For companies and brands, the first signs of a crisis do not always appear in macroeconomic indicators. They also show up in people’s behavior.

Recent retail data reflects this shift: food sales dropped by over 21% in January 2026 compared to December 2025, a sign that households are rapidly adjusting their consumption behavior in a tense economic context. This economic shift also has a less discussed consequence: a crisis of trust.

According to the Edelman Trust Barometer 2026, economic anxiety is now one of the main factors eroding social trust. The study shows that around 70% of people say they hesitate to trust individuals or organizations that use different sources of information or hold different values. In such a climate, negative information—even false information—spreads much faster and is more easily believed. For companies, this is a major vulnerability.

In over 22 years of working in communication and crisis management, I have seen this mechanism repeat itself many times. Reputational crises do not always occur when you make a major mistake. Sometimes they arise from a combination of a tense social context, incomplete information, and the speed at which it spreads.

Today, technology amplifies this phenomenon. Artificial intelligence has democratized content production: credible images, texts, or video clips can be generated in minutes. At the same time, social media algorithms favor emotional and polarizing content—exactly the type of information that spreads the fastest.

The result is an information ecosystem in which reputations can be affected extremely quickly. In many cases, reputational crises no longer stem from real company issues, but from perceptions or incomplete information that go viral before the organization has time to react.

However, fake news has a different dynamic than a classic crisis. One of the most common mistakes I have seen over the years is companies’ reflex to aggressively debunk false information. Intuitively, it seems logical: if the information is false, you explain and correct it.

In reality, things don’t always work that way. Once fake news reaches a certain volume of online conversation, attempting to debunk it head-on can have the opposite effect: it amplifies it, because that’s how algorithms are designed. This phenomenon is known as the Streisand effect—the moment when trying to correct or hide information only makes it more visible.

In the digital age, algorithms don’t help at all. On the contrary, they favor exactly the type of content that generates strong emotional reactions. And denials, controversies, and public disputes are precisely the kind of content that keeps the conversation alive.

There is also another common trap: trying to respond to fake news exclusively with rational arguments and detailed explanations. This doesn’t always work either.

Social psychology shows us that people are wired in a paradoxical way: we often care more about the perception of the majority than about our own analysis of the facts. We tend to adjust our opinions to align with what we believe others think. That’s why people can be influenced by fake news even when, rationally, they know the information is false.

In such situations, companies must understand that the stake is not just factual truth, but also social perception. It is not enough to prove that the information is false, but it is essential to act quickly and try to remove the false information from media platforms as fast as possible (and this is where the discussion begins about why I still believe more in press communication than influencer communication—but that’s a topic for another time). It is equally important to show that others also believe the information is false.

Social validation—coming from experts, opinion leaders, institutions, or relevant communities—often becomes more powerful than a company’s technical explanation.

For entrepreneurs, the lesson is simple: reputation is no longer just an image or marketing element. It has become business infrastructure.

In times of economic uncertainty, companies that people trust are the ones that manage to retain customers, employees, and partners. The others become much more vulnerable to perception-driven crises.

From crisis communication consulting experience, there are three simple things entrepreneurs should keep in mind in 2026.

The first is information speed. In a world where fake news can appear at any time, a company’s greatest vulnerability is silence. Organizations must constantly monitor conversations about their brand and be ready to quickly clarify incorrect information.

The second is behavioral consistency. Trust is not built in a single campaign or one inspired communication moment. It is built through a long series of small moments in which the company proves it is transparent, responsible, and consistent. In a crisis, you don’t start building reputation—you only test it. After two decades of working in reputation management, I have seen companies that navigated difficult situations relatively easily precisely because they already had this trust capital. And I have seen organizations collapse reputationally not because of the crisis itself, but because they lacked this foundation.

The third is preparation. One of the biggest myths about crises is that they can only be managed when they occur. In reality, the first stages of proper crisis management begin long before: scenarios, internal training, simulations, and, perhaps most importantly, the courage to put on paper even the most unpleasant or unlikely risks a company might face (once you see them and name them, they are no longer a surprise).

This exercise is not comfortable for any organization. But it is essential. Companies that imagine the most difficult scenarios in advance are almost always the ones that respond more clearly when something actually happens.

All of this starts from the same reality: we live in an economy of suspicion. Economic anxiety, social polarization, and the explosion of generative technologies create a context in which perceptions can shift extremely fast. For entrepreneurs, the challenge is no longer just to grow their business, but to protect their trust capital.

Paradoxically, in a world dominated by technology and algorithms, the competitive advantage remains a deeply human one: trust.

The post The economy of suspicion: Why trust is becoming the most valuable asset for companies appeared first on careers-business.com.

Modern technology has killed our sense of wonder. Not abruptly. Not spectacularly. But slowly, every day, through notifications, infinite scrolling, “just one more video,” “just one more post,” “just one more piece of news.” A kind of Chinese water torture (a terrible form of torture in ancient times). In the digital world, this form of torture is a sneaky one. Because we don’t realize it’s torture. Because we don’t realize how it erodes the very foundation of our own personal feng shui. And what’s worse is that we don’t realize how bad it actually is for us. We think this is just how life is supposed to be, and that’s that. We don’t even realize that life could, in fact, be different—not necessarily one in which a large part of it is “motorized” by algorithms.

From an evolutionary point of view, humans are built to feel wonder. To have their curiosity sparked. It’s a form of progress. Wonder should be a creative event. It appeared when you saw something truly new, when you heard something you had never heard before, when you encountered something that changed your perspective. And people learned. And progressed. Through qualitative leaps built on quantitative accumulation. Then, at some point, the modern era arrived. An era that gave us more and more of what we might call the permanent novelty of information. When newspapers became a constant for the masses, the permanence of novelty had a daily cycle: you picked up the paper in the morning and knew that until the next morning, you wouldn’t receive another one, no new information. Then came the radio, which drastically reduced the cycle at which we received information. Then television arrived, on the same “instant” principle. And then came digital. Which, in short, went “boooooom” with everything that had to do with cyclical periodicity as the basis for how we received information. In digital, not only can we receive information at any time, but we can also access it ourselves whenever we want, however we want. And as a major leap (we don’t know if it’s also a qualitative one…), we can do this anywhere.

The difference between, say, television and digital is also one of location, if you like. To watch TV, you had to stay in a fixed place. You couldn’t carry the television around with you wherever you went. You had to return to the space where the TV was working in order to watch it. Digital completely eliminated this limitation. But actually, it wasn’t digital. It was the phone. This device that is, in many ways, the most personal device in the history of humanity. The phone has, in fact, trivialized wonder. Because through the phone, more and more, we experience the world around us. Today we see hundreds of “new” things every day, but we no longer feel anything new. In place of wonder, a void has remained. And the major problem is that this void doesn’t stay empty. It gets filled with something else: anger, hatred, polarization, cynicism, sarcasm, distrust. Which is exactly what we see all around us.

The fuel that powers people’s presence in digital today, the fundamental axiom of how this ecosystem functions, is this: people no longer react to information (novelty, therefore), but to strong emotions. And when novelty (real or imagined) is transmitted through strong emotions, then buckle up. And algorithms don’t just know this. They rely on it. That’s why they keep poking at our emotional fences. Constantly. More and more intrusively. Algorithms no longer primarily compete for people’s attention. They compete for emotions in a world where people no longer know how to feel wonder. Attention is just the gateway into their souls.

Why are we talking about algorithms? Because for the first time in the history of marketing, the algorithm itself is a target audience segment for any brand. If we don’t “target” algorithms through marketing, then algorithms won’t “index” us and, as a result, won’t bring us into the attention of other people (whom only algorithms can reach).

This is the context in which digital marketing in 2026 must be understood. Without this framing, it will be very difficult to do effective marketing. And we’ll keep asking ourselves, “What am I doing wrong?” And most likely, from a technical standpoint, there’s nothing wrong at all. Just a strategic perception error, if you will. Which I aim to help you avoid through these lines.

From my point of view (and with many millions of euros in and from marketing behind me), digital marketing today is five to seven times more complicated than it was in 2016. Which, for a brand, means two major increased costs: 1. Higher media budgets (the money that goes to the big platforms) 2. Higher management costs (more agencies, more spreadsheets, more decisions to make, etc.).

If ten years ago digital marketing was about “being present online,” about posts and ads, in 2026 digital marketing has become an exercise in organizational engineering. And I say this with sadness. And with the sigh of someone who is about to mark 20 years of doing digital marketing. In the beginning, it was primarily about creativity. Now it is, first and foremost, about organizing marketing activity.

At Kooperativa 2.0, we work with 44 types of digital marketing that we can offer our clients. Yes, you read that right: 44. And for each type, very precise implementation organization is needed. With lots of spreadsheets. Today, marketing is still creativity, that’s true. But it’s somewhere near the end of the list. Because first and foremost, it means automations, integrations between applications, funnels, data, analytics, AI, email flows, remarketing, pixels, etc., etc., etc. And acronyms (more and more acronyms…), whose meanings are becoming harder and harder to understand: CPA, CAC, ROAS, CPM, LTV, etc., etc., etc.

In 2026, it no longer matters which channels you are present on. What matters is how they all connect to each other. And how well you manage to create these connections. And how efficiently you manage this web. The winners are no longer those who are everywhere, but those who have a coherent system that tells them where to be present most effectively. This increase in complexity didn’t come only from technology (which has undoubtedly exploded). It also came from market expectations. Customers expect personalized, fast, coherent experiences—“something I like.” And to deliver that, companies are forced to build increasingly sophisticated infrastructures.

At the same time, AI has democratized superficial quality. Today, almost anyone can generate good posts, good texts, good visuals, and even decent campaigns. “Good” has become the new banal. To do something “better,” you need an entire strategic and operational arsenal.

And on top of all this, a new phenomenon has settled in: digital fatigue. Customers are tired. Marketers are tired. Entrepreneurs are tired. People no longer want more content. They want more meaning. But everyone is searching for this meaning (which, fortunately or unfortunately, cannot be automated) by consuming more and more. A vicious circle from which, it seems, there is little escape.

I say “it seems” because, from my point of view, the escape lies precisely in assuming this mindset: marketing is so complicated that it requires a strategic management decision in order to be properly handled. It’s no longer “just a department.” It’s no longer “the marketing director handles it, it’s their problem.” It’s no longer something that “if it happens, we’ll talk, we’ll call you.” Without a strategic management decision that serves as the backbone of the marketing strategy, we will see a lot of scraped knees on a lot of brands in 2026.

I already have over 200 face-to-face meetings (online or in person) under the #YouPayWhatYouThinkIt’sWorth system. The common denominator of those who came to talk about marketing was this: “I don’t understand anything anymore, I don’t know what I’m supposed to do.” So, what is to be done?

I believe we’ve reached a moment in marketing where marketing itself needs some “props.” Without which it can no longer really support itself. First, these two major props are needed, and only then can we think about marketing as such.

Professional Digital Footprint Diagnosis (DPFD). That’s what we call it at the agency. This is the first “prop” we work with. It essentially means a 360-degree audit of a brand’s digital presence. And it’s a managerial tool that answers the fundamental question: “Where do we stand?” If you don’t know where you’re starting from, how can you know where you want to go?

Digital hygiene is the second prop. And it means many things: account security, account setup, a minimum digital presence (so that you are there when someone looks for you), a basic understanding of the rules, etc. Digital hygiene answers the question “What are we standing on?”

Then comes marketing. Built on these two props. And marketing answers the question “How do we move forward?” And the answer is what I mentioned above: with the help of true organizational engineering.

So, if it’s that hard and that complicated, will we ever stop doing digital marketing?

My short answer is no. I don’t think it’s a viable option.

But it would be somewhat ideal if we stopped doing digital marketing badly.

That’s what I’m saying.

The post Cristian China-Birta on digital marketing in 2026. Or how to make sense in a world that no longer knows how to wonder. appeared first on careers-business.com.

Pupils and students think digitally, make quick choices, and seek authentic experiences. In this context, schools can no longer be simple “places of teaching”, but institutions capable of offering relevant experiences, adapted to the way young people consume information. At the center of this transformation lies the educational brand.

A school brand is not reduced to a logo, but to the way the institution delivers on its promises: the quality of interactions, the atmosphere a student feels when entering the classroom, and the way teachers address a generation that seeks authenticity and usefulness, not rigid rules.

A brand becomes credible when it helps young people in concrete ways, not just through declarations. Reputation begins with adapting to students’ real behaviors: in a visual culture, the school provides interactive learning; in a fast-paced world, it simplifies processes; in an uncertain economy, it develops critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity. A respected institution is one that looks ahead and responds to the needs of the future.

Innovation thus becomes essential: up-to-date projects, useful technologies, and connections to economic reality. Partnerships are equally important – with the business environment, public authorities and the local community, cultural institutions – showing students and parents that the school does not operate in isolation, but is firmly rooted in reality.

Yet the decisive element remains…

You can find the rest of the article in the print edition of Careers and Business magazine.

For orders, please contact us here.

The post Education as a Brand. Reputation is not declared, it is built appeared first on careers-business.com.

• Labor costs have reached almost the same level as in many European countries and, certainly, we are at the same level as the countries of Eastern Europe.
• Taxation no longer provides a major differentiation compared to our neighbors, the repeated changes over the past two years having eliminated this advantage that supported Romanian companies.
• Energy today represents a major differentiating factor, unfortunately a negative one for us, as Romania pays more than most European countries – an inexplicable paradox for a country with such resources.
• Financing for Romanian companies is expensive and difficult to access, which hinders initiative and investment in a period marked by extreme dynamism, where speed of reaction becomes one of the essential arguments for success.

If we add to these aspects excessive bureaucracy, the costs induced by cumbersome administration, as well as the lack of promotion and involvement of authorities in supporting local businesses through a coherent image program, we get the picture of the delicate moment we are all going through in our attempt to maintain competitiveness, at least at a regional level.

That is why I say this is the moment to reconfigure the route chosen by each of us (as private companies), as well as by central and local authorities. Today, we seem to be in a vehicle traveling on a road without a destination (lack of assumed objectives), moving without direction (we do not have the necessary strategies) and, above all, moving without a driver (we do not have an assumed authority to lead this vehicle). For several years now, the GPS message has been to reconfigure the route, to choose another path for Romanian tourism, but we continue, out of inertia, to go down the same road, which only takes us further away from the rest of the pack.

It is time for the passengers in the vehicle called Romanian tourism to no longer accept this movement by inertia and to take the reins. We can, and above all we must, do this by assuming a major role in the public–private partnership that will lead to the establishment of the long-awaited National Destination Management Organization – DMO Romania, a body that should have authority, resources, strategy, objectives, and the courage to assume all of these.

Private operators must accept and support this change; they are the first to see that things simply can no longer go on like this. They are on the front line and feel when complicated times are coming; it is in their entrepreneurial spirit to react immediately. They will invest if there is a friendly framework, they will develop their businesses if the market gives them this signal.

Authorities, which for so many years have proven that they are not very skilled at managing this sector, must extend a hand to the private sector and build the appropriate framework for this PPP to function and demonstrate its efficiency, bringing competitiveness and attractiveness to Romanian tourism.

I have always said that tourism is with and about people; it is an industry of smiles, well-being, and a positive image. It is about belonging to a set of values; it means culture, traditions, landscapes, gastronomy, and many other things that a certain country has. Fortunately, Romania has them in abundance, but we do not really know what to do with them. We can choose to do nothing, merely mentioning them in electoral campaigns as elements of political dispute between various political camps, or we can choose to act. It depends only on us!

*This material was taken from the first issue of the print magazine Careers and Business and was written by Călin Ile, Senior Partner at Horwath HTL Romania and Honorary President of FIHR.

The post Romanian tourism at the moment of route reconfiguration appeared first on careers-business.com.

With a career built between Silicon Valley, London, and Bucharest, Andra dismantles the most widespread myths about AI, from the idea that it is a conscious entity to the fear that it will steal our professional future. For her, artificial intelligence is not a threat, but a tool that, when used thoughtfully, can help us save time, learn faster, and radically improve our quality of life.

Andra, you work in a field of technology and artificial intelligence that is developing rapidly. What are the biggest, let’s say, myths or misunderstandings you’ve encountered about AI, and how do you debunk them?

I would start by saying that, in general, technology is misunderstood, and what we don’t understand triggers fear in us. I would give a concrete, frustrating example: when you make a bank transfer and the money doesn’t arrive in 3–5 days, you start looking for information, making phone calls, hoping to find out something, and the bank tells you something about correspondent banks and SWIFT… things we have no idea about. And when we don’t understand, fear steps in and, sometimes, we even freeze.

On the other hand, we also have media outlets that generate sales by feeding the public fear and sensationalism, which translates into more clicks and more revenue. That’s why ordinary people have become increasingly worried about AI and its capabilities.

To clarify a first myth: AI, at the moment, is not a conscious technology. It is simply an algorithm that some technology developers have “fed” with different types of knowledge, and this algorithm processes the information it receives. If you tell it to say that God exists, it will tell you that God exists. If you tell it to say that God does not exist, it will tell you that God does not exist. In this sense, it doesn’t have its own thoughts or objectives — it only reflects the choices and intentions of the developers of those algorithms.

Another myth is that AI will become all-powerful. Here, again, many details need to be clarified. AI will not float in the air and tell us how to live, how to eat, or how to breathe. It will most likely look exactly as it does today (somewhere in our phones, in our laptops, in the apps installed on these devices), only the way we receive answers from these applications will be different.

For example, if we want to create a video with multiple photos taken with friends to share for someone’s birthday, AI will be able to do that in a few seconds, instead of us spending hours editing the content. A more concrete analogy is how, back in the day, we spent hours making CDs with MP3s, and now we have an algorithm (AI) on Spotify that gives us recommendations in a few milliseconds. That’s what everyday life will look like.

The same goes for Instagram or TikTok — already a large part of the content is generated by AI, at the level of what we are shown every time we log in. A highly specialized algorithm has learned our habits and shows us what it thinks we will like.

Another myth is that AI learns on its own. This is not true either. It is a rather manual process, in which engineers need to constantly adjust the algorithm with new information. Without this human intervention, AI does not progress.

Probably the biggest myth, and the biggest fear, is that AI will take all our jobs. Jobs, in the form in which they exist today, will simply take other forms, just as has happened over the last 100 years. Just as before there was a lot of manual work with paper and pen, and then that work was digitized, now it will be automated by artificial intelligence. At least in Romania, I think this transition will be welcome, especially when it comes to the bureaucracy that slows us down on absolutely all fronts.

But just as digitization created a lot of jobs, especially in IT, AI will also generate new types of professions. It’s true that we will have to accumulate new skills and retrain. How do we “prompt” an AI correctly? How do we train our own personal AI model? How do we give it instructions to generate videos as close as possible to our creative vision? How do we use existing tools to make our day-to-day work easier? These are the questions to start from.

AI will never replace chefs, for example, just as taste cannot be replicated by robots, but it will be able to offer them ideas for creative recipes that perhaps a chef would never have thought of. In general, AI will not be able to replace roles that are based on using human senses: taste, smell, touch. Sensors capable of reproducing the sophistication of a human have not yet been created. Nor can our brain be replicated by AI, as it is an extraordinarily complex apparatus, which we still have a long way to go before fully understanding.

What I propose is that we adjust our perspective and think about how we could use these capabilities to improve our lives. How can we use AI to learn new things, even at advanced ages? How can we use AI to become healthier? How can we use AI to debate philosophical ideas? How can we optimize our time with the help of AI so that we have more free time for the essential, human things, such as time spent with loved ones?

One of the recent debates, especially regarding the labor market, is replacing the workforce in different fields with AI applications or robots. Many people fear that AI will take their jobs, as you mentioned. What is actually real — in the sense of what types of jobs or processes will disappear?

In general, everything related to analysis has already started to be replaced by AI. It’s true that we can’t compete with an algorithm that has a processing capacity 1,000 times greater or faster than the human one. If we need to read 30 books to become experts in a field, AI can read and interpret them in milliseconds.

This is especially valid for fields that involve exact data, such as financial or scientific analyses, where there is less room for interpretation. AI has advanced enormously in the last 20–30 years, especially in the medical field. New diagnoses and solutions are being discovered for diseases that people have not managed to solve until today.

This progress is beneficial for humanity. Over time, we should have solutions for cancer and other conditions that are currently fatal. In this sense, doctors will not be replaced by artificial intelligence — they will be supported by it, to establish faster and more precise diagnoses.

Another example is the legal profession or the juridical field. Lawyers will not be replaced by AI, but there will be enough applications that will offer legal help to ordinary people, as a complement to a lawyer’s activity. Or in the legal field, where lived human experience is necessary in order to judge different situations. AI can have a lot of historical context, but it cannot make decisions that belong to a deeply human subconscious level.

On the creative side, there is, again, a lot of fear. Here, indeed, we are talking about a revolution, in the sense that media content can be created with the help of AI at a fraction of the time and costs compared to before. If, in the past, you needed two weeks and three models for a photo shoot, now you can generate the same type of content with Sora or Midjourney in a few minutes.

Of course, you will feel the difference between something made with AI and something made in the classic style. But if we think about old films, which had lower quality and “specks” on the image, now everything is in HD. Before special effects studios like Pixar existed, all effects were created manually. That’s how I see the transition in creative industries. Producers will use AI, but they will not be completely replaced by it.

Let’s also look at it from another perspective. In Romania we have many farmers. It’s possible that, in the future, robots will be developed to help them work their land in an automated way. But AI will not be able to fully replace a farmer’s experience. On the contrary, that farmer will now have more time available, which they can use for other activities.

In this sense, all repetitive processes will be automated. In China, for example, there are car factories that operate completely in the dark, because they are 100% robotized and robots don’t need light to work. But these robots need people to maintain them and to control the quality of the products created. Jobs haven’t disappeared — they have been adjusted.

And also, in an increasingly automated world, what remains essentially “human” and cannot be replaced by AI?

As I said earlier, we still don’t have the sensors needed to replace everything related to human sensations: taste, smell, touch, sound. Experiments are being conducted in this direction, but the results are, for now, too precise, too cold: a sculpture that is too perfect, a painting that is too sterile. You can feel that it is something created by a robot, because that “je ne sais quoi,” that unique taste or feeling, cannot be replaced.

Likewise, jobs based on emotional intelligence cannot be replaced: therapist, primary school teacher, babysitter, social services, nurses. AI will help these professionals, but it will not be able to replace them, regardless of what Hollywood says.

AI cannot replace friendship, although there is currently a startup trying to create a day-to-day digital companion (it is not very well received, however). Still, AI can be an alternative for elderly people who have no one to talk to. There are already a few companies that offer tele-services through which lonely seniors can call to talk to someone. Here I think there is a positive impact, because better alternatives do not yet exist, and some nursing homes are a complete disaster. Even so, these tele-services cannot replace the company of a human being.

Lastly, AI cannot replace everything that involves manual work, artistic performances, athletics, surgical operations, cooking (non-repetitive). These fields require lived experience, which AI does not have.

How do you realistically see the role of AI in our day-to-day lives in the next 5–10 years?

I think that, in the next 5 to 10 years, we will notice a significant difference. In 5 years we will advance a lot in the medical field and I expect to see much greater efficiency. The same in the financial field — I think a lot of the friction that currently exists in this industry will be eliminated.

On a personal level, I think many more people will adopt ChatGPT as their main way of searching for information, instead of Google. Also, many will use AI to create funny things to share with others (for example, we already see videos where dog owners create content in which their animals “cook,” clean, or wash laundry).

In 5 years we will start seeing more TV ads for small household robots. These robots will have purposes such as cleaning, washing clothes, etc. They will not yet be autonomous and not very efficient, but I think we will see a clear movement in this direction.

Also, autonomous cars (self-driving cars) will reach other corners of the world. In San Francisco you can already take a taxi without a driver, and I think this technology will expand to other big cities. In 10 years, maybe even in Romania we will see such taxis.

On a personal level, we will have personalized agents that understand our preferences and work for us in all directions: they make appointments, organize notifications, manage finances, travel, etc. Similarly, at work there will be agents that optimize everything related to calendar, email, communication, and other tools we use day to day.

On the entertainment side, I think we will also see new platforms with content natively generated by AI — I already gave the example of dogs cooking, which could exist on a version of “AI TikTok.”

What types of AI applications, like ChatGPT, do you use daily beyond the professional area, and for what kind of information?

I use ChatGPT, Grok (an AI created by Elon Musk), and Perplexity a lot. Usually, I ask for more opinions instead of relying only on ChatGPT. I look at what answers each gives and then I choose, intuitively, the one that seems most aligned with what I want to obtain.

For example, ChatGPT seems better to me at generating philosophical content, while Grok is much more academic and scientific. I was recently in Korea and I saw a statue of Buddha; I wanted to learn more about Buddhism and I had a conversation with ChatGPT on this subject to discover new things. I use Grok when I want to find out information related to wellness, for example what “beauty myths” are and what is truly valid.

I also use an app called InsideTracker, where I enter my blood test results, and the app gives me an overview of my health and my progress over the years.

Besides that, AI also does many things “behind the scenes,” so to speak. For example, Gmail, which I use daily, already has elements of artificial intelligence integrated. The same with the iPhone, which has certain algorithms that increase our productivity. A concrete example: when I search for a photo with a document, for example my passport, and I no longer know when I took the photo or where I saved it, I simply type “passport” in the search bar in the Photos app and the image appears — a feature available at least on newer iPhone models.

I also used Wix’s AI for my photography website. I’m not good at website design, but with the help of AI it is much simpler to generate something in a relatively short time. I think it’s brilliant for people who have a creative hobby and can’t necessarily afford a website designer.

Regarding your field of activity, you built a global company in a very specific area of AI. LYS Labs is a Web3 company that transforms blockchain data into secure information to be processed for AI-powered financial markets and also processes and operates in the crypto field. How did you get here, and what was the most difficult moment along this road?

I lived in the U.S. for almost 20 years over time. I went to university in Silicon Valley, where I also started my career in the IT industry. Eight years ago I focused on the crypto sector in the IT industry, and two years ago AI started to grow in popularity, especially in the crypto world, and that’s when I ended up working at this interesting intersection between the two fields.

The way I got into crypto was more luck than something planned. After I left San Francisco, I moved to London, where I wanted a fresh start. I used my network of contacts and I discovered some of the most interesting fintech companies in London. I went to their offices and saw what roles were available.

One of these firms was active in the “blockchain” sector in 2017. I got in touch with the company’s HR department and had a productive discussion. The company didn’t have a very formal hiring process — I simply started talking to team members and found a role in an “organic” way.

After a week of networking with the team members, I received an offer, and that’s how my first role in the crypto field began. From there I spent eight years in different roles, in smaller and larger projects. Eventually, I met the team in Bucharest, which was already working on an initial concept for what is today LYS Labs, and I joined them as a co-founder because we had very good synergy.

At LYS Labs I also started exploring the intersection between AI and crypto. My knowledge of AI, up to that point, was quite rudimentary. I started learning as much as I could about this subject, and now, two years later, I’ve reached this point.

In this technical field where you operate, in artificial intelligence and blockchain technology, where speed is essential, how do you maintain the balance between rapid innovation and technological quality control?

Everything we do at LYS Labs starts from an extremely high quality of the products we build. Each component is designed and optimized so that we deliver the highest level of quality at every step. Sometimes, this means launching products a little later. It is indeed an art to choose the right moment for launch, because nothing will ever be perfect and completely ready. There are always optimizations that can be made, but usually those optimizations are not critical.

We operate with a Silicon Valley mindset, where people say “fail fast, fail forward.” In other words, even if something fails along the way, we want to learn as quickly as possible from that failure and reorient toward solutions.

Also, after spending a period in this industry, you get used to a much more alert pace in everything related to delivering products. You can’t survive if you don’t operate with a constant sense of urgency.

How would you explain, in one simple sentence, what a “financial AI agent” does, and why should ordinary people pay attention to this phenomenon?

For ordinary people, a financial agent is what we today call a “robot” that has autonomy to carry out certain operations in an automated way. A concrete example of autonomous “robots” we already have is paying bills automatically.

When you link your bank account to Electrica or Engie so that money is withdrawn automatically from your account, you are basically already using some rudimentary algorithms. These algorithms will become more and more intelligent over time — for example, they could predict your electricity bill amount based on your consumption over the last 12 months. In this sense, they make an intelligent prediction and can notify you in advance of the estimated amount.

This can be an example of an agent that works for your benefit. Ordinary people should pay attention to such tools because they can be extremely beneficial and can save us a lot of time that we otherwise waste. Especially in countries like Romania, where certain operations can take days. If adopted widely, these agents can reduce processing times by 90–95%.

What is the difference between “consumer” AI (which we use daily through apps) and financial AI, which you work with at LYS Labs?

Essentially, the concepts are similar. There is an algorithm to which you give data, and that algorithm gives you something in return. In consumer AI, like ChatGPT, the result is an answer to the question you formulate (you prompt). In the financial world, it can also be an answer to a question, but related to the financial domain.

For example, if you wanted to find out stock market prices or where to invest certain amounts, you could communicate directly with agents built on our infrastructure. Consumer AI is trained on a much larger and more varied dataset. We provide more specialized data, optimized for AI dedicated to the financial sector.

How do you think AI will change our relationship with money, from investments and savings to the way we make daily transactions?

AI will make everything more automated and optimized. The research time regarding investment decisions or other financial decisions will be compressed by 90–95%. In many cases, agents will make decisions in an “invisible” way, where you, as a user, won’t see all the operations, only the final result. This way, we gain more time to focus on other things, such as… how to spend the money generated by AI for us.

Also, AI can break down very complex concepts into simpler, easier-to-understand terms and can discover opportunities that would otherwise have been impossible to identify, because we have a limited capacity to find and absorb information. With AI, these limitations no longer exist.

Will ordinary people, not just large institutions, be able to access personal financial AI agents? What would that look like in reality?

Yes, anyone will be able to build their own financial agent. There are several possibilities regarding what this future could look like. For example, those who are more tech-inclined will be able to build a personal agent with just a few clicks. Others will offer services to create these financial agents as third parties.

For instance, the bank where you have an account could offer personalized agents for each user. Or there could be an app on your phone that you install, you connect multiple personal accounts, and from there your personal agent is automatically initiated. There will probably also be options directly in the browser, not necessarily on the phone.

You are an international citizen and you have been shaped in several different cultures. You were born and raised in Romania until adolescence, you studied from high school and during university in the U.S., where you also started working, in the most important and competitive environment for technology development: Silicon Valley. How did the “nothing is impossible” culture there shape you, and what parts did you bring back to Romania?

For me, the time spent in California was essential. If I had been in Romania, I don’t think I would have had the psychological preparation necessary to believe that I can build a career in crypto or AI, even if I studied, let’s say, Economics. Here, there is a tendency to remain on the same profile all your life, with small variations.

But the jump toward something risky, like crypto, is harder to make, especially as a woman. In contrast, being in Silicon Valley, where the impossible happens almost daily, other perspectives open up. If you dream of going to Mars, it’s okay — there is a group of people there who believe the same thing. If you want to open a factory in space or put a DJ in space, that’s also possible (both are projects that different entrepreneurs are currently working on).

Such freedom in the way of thinking is extremely “refreshing.” Somehow, all the dreams you have from childhood can be realized, assuming, of course, that the laws of physics allow it.

Here, in Romania, everything seems harder to me: from having a conversation with someone and being taken seriously, to building a team that believes in the same ideals, or progressing through the monumental bureaucracy that makes some initiatives almost impossible. Fortunately, Romania has advanced, and now everything is “remote.” If you want to find investors, you don’t necessarily have to be in the U.S.; you can have engineers in Romania. Likewise, you can travel by plane anywhere relatively quickly and cheaply, because travel restrictions are no longer what they were 10–20 years ago. Still, the speed at which you can progress in Romania does not compare to what you have when you are at the heart of progress.

Currently, you travel a lot and you split your life between continents and countries with very different cultures, including in terms of technological development or working style. Europe, Romania especially, the United States, Asia… How do you perceive these differences, and where do you feel closer to who you are and to the idea of “home”?

Romania will always be my home of the soul, because this is where I was born and raised. A part of me is also found in San Francisco, where I lived through many formative experiences. It is a city where, as I said, ideas have no limits and everything seems possible.

On the other hand, I also feel at home in London, where I lived for a few years — a city with more culture, art, and deep thinkers than you generally find in America.

Professionally, I think I feel most “at home” in America, because there is a culture of “hustle,” productive agitation, and speed there, which I like. People, in general, have a more pronounced attitude oriented toward immediate action than in other places. Of course, there are differences in America too: between New York and Miami, for example. New York is a city full of ambitious people, and Miami is much more relaxed.

Outside of those places, I like Asia very much for relaxation. I weave this chaotic lifestyle with escapes into the jungle, where there is no signal of any kind.

What is the most valuable thing you learned from a professional failure?

The most practical lesson is that everything always takes longer than you estimate it will. Any plan, any deadline is, in fact, an illusion. Besides that, you need to know when to accept that something doesn’t work and try something else. If you gave 100% of yourself and there were no results over a relatively long period, at some point you have to accept defeat and look for other directions.

When you think about success, what does it mean to you beyond numbers?

There is success on a personal level and success on a professional level. On a personal level, I feel successful every day. I wake up, I’m healthy, I have energy, I have family and friends, and I have managed to get here.

On a professional level, I measure success through what I have created, alone or together with a team. What products have we launched? What innovations have we brought? How many people use what we put on the market? Have we built something relevant, useful? These are the questions that dictate how much success I have in different initiatives.

How do you keep your balance between the pressure to perform and your own well-being?

Over the years, I have developed all kinds of wellness routines that help me maintain the level of energy necessary for this lifestyle. Sleep is the most important, so regardless of what time zone I’m in, I try to get quality sleep.

I also maintain a fitness routine and I try to train even when I’m traveling. Besides sleep and fitness, I also take certain supplements such as creatine, collagen, and many others that I choose depending on the results of blood tests, which I do regularly.

Who are the mentors or role models that inspired you on this path?

I have always been inspired by people’s ideas and attitudes, not necessarily by people as a whole. It was hard for me to find a person whom I would consider inspirational from every point of view. Rather, I found different traits in different people that inspire me.

For example, Reese Witherspoon seems to me like an exceptional businesswoman. Martha Stewart has remarkable perseverance — even with her history, she continues to create and hasn’t retired, as others do at her age. Steve Jobs had an obsession with perfection and attention to detail, but I think there are also artisans in Italy who have the same obsession with details, only they apply it in other directions. Lewis Hamilton was, again, a source of inspiration through his desire to win and dominate. In general, I try to look for inspiration in different places and apply those ideas in my world — the world of technology.

If you could talk to yourself at 20, what advice would you give yourself?

I would tell myself to try to put any problem on paper and write it as clearly as possible, instead of ruminating mentally. It seems to me that over the years I have spent far too much time analyzing certain things in my head, instead of identifying exactly the source of the problem and then looking for solutions.

It’s a rather “masculine” approach, because men tend to be more solution-oriented, but I think it is an extremely useful method — one that would have saved me many headaches along the way.

The post Andra Nicolau on AI myths, work, and the life of tomorrow: Artificial intelligence doesn’t steal our future — it gives us time appeared first on careers-business.com.

I am Iulia Ivan and in my over 15 years of experience in operational leadership and business transformation, I have observed a common pattern: entrepreneurs do not fail because they lack good ideas, but because they underestimate the complexity of execution. Entrepreneurship is not only a matter of vision, but also of structure, strategy, and inner balance.

The most common mistakes entrepreneurs make at the beginning of the road

Lack of strategic clarity.
Many founders start their journey with enthusiasm but without a well-defined business model. They focus on the product, on social media, but omit the essential question: what is the real problem I am solving and who is willing to pay for it?
Mature entrepreneurship begins with a clear market strategy and early validation of assumptions. Clarity does not come from brainstorming but from action, testing, and constant feedback.

Confusion between growth and scaling.
Another common mistake is the temptation to “grow” quickly without the infrastructure needed to support that growth. A company that gathers clients without processes, without a solid financial system, and without a team prepared for volume grows out of inertia.
Healthy scaling requires efficient business management, leading a team both with strategy and compassion — a team that understands the business direction, not just executes tasks — digital processes, reporting systems, performance indicators.

Ignoring financial discipline.
In entrepreneurship, cash flow is the company’s oxygen. Too many entrepreneurs confuse profit with liquidity and discover too late that they cannot sustain operational expenses.
My recommendation: treat the budget as a compass, not as a formality. Track monthly the operational margin, conversion rate, and customer acquisition cost. A financially healthy company can withstand any market storm.

Lack of an organizational culture.
At the beginning, it may seem premature to talk about culture in a team of 3–4 people. But precisely then the DNA of the organization is formed.
A company’s culture is not about nice words in presentations, but about consistent behaviors: how you make decisions, how you communicate, and how you react to failure.
Without a healthy culture, the entrepreneur will quickly become the “bottleneck” — the only one who decides, controls, and thus becomes exhausted.

The need for total control.
Many entrepreneurs confuse responsibility with absolute control. In reality, effective leadership means building systems and people who can function without you.
Entrepreneurs believe that if they control everything, things will be done better and they won’t lose what they have built. However, control comes largely from the need for safety — but it is a false sense of safety.
Team autonomy is an indicator of the business’s and the entrepreneur’s maturity. If everything depends on the founder, the company is not a business but a glorified job.

The recipe for success in entrepreneurship from my perspective

Success in entrepreneurship has no universal formula, but there are some principles that are consistently found among founders who manage to get past the first five years of activity.

Start with “why.”
Simon Sinek is right: inspired entrepreneurs start with a clear mission, not with a product. A business built only for profit loses its meaning at the first crisis.
When you know why you do what you do, you will always find a how — even when the market changes.

Building a scalable operational model.
The modern entrepreneur must think in terms of developing an ecosystem, creating processes, and growing people. Automation, digitalization, and clearly defining internal workflows free up time for innovation.
A business that depends exclusively on the founder’s presence cannot grow sustainably.

Investing in people, not just in products.
The team is the engine of any business. The right recruitment and authentic leadership make the difference between a company that endures and one that collapses at the first obstacle.
Successful entrepreneurs do not seek people who follow them blindly, but leaders who can think, decide, and evolve alongside the company.

Learning from data.
Without data, a company remains just a ship without a rudder at the mercy of the storm. Whether we talk about marketing, sales, or operations, performance is measured in numbers.
It is necessary to set clear performance indicators, to track them constantly, and to adjust the strategy where needed. True agility in business comes from the ability to adapt quickly to reality, not from changing direction impulsively.

Maintaining the balance between vision and execution.
An entrepreneur without vision is an executor. An entrepreneur without discipline is a dreamer.
A long-distance business needs a concrete plan, implemented daily with consistency. Many entrepreneurs are always caught up in day-to-day activity without giving themselves space to work on the business, not just in the business. That means concretely setting hours or days when they can take a step back and see what I call the “helicopter view” — the big picture.

The entrepreneur as the architect of their own transformation

Over time, I have worked with dozens of leaders and founders from Europe and the Middle East. They all had one thing in common: at some point, they had to transform personally for their business to grow.

Entrepreneurship is, in essence, an inner journey. You cannot build a solid business if you, as a leader, are emotionally unstable or react out of fear or anger.
The psychology of the entrepreneur is just as important as financial strategy. Understanding one’s own thinking patterns, managing stress, and the ability to stay centered in the middle of chaos make the difference between having a successful business and burnout.

As I often like to tell the entrepreneurs I work with: it is not enough to scale the business; you must scale yourself.

Entrepreneurship is not a sprint, but a marathon of continuous adaptation. There are no shortcuts, but there is clarity, discipline, and the courage to say “no” when temptations of rapid growth appear.

I believe the true recipe for success in entrepreneurship does not lie in spectacular ideas, but in the balance between strategy, people, and mindset.
Entrepreneurs who succeed are those who learn constantly, delegate intelligently, and remain anchored in market reality without losing their enthusiasm.

In the end, entrepreneurship is not about building a business. It is about building a life with meaning, freedom, and impact.

„I am Iulia Ivan, entrepreneur and Managing Director of Beyond Business SRL, with over 15 years of experience in developing and scaling businesses, both in Europe and the Middle East. Using my own experience of more than 10 years in leading teams, I have created personalized experiential online leadership programs for executive leaders and entrepreneurs.

I am an accredited mentor for entrepreneurs by MentorDay, Spain, and part of TheBreak — an award-winning European community of over 1000 women founders, created by the European Union together with Spain’s first business school.
I am the author of the book ‘How to Thrive as a Woman Leader in a Still Patriarchal Society’ (available on Amazon) and I advocate for authentic leadership, balance between performance and humanity, and the power of collaboration. I believe in education, courage, and in every entrepreneur’s potential to transform an idea into a success story.”

Read also: Cristiana Oprea: Curaj, perseverență și pasiune în Motorsportul din România – Revista Careers & Business România

Read also: Ionuț Păun: Performance is not maintained by rules alone, but through connection and culture – careers-business.com

The post Iulia Ivan: In entrepreneurship, it is not enough to scale your business; you must scale yourself appeared first on careers-business.com.

What if the detectives of the future worked side by side with artificial intelligence to solve complex crimes? Jo Callaghan, author of the bestseller In the Blink of an Eye, explores this very idea through her unique investigative duo: Kat Frank and Lock, an AI entity with surprising abilities. In this captivating interview, the British writer talks about the inspiration behind the novel, the challenges of building a believable non-human character, and how AI is already shaping both the present and the future.

C&B: Hello, Jo Callaghan, and thank you for the interview! In the Blink of an Eye puts forward a very intriguing idea – a detective duo that’s half human, half algorithm-based, with artificial intelligence. Usually, literature runs ahead of reality! Do you think we’ll soon see detectives working alongside AI to fight crime?

Jo Callaghan: Thank you! They already do. The police in the UK and in other countries are using artificial intelligence in the fight against crime, whether through facial recognition technology, algorithms designed to prevent or reduce illegal activities, or data analysis in criminal investigations. What I did was to bring together many of the different aspects of AI already used in investigative work and imagine them merging into Lock, who is an EDIA (Artificial Intelligence Detective Entity).

C&B: How did the idea of a detective that is an AI entity come about? Which character was harder to write – Lock or his partner, Kat Frank?

Jo Callaghan: I’d wanted to write a crime novel for some time, but the market was oversaturated, so I struggled to come up with an original concept. Then, in my day job, I was analyzing the impact of artificial intelligence on the labor market (whether AI would one day replace radiologists, and what that would mean for the entire team), and I thought: what if you had an AI detective? I did some research and found out that the police were already experimenting with algorithms and AI-based technologies such as facial recognition and predictive strategies (this was around 2017). Of course, that raises a host of questions – could such an approach make policing more efficient, grounded in concrete evidence, or do we risk losing those flashes of intuition and nuance that come from human judgment? These debates fascinated me, and I became excited when I realized it would be the perfect framework for writing a gripping crime novel that also explores what it means to be human.

Lock was, without a doubt, the hardest character to write, because I had to find a way to convey how a machine guided by logic and algorithms would “think” and speak, while still evoking enough humanity to make readers wonder to what extent Lock might develop more human traits, without seeming too stiff or implausible. Interestingly, the conversational abilities of some large language models have evolved so quickly that Lock’s capabilities in this regard no longer feel like pure speculation, as they did when I first wrote the book.

C&B: The novel’s motto says that “there is as much mystery in the thinking of a machine as in that of a human being.” Why did you feel this quote was representative of the novel?

Jo Callaghan: That’s an excellent question! I love that quote, so I’m glad you brought it up. I chose it because there’s such a heated debate about whether artificial intelligence will ever develop its own consciousness, but the truth is, we don’t actually understand what consciousness is, how it can be gained or lost.

We can make judgments about others based on their behavior, but we can never truly know what is happening in someone else’s mind. There’s a scene in the novel where Lock says “condolences” to Kat. She’s ready to dismiss it, assuming it’s just a formula he’s reproducing, something he’s learned to say in that context. But then she pauses and wonders: isn’t that exactly what we all do? Isn’t that what her friends do when they send similar text messages?

I wanted to highlight the fact that while we talk a lot about machine learning, humans learn in a very similar way. In future novels, a small child also appears, because I wanted to compare and sketch parallels between how Lock learns and how a child learns. These questions fascinate me, and I think that’s why I enjoy writing these books so much.

C&B: Did you expect In the Blink of an Eye to be such a huge success?

Jo Callaghan: Not at all! At that point, I had been writing for 13 years, with no success. I had written five books for children and young adults, and each project was rejected by publishers in the UK. I had basically given up. But after my husband passed away, I decided to write this novel to take my mind off grief and motivate myself to keep going, for my children’s sake. That’s why Kat Frank is a middle-aged widow returning to work after the death of her husband – because that’s what I was going through at the time. I didn’t write the book with the intention of publishing it, but eventually I was persuaded to send it to publishers. Even then, I was very relaxed about it, because for me it had already served its purpose – it had kept me alive. So everything that came afterwards was a bonus.

After so many years of rejections, it was very strange to see multiple publishers competing to publish it, and then for it to win several major crime fiction awards and make the Sunday Times bestseller list! I hope the novel will also be appreciated by Romanian readers, and I’m delighted that it has been published in Romania.

C&B: As a lead strategist researching the future impact of artificial intelligence and genomics on the workforce, how do you think society and educational systems should adapt to the inevitable transformations brought about by the wider adoption of AI?

Jo Callaghan: In my work, I’ve learned that the only certainty about the future is that all predictions will turn out to be wrong. But things are changing at a much faster pace and on a much larger scale than ever before, so we’ll all need to accept a world where lifelong learning is the norm. The idea that you could go to school or university, qualify for a certain job at 18 or 21, and then work for 40 years in that field has long ceased to be valid. We’ll all have to learn constantly, adapt, and be flexible in how we apply and develop our skills. The challenge will be to identify where we, as humans, can bring the most valuable contribution – probably in areas like relationships, trust, judgment, and holistic thinking – but also to define more clearly what we value. For example, what does it mean for us to live well, what do we want to do outside of work, and how do we make sure AI supports, rather than undermines, that ideal. We need to reclaim decision-making power and proactively shape our future, rather than just letting things happen to us.

C&B: Speaking of future skills: which competencies do you think will become essential in the next 10–20 years?

Jo Callaghan: In the future, flexibility and adaptability will be essential, as will the ability to live and work in uncertain circumstances where many things are constantly changing. But on the other hand, I think that in such a scenario, fixed points become even more important. Human beings are social animals – we love to interact. That’s why so many people go to book festivals, music festivals, or conventions like Comic Con. People love art, they love to create, to form bonds. These truths about us will endure, which is why I’m more optimistic than others about the arts.

C&B: As a specialist in the field – if it’s quite possible that AI will partner with humans in police investigations, do you also think it’s possible for it to start writing crime novels?

Jo Callaghan: I’m sure it already does. The question isn’t whether artificial intelligence can write a crime novel (it can) – the question is whether people will want to read it. I tend to think some will – there has always been demand for formulaic fiction. But the films and books that are most successful or truly groundbreaking are the ones that touch people’s hearts, the ones that transcend genre to reveal a truth about the human condition. We write and read stories to remind ourselves that someone else has felt what we’re feeling – that, ultimately, we’re not alone. I attend literary festivals all the time and, as in this interview, people want to know who I am, why I wrote the book, what my story is. I think readers appreciate my books because they sense, on some level, that they’re inspired by my own experience, and that there’s a connection between us when they read them and especially when they share their thoughts with me. At least, that’s what I like to believe.

C&B: Kat and Lock are an irresistible duo, and we can’t wait to see them again! Can you give us a few hints about the next volume?

Jo Callaghan: Thank you! The second book is called Leave No Trace, and here Kat and Lock face their first real-time case, when a man’s body is discovered crucified on Judd’s Peak, with his ears cut off. As more crucified male victims appear, the police issue an extraordinary warning to men in the area: avoid pub crawls, don’t walk alone late at night, and always tell a friend where you are. Amid a media frenzy, Kat and Lock must work together to solve the mystery and prevent another murder.

I’ve just finished writing the fourth volume (the last in the series). Lock is capable of learning, so the question I’ve been exploring throughout the series is: how much can he learn, and what happens as he evolves…

Interview conducted by Fabrica de PR for Careers & Business magazine

Photo credit: Edward Moss

The post Interview with Jo Callaghan: AI Detectives and the Mysteries Behind In the Blink of an Eye appeared first on careers-business.com.

Julie Starr is an executive coach, mentor, author, and speaker. She works with organizations and individuals, helping them clarify their purpose and remove obstacles standing in the way of progress. Driven by the intention to unlock people’s full potential, her approach is both challenging and compassionate. Her books on this topic have become bestsellers, specifically The Coaching Manual and Brilliant Coaching.

Julie Starr is also a dedicated advocate of mentoring, and in Romania, her book Manual de mentorat: un ghid pas cu pas pentru a fi un mentor mai bun / The Mentoring Manual: Your Step by Step Guide to Being a Better Mentor has been published. This book is aimed at anyone who wants to become a mentor, as well as those who have never dared to aspire to such a role, unsure if they have the necessary qualities. The book reveals: the qualities you need to become a mentor, the essential methods of mentoring, and how to apply them to typical mentoring scenarios.

We spoke with her to learn more about the secrets of mentoring and building a successful career.

C&B:What inspired you to write The Mentoring Manual?

Julie Starr: I wanted to create a clearer distinction between mentoring and coaching. Too often, the two roles are blurred together, yet in their purest forms they are different. Mentoring is not the same as coaching, managing, or consulting — it’s a unique kind of one-to-one relationship.

A common misconception is that mentors advise while coaches ask questions — in other words, the mentor is directive while the coach is less so. But that’s not true. Both roles can be directive or non-directive depending on the situation.

Another issue is that many books cover both mentoring and coaching at once, which only deepens the confusion. I wanted to return mentoring to its roots: an ancient, archetypal role that has shaped people’s lives for centuries. When a mentor operates from that deep, archetypal energy, that’s when real transformation takes place.

C&B: In your experience, what are the mistakes new mentors tend to make?

Julie Starr: Most mistakes happen at the beginning — during preparation or the early stages — but they don’t reveal themselves until later. After what I call the ‘honeymoon stage,’ when the novelty fades and conversations start to feel routine, the real challenge appears: how to support someone without slipping into forceful advice-giving or problem-solving.

New mentors often fall back on what they know. If the mentor is also a manager, for example, it’s tempting to approach mentoring like performance management: “Here’s what I need you to do.” That approach might work in management, but it undermines the intentions of mentoring.

In reality, the problem often starts much earlier, when the mentor hasn’t developed the awareness or skills to handle the later, more demanding phases of the relationship.

C&B: What makes an effective mentor?

Julie Starr: In The Mentoring Manual, I outline five qualities that stand out: The ability to connect — for instance, through deep and attentive listening; The ability to build trust and genuine engagement; The ability to keep focus; The ability to help someone move past false limits or roadblocks; The ability to foster growth. Of these, the fifth is the most important. True mentoring is about growth in the broadest sense — beliefs, values, behaviours, mindset — not just short-term skills or results.

C&B: How would you define a healthy, balanced mentor–mentee relationship?

Julie Starr: At its core, it’s an exchange of benevolence and respect. From the mentor, there must be benevolence: generosity, compassion, patience. A mentor must accept that they don’t have direct authority over the other person’s choices. That often means standing back, watching someone learn through mistakes, and resisting the urge to fix things.

From the mentee, there must be respect. Respect opens the door to being influenced by someone else. It’s this combination — benevolence from the mentor and respect from the mentee — that makes the relationship effective and lasting.

C&B: Is there an exercise you’d recommend even for those who don’t plan to become mentors?

Julie Starr: Absolutely. I suggest a simple but powerful reflection exercise:

Step 1: Identify your mentors. Write down the names of people who have had a positive impact on you — shaping your development, mindset, or outlook. It could be a teacher, a family friend, a coach, or someone you met in a community or sports club. Parents are important too, of course, but look for those other, naturally occurring relationships that helped you grow.

Step 2: Reflect on their influence. Think about how each person shaped you. Did they spark an interest? Nurture a talent? Help you see the world differently? These are the relationships that often leave the deepest imprint.

Step 3: Consider your own role. Now think about where you might play this role for others. It could be nieces, nephews, younger colleagues, or people in your community. You may not always recognise it, but your influence often reaches far beyond the roles you’re formally known for.

#Coaching

C&B: What inspired you to write The Coaching Manual, and how has your understanding of coaching evolved since the first edition?

Julie Starr: I wrote The Coaching Manual because I wanted to create the book that was missing when I first entered the field. I wanted to write something that gave people direct access to the principles, process, skills, beliefs, and mindset of coaching. I was disappointed, I suppose, with the more conceptual books I could find at the time. I also wanted to welcome people into the field—to be encouraging and to support their journey into becoming a coach.

C&B: In your view, what are the core principles that make coaching truly effective?

Julie Starr: There are several! One core principle for any coach is that we intend to serve, humble ourselves, and be willing to embark on a journey of self-discovery and self-inquiry to remove those aspects of our behaviour, conditioning, or character that inhibit our ability to become a truly great coach.

To coach effectively, we must be able to ‘get ourselves out of the way’ in conversation. To achieve that, our thoughts, beliefs, and unconscious tendencies must be decluttered over time. For example, in conversation, some of us want to fix, to help, or to hear ourselves talk— to be seen as adding value in a conversation. There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of those behaviours; it’s simply that they can interfere with creating the spaciousness necessary for effective inquiry.

C&B: You describe coaching as a way to unlock potential, rather than direct or advise. Why is this distinction so important?

Julie Starr: The power and magic of coaching lies in conversations of inquiry, which means we go deeper, to uncover someone’s unconscious awareness, inner thoughts and buried insight. This is all hidden beneath the noise, chatter, and clutter of everyday life. If what we do as coaches is always direct or advise, we’re simply piling more thoughts, more options and more information onto a situation that might already be overwhelmed.

C&B: What are the most common mistakes new coaches make, and how can they avoid them?

Julie Starr: A common mistake is what I call ‘efforting’—for example, in conversation, they talk too much, and work too hard, perhaps as they have a strong intention to ‘be a great coach’. Instead we must learn to relax, lean back, and focus on listening, and allow effective questions to surface from the present moment. This is why self-awareness is key; if you’re not aware that you’re talking too much or working too hard in a conversation, how can you manage yourself in that moment? How can you remember to take a breath, to lean back and relax?

C&B: How would you describe a great coach in just three words?

Julie Starr: Intentional. Focused. Compassionate.

C&B: Your approach is said to be both challenging and compassionate. How do you maintain that balance during a difficult coaching session?

Julie Starr: This is a tricky one for me to identify exactly, since some of this process is more sense-based than logic-based. For example, over time, I’ve learned to use my body as a navigational tool: to remain embodied and not to disappear into my head. From here, I can get a sense of where to go in the conversation. There is great strength in a willingness to speak the truth with compassion, and many experienced coaches have this. An experienced coach will likely acknowledge that sometimes they’re working from a felt sense in the body as much as from the thoughts in our mind. This is access to intuition.

To maintain a healthy balance between challenge and compassion, I check in regularly to ensure I’m not being too challenging, that what I’m saying can be heard (rather than blocked or distorted) and that I’m communicating from an aligned, heartfelt place. That might sound more mystical than it is—in practice, it’s quite simple. I need to stay grounded, stay embodied, and continually check that my tone feels appropriate. Of course, I’m also observing visual cues: how the individual appears to be reacting. When things get difficult, it’s important to give people time to process. Sometimes, silence helps with that.

C&B: What role does self-awareness play in a coach’s own development?

Julie Starr: Self-awareness is an ongoing journey for any coach—something that must be developed, increased, and maintained. That’s why the practice of staying present is so important. It helps us stay attuned both to what’s going on within ourselves and what’s happening with the person we’re speaking with.

C&B: You emphasize the importance of listening in coaching. How does ‘deep listening’ differ from ordinary conversation?

Julie Starr: Deep listening is an effective blend of intention and attention. It’s very different from surface-level or casual listening. In deep listening, we stay fully present. We hold a strong intention to understand the other person and actively demonstrate that through our attention. Like many of the core coaching skills, effective listening is a valuable life skill. We should teach listening in schools (imagine!).

C&B: Many people struggle with the idea of “not giving advice” as a coach. How do you guide them through this mindset shift?

Julie Starr: This idea of not giving advice is something many coaches never quite grasp. They never develop the ability to remain in inquiry—to ask great questions, to summarise and observe before offering guidance.  It means that coaching mastery is not a level that same coach can ever reach. If we don’t build this skill, we will struggle to avoid defaulting to advice-giving—because that’s what we’re used to (and comfortable with).

The mindset shift often happens when coaches experience the freedom that comes from not giving advice—and see how powerful that can be, both for themselves and the client. Sometimes it’s a question of self-awareness (how much we tend to talk or advise), and sometimes it’s about skill—having the tools and strategies to do something different. Ultimately, it’s skills plus experience that help us move beyond the impulse to give advice.

C&B: In The Coaching Manual, you offer a structured coaching model. How can coaches use it without becoming too rigid or mechanical?

Julie Starr: The Coaching Path is a flexible structure encompassing the basic stages of an effective coaching conversation. Because the stages within The Coaching Path are domains of purpose—to inquire, to understand, to shape agreements, etc.—there is built-in flexibility within the model.

I developed The Coaching Path after becoming irritated with the mechanical, sometimes formulaic nature of other coaching models based on acronyms, which became ‘checkboxes’. I wanted to offer freedom for coaches to explore the stages of a conversation gently, without being constrained by them.

C&B: You often speak about removing obstacles to progress. What kinds of internal blocks do you see most often in clients?

Julie Starr: Obstacles can be internal and external. Internal obstacles include self-perception, beliefs, values, and worldview. For example, in a tough situation, clients are often living in a story of perception about that. They tell a convincing story about their lives or challenges, completely constrained by a limited sense of possibility. A trap for any novice coach is to accept that lack of possibility as ‘true’ – which means they don’t believe that things can change or improve either.

A great coaching conversation expands someone’s sense of what’s possible. That’s often the beginning of meaningful change.

Of course, some obstacles may be more external practical (e.g., habits or routines), but at the level of coaching mastery, most obstacles are internal.

C&B: How do cultural differences influence coaching relationships, and what should a coach be mindful of in cross-cultural settings?

Julie Starr: Cultural differences demand self-awareness and an awareness of others.  For example, we must be aware of our unconscious assumptions and demonstrate respect for alternative views. This awareness must be blended with a sense of respect and equality towards others. When people sense that you respect them and see them as equals, any cultural misunderstandings can often be minimised—or even ignored entirely—because mutual respect carries the rapport beyond any minor misunderstandings.

C&B: If a client shows signs of low confidence or self-doubt, what is the most effective coaching response?

Julie Starr: When someone is experiencing low confidence or self-doubt, the best response depends on the capacity of that individual, in that moment. Sometimes, encouragement, belief in them, and helping them explore limiting beliefs or fears can be enough.

But if someone is deeply affected by low confidence, our positive intentions of upbeat optimism can backfire. In those cases, it’s important to stay with them, understand their process, and support them in a way that is appropriate in the moment.

C&B: Looking to the future, how do you see the field of coaching evolving, especially in fast-changing workplaces?

Julie Starr: To name the elephant in the room: AI is advancing and can now handle some of the simpler aspects of people’s coaching needs. But AI will never replace the human element in coaching. There is so much occurring in a conversation that cannot be explained or replicated. The human system of communication, includes the energy between people, the subtle cues (verbal, non-verbal, tonal, facial expressions)—most of this lies outside AI’s reach. Indeed, some of it even lies beyond our ability to understand. That’s where the true magic of coaching exists—in the intangible, inexplicable moments of transformation. It’s why, after more than 25 years in the field, I’m still excited by these conversations, still passionate about this work. Where the world becomes ever more complex and the challenges we face feel different from anything previously encountered, one-to-one coaching support has an essential role to facilitate enquiry, insight, and understanding. In conclusion, looking ahead, I believe the future of coaching is very bright indeed.

The post Julie Starr on Mentoring and Coaching: Secrets of a Successful Career appeared first on careers-business.com.

Dr. Sebastian Stanculescu is a professor at the University of Bucharest, a collaborator with Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna and the University of Vienna. He has been working for over two decades to cultivate a culture of authentic personal development. As a lecturer, trainer, author, and mentor, he has delivered more than five thousand conferences and over a thousand training sessions for hundreds of thousands of people around the world. He is also the creator of one of the most complex modern applications for personal and spiritual development.

C&B: How would you describe yourself in a single sentence to spark the curiosity of those who don’t know you yet?

Sebastian Stanculescu: In a world more concerned with product and label than with substance, I am grateful to have been active in the fields of personal development, brand psychology, and character formation for over two decades.

C&B: If we were to look at a narrative thread of your evolution, what were the key moments that defined you?

Sebastian Stanculescu: Starting from my first workshops and books, an extraordinary community of psychologists, doctors, trainers, and entrepreneurs has formed around me—people who have grown alongside me. Until 2015, my activity was primarily local, but after 2016 I was increasingly invited to major cities around the world to give lectures, courses, and workshops for thousands of people. Today, there are over 50,000 participants in our events, more than 800,000 readers of my books, and many users of our app, ProfessorApp.

C&B: What has been the most difficult moment in your journey so far, and how did you overcome it?

Sebastian Stanculescu: Probably the most difficult moment in my professional journey wasn’t caused by the 2008 economic crisis or the 2020 pandemic, but rather by the fact that, living in a post-communist country, Romania in recent decades is still a place where imposture and political influence hinder certain initiatives of the free entrepreneurial environment. Waiting up to a year for permits, never-ending bureaucracy and paperwork—you surely know what I’m talking about.

C&B: Has there always been a dream or ambition that guided you, regardless of obstacles?

Sebastian Stanculescu: I’ve always been guided by my ideal of creating complete, valuable, and useful tools for as many people as possible, knowing that people will always appreciate value in relation to time and quality—not just trends. That’s what brought us to where we are today, and we know we’ll continue to grow, especially thanks to our extensive experience with modern technologies.

C&B: What were you like at the beginning of your journey, and how do you feel you’ve transformed over time?

Sebastian Stanculescu: At the start, I was definitely more naïve, more idealistic, and more impatient. But years of experience have taught me that lasting projects are built over time—with perseverance.

C&B: If we met your team or collaborators, what do you think they would say about you?

Sebastian Stanculescu: Our collaborators often recommend other collaborators to us, which is the best feedback we could ask for. We have many clients who’ve been with us for over 10 years, and it’s a great honor when collaborators return after 20 years—that’s the highest recognition of the work we’ve done. That’s also where we draw our enthusiasm and motivation to grow our projects for an even greater impact in the future.

Our team has always found a warm, family-like environment with us. I like to keep people close and to know they’re doing well personally, not just professionally.

C&B: What’s the most important decision you’ve made that changed your trajectory?

Sebastian Stanculescu: Probably the shift to online and the development of our mobile app, which radically improved accessibility to our services.

C&B: How did you develop your leadership style or decision-making approach? Was it a natural process or something learned?

Sebastian Stanculescu: I’m truly grateful to be one of those people with a natural talent for working with large teams across thousands of projects. Without that gift, many of our results would have been much harder to achieve.

C&B: What do you believe sets your business or professional approach apart from the rest of the industry?

Sebastian Stanculescu: In the personal development industry, many workshops, trainings, and one-off products ride the wave of temporary campaigns. New waves often bring new personalities who fade away a year or two after their rise. We’ve been here for over two decades, and all of our clients know that our projects are not only highly accessible—they’re also consistent, well-paced, tailored to their needs, and highly stable.

C&B: What does a typical day look like for you now, and which moments bring you the most satisfaction?

Sebastian Stanculescu: What I enjoy most are the meetings with people—seeing both longtime and new clients again, connecting with individuals and their life stories. There are days when I work more than 10 hours, but the joy of my clients’ results always makes up for any possible fatigue.

C&B: What values or principles guide you in your work, and how do you apply them day to day?

Sebastian Stanculescu: My core principle is both simple and profound: if the people who benefit from our services are happier, healthier, and more accomplished, not only will they return to us, but we also know that we’re contributing to a better and more balanced world. That is the most important ideal behind the thousands of projects we’ve carried out.

C&B: How did you come up with the idea to launch this project, and why this name?

Sebastian Stanculescu: Because my national project has been associated with my name and the Romanian brand that carried my name for 20 years, expanding globally meant developing ProfessorApp—a name that describes the role of the services we offer: to provide psychological, entrepreneurial, and cultural education for more and more people around the world.

C&B: If you were to send a message to those who follow your example, what would it be?

Sebastian Stanculescu: My message to the thousands of students and trainees who want to build something lasting is simple: perseverance and consistency in your efforts can take you anywhere.

The post Dr. Sebastian Stanculescu: Two Decades Dedicated to Authentic Personal Development appeared first on careers-business.com.

First Impressions: Entering the Conversation with Confidence

The first impression is formed in the first few seconds, and body language plays a crucial role. An upright posture, a warm smile, and direct eye contact convey confidence. When introducing yourself, offer a firm handshake and clearly state your name, possibly accompanied by a brief introduction of your work.

If you’re joining an already-formed group, listen to the conversation for a moment before intervening. You can start with a question like: – “It’s great to meet you! The event is very well organized! Have you attended the previous editions?”

If you meet someone new, a simple introduction is always effective: – “Hi, I’m [your name]. I work in [your field]. How about you?”

Active Listening and the Art of Asking Smart Questions

Networking isn’t about talking as much as possible, but rather asking the right questions and listening actively. A good listener maintains eye contact, slightly tilts their head in a sign of interest, and provides responses that encourage the speaker to continue, such as “Very interesting!” or “Tell me more about that.”

Open-ended questions are essential for a smooth conversation: – “How did you get into this field?” – “What are the biggest challenges in your industry right now?” – “What motivates you the most in what you do?”

Avoid closed questions that can lead to monosyllabic answers. For example, instead of asking “Do you like the event?” ask “What aspect of the event did you find most interesting?”

How to Talk About Yourself Without Coming Across as Self-Centered

Many women avoid talking about their achievements for fear of seeming boastful. However, it’s important to present your experience with confidence and ease.

Instead of saying, “I had an excellent year, I attracted the biggest clients in the industry,” try: – “I worked on some interesting projects this year, including with [name of an industry or major client]. It was a very valuable experience.”

Instead of saying, “I’m an expert in this field,” say: – “I’ve been working in this field for [number] years and have had the opportunity to collaborate with amazing teams.”

Examples of Women Who Excel in Networking

Oprah Winfrey is an example of a master conversationalist. At events, she stands out through active listening: maintaining eye contact, asking relevant questions, and making sure the speaker feels appreciated.

Michelle Obama is known for her charismatic presence and the way she creates authentic connections. At official events and international meetings, she would initiate conversations with open-ended questions that highlighted the speaker and encouraged an honest dialogue.

Sara Blakely, the founder of Spanx, uses networking naturally and with humor. At events, she begins her conversations with stories about her beginnings, making her approachable and memorable.

Dolly Parton is not only a remarkable artist but also a successful businesswoman. At events, she uses humor and warmth to make conversations more natural and enjoyable, creating an atmosphere where people feel comfortable.

How to Gracefully Exit a Conversation

At networking events, it’s essential not to stay in one conversation for too long. If you feel the discussion is nearing its end, here are some elegant ways to wrap it up: – “It’s been a pleasure talking to you! I’d like to take the opportunity to meet other participants, but I’d love to stay in touch.”

– “Thank you for the conversation, you’ve given me a very interesting perspective. I hope we have the opportunity to collaborate in the future!”

If you’ve exchanged business cards, mention that you will send a follow-up message after the event.

Mistakes to Avoid in Networking Conversations

If you monopolize the conversation, you may come across as egocentric. On the other hand, if you speak too little, you may appear uninterested. A successful conversation strikes a balance between sharing and listening. Negative topics, such as complaints about the organization, competition, or other people, can create a negative impression. Gossip, in particular, should be avoided, as it affects the credibility of the person spreading it. If you forget the name of your conversation partner, don’t hesitate to ask again using a polite phrasing: “I was excited/it was noisy when you were introduced to me, and I wouldn’t want to mispronounce your name.” It’s not advisable to use informal language at the first contact, especially in formal settings. Additionally, while our phones are incredibly useful in many situations, they can become a major “sin” in others. Constantly checking the screen during a conversation conveys disinterest and disrespect.

In other words, networking is not just a exchange of words but the architecture of your professional relationships. Every conversation is a brick, and every well-asked question is a supporting arch. Build carefully, listen attentively, and construct a solid bridge between you and the opportunities that await.

Ileana Zamfir, Etiquette Coach

The post Ileana Zamfir: The Art of Conversation for Women at Networking Events appeared first on careers-business.com.