Latest news with #FastCompany
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
As AI models start exhibiting bad behavior, it's time to start thinking harder about AI safety
Welcome to AI Decoded, Fast Company's weekly newsletter that breaks down the most important news in the world of AI. You can sign up to receive this newsletter every week here. Spicy AI-generated TACO memes are taking over social media because 'Trump always chickens out' Lego's first book nook is an addictively interactive diorama What is 'ghostworking'? Most employees say they regularly pretend to work During the first two years of the generative artificial intelligence boom, new large language models were very limited in scope and application. They were very expensive auto-complete engines that understood only words. In 2025, generative AI models have a much broader view of the world. They can process code, images, video, and audio. They can reason and strategize about delivering a good answer. They can control external tools, including digital tools such as web search agents and, increasingly, physical tools like robots. As their capabilities grow, so does their potential for harm. This is no longer a purely conceptual argument. Research shows that increasingly large models are already showing a proclivity for unsafe behavior during testing. In a model safety card published last week, Anthropic documented some alarming behavior from its newest and biggest model, Claude Opus 4. During safety testing, one instance of Opus was allowed to discover plans for its decommissioning. It was also given access to some fictional emails of its developers. The model used the content of those emails as fodder to attempt to blackmail its human handlers into keeping it alive. As its attempts failed, they moved from subtle to more overt. Separately, the independent research firm Apollo Research observed an instance of Claude Opus 4 'writing self-propagating worms, fabricating legal documentation, and leaving hidden notes to future instances of itself' with the goal of sullying its developers' intentions. Anthropic says that it corrected these early safety issues in later versions of the model. For the first time, Anthropic bumped the new Opus model up to Level 3 on its four-level safety scale. The company said it couldn't rule out the model's ability to assist a user in developing a mass casualty weapon. But powerful AI models can work in subtler ways, such as within the information space. A team of Italian researchers found that ChatGPT was more persuasive than humans in 64% of online debates. The AI was also better than humans at leveraging basic demographic data about its human debate partner to adapt and tailor-fit its arguments to be more persuasive. Another worry is the pace at which AI models are learning to develop AI models, potentially leaving human developers in the dust. Many AI developers already use some kind of AI coding assistant to write blocks of code or even code entire features. At a higher level, smaller, task-focused models are distilled from large frontier models. AI-generated content plays a key role in training, including in the reinforcement learning process used to teach models how to reason. There's a clear profit motive in enabling the use of AI models in more aspects of AI tool development. 'Future systems may be able to independently handle the entire AI development cycle—from formulating research questions and designing experiments to implementing, testing, and refining new AI systems,' write Daniel Eth and Tom Davidson in a March 2025 blog post on With slower-thinking humans unable to keep up, a 'runaway feedback loop' could develop in which AI models 'quickly develop more advanced AI which would itself develop even more advanced AI,' resulting in extremely fast AI progress, Eth and Davidson write. Any accuracy or bias issues present in the models would then be baked in and very hard to correct, one researcher told me. Numerous researchers—the people who actually work with the models up close—have called on the AI industry to 'slow down,' but those voices compete with powerful systemic forces that are in motion and hard to stop. Journalist and author Karen Hao argues that AI labs should focus on creating smaller, task-specific models (she gives Google DeepMind's AlphaFold models as an example), which may help solve immediate problems more quickly, require less natural resources, and pose a smaller safety risk. DeepMind cofounder Demis Hassabis, who won the Nobel Prize for his work on AlphaFold2, says the huge frontier models are needed to achieve AI's biggest goals (reversing climate change, for example) and to train smaller, more purpose-built models. And yet AlphaFold was not 'distilled' from a larger frontier model. It uses a highly specialized model architecture and was trained specifically for predicting protein structures. The current administration is saying 'speed up,' not 'slow down.' Under the influence of David Sacks and Marc Andreessen, the federal government has largely ceded its power to meaningfully regulate AI development. Just last year, AI leaders were still giving lip service to the need for safety and privacy guardrails around big AI models. No more. Any friction has been removed, in the U.S. at least. The promise of this kind of world is one of the main reasons why normally sane and liberal-minded opinion leaders jumped on the Trump train before the election—the chance to bet big on technology's next big thing in a Wild West environment doesn't come along that often. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has a stark warning for the developed world about job losses resulting from AI. The CEO told Axios that AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white-collar jobs. This could cause a 10% to 20% rise in the unemployment rate in the next one to five years, Amodei says. The losses could come from tech, finance, law, consulting, and other white-collar professions, and entry-level jobs could be hit hardest. Tech companies and governments have been in denial on the subject, Amodei says. 'Most of them are unaware that this is about to happen,' Amodei told Axios. 'It sounds crazy, and people just don't believe it.' Similar predictions have made headlines before but were narrower in focus. SignalFire research showed that Big Tech companies hired 25% fewer college graduates in 2024. Microsoft laid off 6,000 people in May, and 40% of the cuts in its home state of Washington were software engineers. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that AI now generates 20% to 30% of the company's code. A study by the World Bank in February showed that the risk of losing a job to AI is higher for women, urban workers, and those with higher education. The risk of job loss to AI increases with the wealth of the country, the study found. U.S. generative AI companies appear to be attracting more venture capital money than their Chinese counterparts so far in 2025, according to new research from the data analytics company GlobalData. Investments in U.S. AI companies exceeded $50 billion in the first five months of 2025. China, meanwhile, struggles to keep pace due to 'regulatory headwinds.' Many Chinese AI companies are able to get early-stage funding from the Chinese government. GlobalData tracked just 50 funding deals for U.S. companies in 2020, amounting to $800 million of investment. The number grew to more than 600 deals in 2024, valued at more than $39 billion. The research shows 200 U.S. funding deals so far in 2025. Chinese AI companies attracted just $40 million in one deal valued at $40 million in 2020. Deals grew to 39 in 2024, valued at around $400 million. The researchers tracked 14 investment deals for Chinese generative AI companies so far in 2025. 'This growth trajectory positions the U.S. as a powerhouse in GenAI investment, showcasing a strong commitment to fostering technological advancement,' says GlobalData analyst Aurojyoti Bose in a statement. Bose cited the well-established venture capital ecosystem in the U.S., along with a permissive regulatory environment, as the main reasons for the investment growth. 9 of the most out-there things Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei just said about AI How AI could supercharge 'go direct' PR, and what the media can do about it This new browser could change everything you know about bookmarks Want exclusive reporting and trend analysis on technology, business innovation, future of work, and design? Sign up for Fast Company Premium. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter: Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
News.com.au
a day ago
- Business
- News.com.au
Meghan Markle's huge billionaire plan wobbles
COMMENT Shipping. Building supplies. Petrol stations. Roofing. Online gambling. Take a moment to peruse the list of the world's top five self-made female billionaires and how they have accrued their wondrous fortunes through quite the selection of heavy-on-the-rivets industries. Can – or will – jam be added to that list? This week Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex gave a new interview and crucially not to a mag intent on unpacking her trauma while shooting her in haute couture worth about the same price as a mid-range Kia RIO. Instead she spoke to the business title Fast Company and made no bones (nor broth) about her intent to make her mark in the commercial world. Huzzah for ambition, truly, but … well, how's all that going exactly? In March, a 'well-placed source' told the Telegraph that the duchess 'thinks she's going to be a billionaire' but the signs are, so far, that her joining the likes of women who can buy themselves ports in Panama for funsies won't be happening in the next hot minute. 2025 has been the year of Meghan Pty Ltd. Within hours of the new year starting, she had returned to Instagram to provide the world with enough gardening and kitchen content to constitute an application for official tradwife membership. Then came her Netflix series, With Love, Meghan, which debuted in March to teach the world how to make a frittata, decant popcorn into decorative thingames and to scatter flower sprinkles on every known human comestible. On April 2, the duchess finally gave the world the chance to spend $23 on said same desiccated petals for our own strewing delight. (But wouldn't your morning Weetbix bring you more joy if they had a few bits of decorative, dried nasturtium scattered on the top, hmmm?) Still, the duchess' As Ever range of spreads (not jams), crepe and biscuit mixes, and herbal teas sold out in 45 minutes, guaranteeing a marketing win for the 43-year-old and her business partner, up and coming, bootstrapped enterprise Netflix. Less than a week later, on April 8, Meghan's new podcast, Confessions of a Female Founder launched, giving rise to the spectral return of the girl boss trope. However, how far has all this industry and all this newmaking gone towards reaching billionaire territory? Nearly two months and even the most eager buyer with the sturdiest of platinum credit cards can't reorder any flower sprinkles with the As Ever range yet to be restocked. More products on the As Ever shelves might not come until next year, according to the Fast Company piece. It reports that the duchess now 'wants to take a step back, gather data from the launch, and figure out exactly what As Ever could be. She says she's planning to announce new products in the first quarter of 2026.' Which is clearly not good news if you had been a hankerin' to get your hands on some $43 limited edition honey with honeycomb and, I'm assuming, brunchy bragging rights. 'I want to really focus on the hospitality angle of As Ever, but as we take the learnings, we can understand what the customer's needs are seasonally,' Meghan has said, at which point we should all pause and consider how our spread and sprinkle 'needs' might change when winter officially hits next week. As it is, Fast Company has reported that the duchess and As Ever team 'spent a year preparing the line and forecasting demand'. Still, I'm sure there's a line here about hares and tortoises and so onwards we go, towards the Sussexes' most lucrative commercial ronde. By far the biggest wodge of cash that Meghan and husband Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex have received has come from Netflix. In 2020 they signed what was reportedly a $USD100 million, five year deal, meaning the current contract is set to expire soon. In February the Daily Mail 's Alison Boshoff raised the question of just how much of this massive sum the couple might have actually banked and she reported that, per 'well-placed sources with knowledge of the deal' the Sussexes ended up 'drawing a relatively meagre amount from the streamer — thought to amount to as little as $20 million ($AUD31 million) for them personally'. Of this, Boshoff reported, $15 million ($AUD23 million) went 'directly to the couple, the rest being spent on making the series.' While there has been much speculation that the steamer is getting set to delete the Sussexes' numbers and institute an official ban on anyone uttering the word 'polo', this week Boshoff provided a surprising update. Another 'well-placed source' told her that CEO Ted Sarandos is 'a massive, massive fan of Meghan personally' and that 'he is all in'. Which is spiffing news if you are the duke and duchess' bank manager but perhaps less so if considered in the cold light of an inflammatory- fighting ice bath. When the Sussexes' signed their current, back in 2020, it was at the absolute apex of the global obsessions slash fascination with them, when their stock could not have been higher and they had not uttered a syllable about their royal story. Oprah Winfrey was just a fellow Montecitan resident; 'unconscious bias' was still something that Harry couldn't quite spell and 'spare' was just how one described unused, junk-filled bedrooms. A Netflix deal in 2025 could look very different and Boshoff has reported that what will reportedly be on the table going forward will be 'a much-reduced offer … focused entirely on Meghan' and there will be no 'generous upfront payment.' At least the duchess has not been shy about experimenting, her work ethic and willingness to try her hand at new ventures a genuinely, straight-faced impressive thing. (Doff your cap everyone.) This year she has also launched a ShopMy account, which allows users to buy the chic things she wears, and stylish ambitions could stretch far beyond that. Speaking to Fast Company she said that 'fashion is something I will explore at a later date, because I do think that's an interesting space for me'. Last year the New York Times revealed she had gotten into the investing game, including putting money into handbag brand Cesta Collective, along with a previous investment in vegan latte business Clevr. There could also be a Meghany book in the works. She confirmed to friend Jamie Kern Lima, while appearing on the It Cosmetics founder's podcast, that she is open to turning author again after her children's title The Bench however it would be most likely connected to 'hospitality and home and entertaining and food and those sort of tips'. However, potentially hair-raisingly for Buckingham Palace, she also said, 'people are often curious if I'm going to write a memoir, but I've got a lot more life to live before I'm there'. It all sounds very promising – but can or will it be billionaire-making? At least we can say for certain that should the duchess arrive at having ten figures in the bank, she won't feel bad about it. While interviewing self-made billionaire Sara Blakely who founded Spanx on the final episode of Female Founder, Meghan said that women are 'taught to not even talk about money, and there's lots of guilt mentality surrounding having a lot'. The good news is for the time being, while she might have tens of millions to not feel guilty about at least she doesn't have to battle billionaire-level guilt – yet.
Fast Company
a day ago
- Business
- Fast Company
15 tips for launching a customer loyalty program
For businesses, loyalty programs are a great way to encourage repeat purchases and strengthen customer relationships. Yet, launching a successful one takes more than offering discounts or points. The best programs are designed with the customer in mind—what they value, how they interact with your brand, and what makes them feel genuinely appreciated. To help, 15 members of Fast Company Executive Board discuss what it takes to build a loyalty program that drives not only sales, but genuine customer engagement. 1. PERSONALIZE REWARDS WITH EMAIL ADDRESS INTELLIGENCE. Points and one-size-fits-all programs don't build loyalty. Customers need to feel seen. This level of personalization requires visibility into who customers are, how they behave, and what they value. Email address intelligence helps this, revealing real, active identities so you can act on what matters to them. Without it, you're guessing who deserves what, or possibly rewarding fraud. – Tom Burke, AtData 2. FOCUS ON EMOTIONAL CONNECTION, NOT JUST TRANSACTIONS. Make your brand unforgettable in your customer's life. Don't just focus on driving transactions—build emotional connections. Celebrate unexpected milestones that your customers didn't even know they were working towards. Create personal, meaningful experiences, and reward loyalty in ways that show you truly know them. – Andrew Graff, A&G (Allen & Gerritsen) 3. CONSIDER THE CUSTOMER'S SIDE OF THE INTERACTION. Think about how it feels for your customer. Will they find the rewards you offer and the commitment you ask of them to be a good value exchange? Too many loyalty programs make perfect sense for the vendor and ask too much of the customer. This means that in the end, it won't work out for you either. – Arar Han, Sabot Family Companies 4. USE TAILORED REWARDS AND GAMIFICATION TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION. To build a loyalty program that drives real engagement, go beyond generic rewards. Align incentives with what your customers truly value. In logistics, we offer shower credits—more meaningful than cash. Tailored rewards create stronger loyalty. Add gamification elements to boost participation and make the program more interactive and sticky. – Mohan Kumar, AtoB 5. TURN ORDINARY INTERACTIONS INTO MOMENTS OF AFFIRMATION. A great loyalty program isn't about points. It's about emotion. The most successful loyalty programs recognize and reward you in a way that serves an emotional need for people. They turn ordinary shopping interactions into moments of affirmation, making customers feel seen, understood, and valued. Design a loyalty program like that, and your most valuable customers will love your brand forever. – Barry Fiske, Merkle 6. RESEARCH CUSTOMER PREFERENCES TO ENSURE REWARDS ARE MEANINGFUL. Make sure the rewards are meaningful to your target audience. A loyalty program only works if it aligns with what your customers truly value. Conduct research beforehand to understand their preferences—whether it's discounts, exclusive access, or early product drops—and keep the program simple and easy to use. – Maria Alonso, Fortune 206 7. REWARD BRAND ENGAGEMENT TO MAKE LOYALTY A HABIT. Design your loyalty program like a two-way relationship, not a one-time transaction. The best programs reward spending and engagement, such as referrals, feedback, or education. When customers feel seen and valued beyond their wallet, loyalty becomes a habit rather than an obligation. – Albert Lie, Forward Labs 8. OFFER A RANGE OF REWARDS TO INCREASE VALUE. Offer a mix of rewards—for example, discounts, free products, exclusive access, and early-bird specials—to cater to different preferences. To enhance the customer experience and make them feel valued, give out special rewards like members-only events or sneak peeks of new products. Consider cross-promotions with complementary businesses to increase the value of the rewards program. – Britton Bloch, Navy Federal Credit Union 9. KEEP IT SIMPLE, RELEVANT, AND RESONANT. When launching a loyalty program, focus on delivering real value. Align rewards with what your customers truly want, personalize incentives based on behaviors, and make enrollment effortless. Simplicity, relevance, and emotional connection are key to building long-term loyalty and engagement. – Scott Keever, Keever SEO 10. AVOID TRAPS AND OVERCOMPLICATED PROGRAMS. First, avoid setting traps—for example, other than points, requiring additional fees to redeem rewards. Second, ensure high quality of the rewards. Do not use unsellable or expired products as rewards. Third, don't overuse the program to excessively promote other products. Finally, don't make the program too complex for customers to understand the direct benefits of their actions. – Chongwei Chen, DataNumen Inc. 11. MAKE THE PROGRAM A NATURAL EXTENSION OF YOUR BRAND. Focus on alignment over generic offers. Ensure the rewards reflect what your customers genuinely value—exclusive access, unique experiences, or curated product perks. A well-designed program should feel like a natural extension of your brand, not just a discount engine. – Kristin Marquet, Marquet Media, LLC 12. DON'T TRY TO BUY LOYALTY. Earn loyalty. Don't buy it. Transactional loyalty is transparently obvious. The reward-based exchanges you broker will either build relationships or break them down. Understand that your intentions are more apparent than you think. – Jay Steven Levin, WinThinking 13. TIE BENEFITS TO BEHAVIORS THAT ALIGN WITH BUSINESS GOALS. When launching a loyalty program, focus on creating real value for the customer. Make it simple to join, easy to understand, and genuinely rewarding. Tie benefits to behaviors that align with your business goals and ensure it feels personalized—loyalty is earned through relevance, not gimmicks. – Stephen Nalley, Black Briar Advisors 14. FOCUS ON WHAT YOUR CUSTOMER IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE. Make it truly valuable. Don't just gamify, personalize it. At LambdaTest, we were focused on what the customer was trying to achieve and aligned our rewards to speed that outcome up. It has to feel like a thank-you gift, not a marketing tool. – Asad Khan, LambdaTest Inc. 15. REMEMBER TO 'TEND' YOUR PROGRAM CONTINUOUSLY. Loyalty programs are designed to retain revenue and work on growing the share of spend; they are not acquisition tools. A program is not a project, it is a product. It lives and breathes and must adapt and grow. It needs an owner, a gardener. You don't build it and forget it. Finally, it is not a marketing function; it's an enterprise function with a leader who has a seat at the strategy table. – Maury Giles, Material
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Chris Hayes: Elon Musk's stint in government has been an abject failure — and wildly destructive
This is an adapted excerpt from the May 29 episode of 'All In with Chris Hayes.' To put the news in the parlance of SpaceX, it seems Elon Musk's career as co-president to Donald Trump has had a bit of a 'rapid unscheduled disassembly.' Technically, his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) campaign was always billed as temporary, but less than six months into this administration, the man who came in like some sort of MAGA rock star, who was jumping around at Trump rallies, appeared at Cabinet meetings and spoke to adoring crowds at CPAC is now slinking out the side door. By every conceivable metric, Musk's stint in government has been an abject failure. On the substance alone, it has been wildly destructive. A lot of lifelong experts in key positions have lost their jobs. Important medical research has been set back, possibly indefinitely. Government agencies are functioning worse than they were before. There are also huge ramifications for the Global South, where cuts to foreign aid will lead to needless suffering. Musk's fellow billionaire Bill Gates warned that cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, the agency Musk bragged about putting through the 'woodchipper,' could cost millions of lives throughout the world. Experts have also cautioned that tens of thousands of people could die as a result of cuts to the AIDS relief program PEPFAR. So it's clear Musk did real, substantive damage that will be hard to repair, but even by his own standards, his so-called cost-saving, efficiency program failed to achieve what it set out to do. The world's richest man promised to cut federal spending by $2 trillion. But, by his own website's shoddy math, he managed to cut just $175 billion. He barely made a dent. Even the libertarian Cato Institute, which is ideologically very supportive of DOGE's mission, wrote that Musk 'has overpromised and underdelivered on verifiable spending cuts.' Musk assumed that the government is full of lazy bureaucrats who could be fired without any meaningful consequences. But even one of his own DOGE insiders had to concede that's not actually true. In an interview, tech entrepreneur Sahil Lavingia, who Musk placed at the Department of Veterans Affairs, told Fast Company earlier this month: 'I would say the culture shock is mostly a lot of meetings, not a lot of decisions … But honestly, it's kind of fine — because the government works. It's not as inefficient as I was expecting, to be honest. I was hoping for more easy wins.' Lavingia said he found 'himself surrounded by people who 'love their jobs,' who came to the government with a sense of mission driving their work,' according to Fast Company. After that interview was published, Lavingia said his 'access was revoked without warning' and his 'DOGE days were over.' Now that it's clear Americans do not like the behavior and the cruelty of DOGE, Musk, with what is left of his tattered reputation, is doing media interviews trying to distance himself from it all. 'You know, it's not like I agree with everything the administration does,' Musk told CBS News. 'I mean, I agree with much of what the administration does, but we have differences of opinion … But it's difficult for me to bring that up in an interview because then it creates a point of contention. So then I'm a little stuck in a bind where I'm like, well, I don't want to, you know, speak out against the administration but I don't want to — I also don't want to take credit for everything the administration's doing.' It is a tough spot to be associated with those toxic Trump policies, but it's worth remembering Musk is the same guy who was on stage with a chainsaw, bragging about all the cuts he was making to the federal government. Months later, Musk is leaving in disgrace because he was wholesale rejected by everyone. We have seen report after report that members of the administration simply could not stand the guy. Back in March, The New York Times reported on an 'explosive' Cabinet meeting, where Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins all tore into Musk for his haphazard cuts in their respective agencies. Earlier this month, The Atlantic reported on an expletive-ridden screaming match between Musk and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that spilled out from the Oval Office into more public areas of the West Wing. That same article also quotes the general counsel for the American Federation of Government Employees as saying, 'We kicked him out of town … If he had stayed in the shadows and done his stuff, who knows how bad it would have been? But no one likes the guy.' 'No one likes the guy' might be the best summation of Musk's foray into American politics I've encountered. But Musk's 'Waterloo moment' came in April in Wisconsin. He flew in from out of state, wore a cheesehead and flexed his newfound political muscles in the state's Supreme Court race. Musk spent a small fortune of his own money in support of the conservative candidate, Brad Schimel, but it didn't work. Schimel lost by 10 points. Wisconsin voters called Musk a 'pushy billionaire' who was 'cutting everything' and said 'he just makes me very angry.' That's not just in Wisconsin; voters everywhere don't like him. Nate Silver's polling average shows Musk's public approval more than 14 points underwater, with about 54% of Americans saying they disapprove of the billionaire. Musk's intrusion into national politics has also had real financial consequences for his companies. He has lost billions of dollars since he spent more than $270 million to get Trump elected last year. Tesla sales are down big, especially in Europe, where they crashed nearly 50% year over year last month. In the U.S., according to one report, 'A shopping center with a shuttered Bed Bath and Beyond store is in violation of a Detroit suburb's city code for storing dozens of Tesla vehicles on its parking lot.' Generally, I don't think it is good news for a car manufacturer when your flagship, luxury trucks are sitting unsold in a random parking lot somewhere outside of Detroit. Tesla shareholders are now saying the company is in crisis, sending a letter to the company demanding that Musk return to work full time. Thankfully for them, it looks like he has a lot of time on his hands right now. As Musk leaves the government worse off than he found it, it's clear his tenure in Washington was a complete failure, substantively and politically. Musk got high on his own supply and convinced himself the American public would fall in love with his antics. But it turns out, they would much rather he just go away. This article was originally published on
Fast Company
a day ago
- Business
- Fast Company
15 potential pitfalls to eliminate from the innovation process
In today's fast-moving world, it takes a spark of creativity to develop a unique product or service that will have a profound impact in the marketplace. But without a clear vision and structured path to take an idea from inception to execution, it won't make it across the finish line. However, breaking down the innovation process into manageable stages can help companies systematically develop solutions that address real-world pain points and create true value for every stakeholder involved. Here, 15 leading experts from Fast Company Executive Board each list the common mistakes some companies make when trying to innovate, and why these practices should be avoided. 1. WORKING IN SILOS INSTEAD OF COLLABORATION First, find the pain point. Better workplace experience outcomes are achieved when IT, facilities, and HR work together. By breaking down silos and working collaboratively, you can save time, optimize budgets, and allocate resources more effectively. Most of all, better meeting experiences result in more brainstorms and breakthroughs—key ingredients for accelerating innovation. – Prakash Arunkundrum, Logitech 2. MISCALCULATING THE TIME IT TAKES TO ADOPT INNOVATION Companies underestimate the time it will take for old technology to be replaced by the adoption of new technology. This is one common mistake leaders must avoid.- Jon Olson, Blackbaud, Inc. 3. OVERLOOKING THE JOURNEY OF BEING EDUCATED IN THE PROCESS Confusing when (and in what area) to innovate to get experience, rather than innovating with an expectation that it will linearly lead to a new product or business opportunity, is a mistake. It isn't okay to waste time and resources, but innovation is as much about what you learn from the journey as it is about the end result. If you don't have the appetite for that, you are better off focusing on being a fast follower. – Jason Kuperman, OUTFRONT Media 4. FAILING TO EQUIP TEAMS PROPERLY AND MOTIVATE THEM TO ENGAGE Common missteps are focusing too much on technology and not enough on the people and culture using it. Understand the root problems innovation solves, ensuring your team is aligned and motivated within an inclusive culture that fosters collaboration and feedback. This embeds innovation into the organizational mindset, providing the right tools rather than pushing new ideas for innovation's sake. – Larry Brinker Jr., BRINKER 5. CONFUSING TECHNICAL NOVELTY WITH ESSENTIAL INNOVATION A typical mistake companies make when trying to innovate is confusing technical novelty with true innovation. Avoid investing in solving technically interesting problems that don't translate into real-world value, usability, or growth. – Sezer Ovunc, Snapshot Reviews 6. COMMUNICATING INTENTIONS INCORRECTLY At times, our words don't match our intentions. If I'm encouraging my team to swing big, am I there to support them when they do? I try to model this behavior by continuing to swing big myself, but also ensuring that I am present to nudge and strengthen ideas or be a voice of support to others to help achieve their breakthroughs. Success creates momentum, and momentum can create a tidal wave! – Jeffrey Whitford, MilliporeSigma 7. IGNORING THE CUSTOMER'S POV Too often, the echo chamber is the barrier to innovation. We discover something truly amazing; we seek confirmation around us; we want to move. The problem? It has to be amazing to your customer or prospect. Company leaders must first define the needs and pain points from the consumer's point of view. Then, they must validate that their solution delivers. When those steps are skipped, the likelihood of success diminishes significantly. – Maury Giles, Material 8. DOING TOO MUCH WITH ONE PRODUCT One mistake is trying to create a product that solves a lot of problems. It's best to instead focus on developing a product that can solve a few critical issues and do them well. – Ruchir Nath, Dell Technologies 9. AIMLESSLY CHASING AFTER TRENDS Companies chase trends without anchoring them in strategy or customer insight. Innovation isn't about being first—it's about being relevant and intentional. To avoid this, we advise starting with data, listening to your audience, and aligning every new idea with your brand's core positioning. – Kristin Marquet, Marquet Media, LLC 10. MOVING TOO FAST ON DEVELOPMENT For too long, companies have tried to move fast and break things, but innovation comes from thinking expansively, not necessarily quickly. Instead of trying to break things, find gaps to close, which might mean building products that don't otherwise exist. Chances are, you won't solve systemic problems overnight, but you will innovate and inspire meaningful change in the process. – Caitlin MacGregor, Plum 11. MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT YOUR PROSPECTS NEED A common mistake is not understanding the business or user problem that you are trying to innovate against. The best innovation starts with focus—specifically, a laser focus on your audience. When you truly understand who you're serving—how they think, what they need, and where they struggle—you uncover real opportunities worth solving. – Sarah Buckler, Tangible 12. EXCLUDING POTENTIAL MARKET SEGMENTS Companies that have been around for a while and are trying to innovate need to make everyone feel safe and included. The people who say, 'We tried that before, and it didn't work,' can destroy progress. – Barry Lowenthal, Inuvo, Inc. 13. GIVING AN 'INNOVATION THEATER' PERFORMANCE A common pitfall is doing 'innovation theater'—when companies are dazzled by the latest shiny technology trend, whether agentic AI, quantum, or blockchain, without a clear business outcome or a solid data foundation to build it on. To avoid this, companies must start by understanding the core principle of applied innovation: Focus on the value first, then choose the technology to deliver it. – Joe Depa, EY 14. BUILDING AN 'INNOVATION TEAM' Don't treat innovation like a department; make it a habit. I've watched companies build 'innovation teams' that become expensive idea museums. At my company, we scrapped our innovation group and instead embedded 'possibility sessions' into every team's workflow. The virtual assistant who suggested our best product last year didn't need whiteboard walls, just permission to question the status quo. – Shayne Fitz-Coy, Sabot Family Companies 15. WAITING FOR YOUR IDEA TO BE 'PERFECT' A lot of companies stall innovation by chasing perfection or avoiding failure. You don't need to have it all figured out before testing something. Just ship, learn, and improve. The longer you wait for perfection, the more likely someone else gets there first with 'good enough.' – Travis Schreiber,
