral of Ly Tong, an anti-communist activist, surfaced online. She'd achieved a degree of fame by winning a singing reality show in Vietnam and appearing on 'American Idol' in 2019, but she received harsh condemnation from online nationalists and state media when the video from several years ago went viral. Facebook and TikTok users labeled Tran, now 25, as traitorous, anti-Vietnam — and Cali. The controversy prompted a more broadly-based movement to ferret out other Vietnamese celebrities suspected of conspiring against the country. Internet sleuths scoured the web for anyone who, like Tran, had appeared alongside the flag of South Vietnam and attacked them. An entertainment writer in Ho Chi Minh City, who did not want to be identified for fear of being targeted, says that as Vietnamese youth have become more nationalistic online, musicians and other artists have felt pressure to actively demonstrate their patriotism or risk the wrath of cancel culture. He added that the scrutiny of symbols like the South Vietnam flag has given those with connections to the U.S. greater reason to worry about being attacked online or losing job opportunities. That could discourage Vietnamese who live overseas — a demographic that the government has long sought to attract back to the country — from pursuing business or careers in Vietnam. 'There used to be a time when artists were very chill and careless, even though they know there has been this rivalry and this history,' he said. 'I think everybody is getting more sensitive now. Everyone is nervous and trying to be more careful.' Tran was bullied online and cut from a music television program for her 'transgression.' She issued a public apology in which she expressed gratitude to be Vietnamese, denied any intention of harming national security and promised to learn from her mistakes. Two months later, Tran was allowed to perform again. She returned to the stage at a concert in Ho Chi Minh City, where she cried and thanked fans for forgiving her. But not everyone was willing to excuse her. From the crowd, several viewers jeered and yelled at Tran to 'go home.' Videos of the concert sparked fierce debate on Facebook among Tran's defenders and her critics. 'The patriotic youth are so chaotic now,' one Vietnamese user complained after denouncing the hate that Tran was receiving online. Another shot back: 'Then go back to Cali.'
