McKinsey Seeks to Avoid New Succession Dramas With Changes to Its Elections
The elite consulting firm, as part of sweeping changes to its governance, will now elect a global managing partner to a single six-year term, though its partners will hold a confirmation vote at the four-year mark on whether the leader should serve the final two years of that term. McKinsey's roughly 750 senior partners currently vote to elect a firmwide leader every three years and can stand for two terms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Digital Trends
24 minutes ago
- Digital Trends
Nvidia's AI PC delay may be just what the industry needs
Nvidia and MediaTek have reportedly postponed the launch of their ambitious AI PC platform, codenamed N1X, to the first quarter of 2026. According to a report from DigiTimes, the reason for the delay has been attributed by a mix of industry-level and technical hurdles, including Microsoft's delayed operating system roadmap, critical chip revisions on Nvidia's end, and weakening demand in the global notebook market. While delays in the tech world are rarely celebrated, this one may possibly be a healthier and refined future for AI PCs. Originally slated for a Q3 2025 release, the N1X platform was expected to debut in both commercial and high-end consumer devices. Yet its absence from the Computex 2025 showcase raised some concerns. Industry insiders now point to three main factors behind the hold-up. First, Microsoft's upcoming Windows release, further optimized for Arm and AI workloads, is reportedly behind schedule creating a software bottleneck. Second, Nvidia is said to have uncovered issues in the initial silicon that required a significant redesign. And third, broader economic conditions, including weaker-than-expected notebook sales and a cautious enterprise spending environment, have pushed both companies to re-evaluate the platform's timing and market strategy. Change in strategies The N1X launch is now being repositioned with a greater emphasis on the commercial sector, with Dell, HP, Lenovo, and other OEMs expected to lead the rollout in early 2026. Analysts suggest that the enterprise segment is better positioned to adopt AI-enhanced systems in the short term, given ongoing IT refresh cycles and the growing demand for on-device AI in business applications. This pivot is also a way to avoid launching into a volatile consumer market, where purchasing behavior remains unpredictable and value perception around AI PCs is still at an early stage. Recommended Videos In strategic terms, the Nvidia–MediaTek partnership is deeper than just a one-off product. The two companies have been collaborating across several AI domains in recent years. In automotive, MediaTek's Dimensity Auto cockpit platform now integrates Nvidia RTX GPUs for advanced in-vehicle graphics and compute tasks. On the edge AI front, Nvidia's TAO toolkit works alongside MediaTek's NeuroPilot SDK, streamlining model training and deployment. They've also co-developed a personal AI supercomputer called DGX Spark, and MediaTek is among the first to adopt Nvidia's NVLink Fusion ecosystem, an interconnect platform that enables custom AI silicon design for data centers. While a delay in a major launch can be frustrating, the benefits of patience in this case are compelling. First and foremost, it allows for better integration between hardware and software. Nvidia can use the extra time to finalize its chip redesign and iron out driver and compatibility issues, while Microsoft can ensure that its next-generation Windows OS is ready to make the most of the hardware. In short, it reduces the risk of launching a product that looks exciting on paper but fails to deliver a meaningful experience to users. A worthy challenger Beyond polish, the delay also opens the door for more healthy competition. With Qualcomm, AMD, Intel, and Apple all expanding their AI-capable chip portfolios, a later arrival for N1X allows Nvidia and MediaTek to better assess the market landscape and position their offering more competitively. This could translate into more choices for consumers, improved performance per dollar, and less pressure on OEMs to rush half-baked devices to market. This was particularly the case when Intel jumped onto the AI bandwagon when it launched its Meteor Lake lineup. By 2026, the AI PC market is projected to be far more mature, and the extra development time may ensure the N1X platform enters a space that's ready to support its potential. Perhaps most intriguing is what this delay hints at for the future of Arm-based computing. Rumors suggest Nvidia could potentially be planning to pair N1X with its own discrete GPU technologies for future high-performance laptops, potentially even targeting gaming workloads. If successful, it could mark the beginning of a true Arm-based gaming CPU capable of challenging x86 incumbents from Intel and AMD. While those ambitions are still speculative, the technical groundwork and strategic intent are clearly being laid. Ultimately, the Nvidia–MediaTek delay isn't just a missed deadline but a recalibration. It reflects how complex the transition to AI-first computing really is, and it highlights the importance of aligning hardware, software, and market readiness. In this case, more time could mean better value, stronger adoption, and a more meaningful leap forward for AI PCs. For consumers, developers, and the industry at large, it's an outcome that is worth waiting for.
Associated Press
25 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Investigation finds vote discrepancies in 2024 Kauai election
A Hawaiʻi State Elections Commission investigative panel tasked with examining the 2024 general election on Kauaʻi has found inconsistencies between state and county vote totals, among other concerns. The panel is recommending that the county and state conduct audits of the vote-counting process in order to figure out why the number of ballots cast differs substantially between the two elections offices. The July 13 report from the Elections Commission investigative group found that Kauaʻi County collected 26,414 mailed-in ballot envelopes for the Nov. 4 election but the state Office of Elections says it counted 27,075 mail ballots from Kauaʻi, a difference of 661 votes. Critics of the election process — including some commission members themselves — have been raising concerns about Hawaiʻi's election process and voter fraud for years. The Hawaiʻi Elections Commission is set to discuss the group's reports and its recommendations to ensure that local election results are conducted fairly and accurately at its next meeting July 30. It's unclear whether the discrepancies, if validated, could lead to altering the outcome of individual Kauaʻi races. The official deadline to challenge results has passed, and the results have been certified. While most of the races on the Kauaʻi ballot were not close, the winning margin for at least one Kauaʻi County Council race was just 106 votes. But the committee's report along with recommendations to ensure greater accountability when it comes to voting could significantly alter how the counties and the state conduct elections to ensure voting integrity. Those suggestions include keeping more accurate official daily counts of ballot collections and the presence of official observers for ballot collection and signature verification. Michael Curtis, the Elections Commission chair, declined to comment on the report. Scott Nago, the state's chief elections officer, also declined to comment. Peter Young, the elections commissioner who chaired the group, could not be reached for comment. But during the commission's meeting last week he said, 'I think that what you're going to see is something that can be debated, but should shed light on a situation that we've heard lots of commentary from both our citizens and commission members.' Young described the report as 'not one-sided' and 'actually quite neutral in many cases.' Ralph Cushnie, one of nine elections commissioners and one of the most outspoken critics of Hawaiʻi elections, called the report 'damning.' Cushnie, who like Curtis lives on Kauaʻi, has been speaking out for many months over his concerns about the voting process, especially regarding what's known as 'chain of custody' — that is, the way ballots make it from voters to the county and to state government for tabulating. Cushnie has done his own independent analysis of election results using material obtained through public records requests, and his numbers differ from the official reports for Kauaʻi and Hawaiʻi County. Cushnie and his supporters, including dozens of members of the public who turn out in large numbers to testify at Elections Commission meetings, regularly raise their concerns at the meetings. But they have gotten little traction with the commission other than to form the permitted interaction group to look more closely at some of the issues they've raised. Cushnie also lost a case before the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court in December that challenged the Kauaʻi election. In that case Kushnie's group alleged there were 3,772 more ballots cast on Kauaʻi than the state's total. But the high court found no evidence of that. Election Complaints 'Valid' A permitted interaction group — or PIG under the Sunshine Law — allows a board to form a small group to work on specific issues and then report back in open session. The Elections Commission group was specifically charged with collecting information on complaints 'regarding chain of custody and election results discrepancies' on Kauai. The complaints, the group concluded, 'are valid.' Its report said there were no logs or records retained by Kauaʻi County that complied with Hawaiʻi Administrative Rules on the security of ballots — specifically, rules requiring the clerk to maintain a complete and current count of ballots issued, spoiled and received by the county. As well, a count of ballots based on scans of ballot envelopes into the state's voter registration system 'is not reconciled with any manual counts and is not verifiable.' Neither Nago nor the Kauaʻi county clerk, the report said, had a 'plausible explanation' for the discrepancy of 661 ballots between the county and the state. The group said it had several written exchanges with Nago, Kauaʻi County Clerk Jade Fountain-Tanigawa and Kauaʻi Deputy Clerk Lyndon Yoshioka. But their responses did not satisfy the group's concerns. 'Both offices have responded to our requests, furnished documents, and offered explanations,' it said. 'They have not, however, provided a clear understanding of how the checks and balances work, nor have they removed doubt about the integrity of the election procedures. The PIG did not receive documents that comply with the law cited above.' The report also suggests there is a different understanding between the Elections Commission group and election officials as to what exactly constitutes an official count. Yoshioka, in response to questions from the group, said that 'any perceived inconsistency or correction' within manual hand-counts or envelopes 'is irrelevant' to the official results, 'as they do not represent the official count.' The group's response: 'While this quote is true to fact, it does leave the PIG members trying to understand why there is a manual hand-count if it is 'irrelevant' and why this manual hand-count discrepancy is not noted throughout the County's documentation to address this confusion. The word 'irrelevant' is off-putting to the members of the PIG.' Ultimately, the group concluded, there appears to be 'no inventory control' of ballot envelopes, and the Statewide Voter Registration System logs are 'electronic and unverifiable' by the group. 'Although the law clearly makes the Counties responsible for this task and the State assures the people that there is a chain of custody in which every ballot envelope is accounted for, there remain questions,' the group wrote. The report also said there exists no reconciliation process to address differences between what the county and state respectively report. 'One would expect the number of signature-verified ballot envelopes in SVRS to equal the number delivered to the Counting Center, but neither of those numbers are provided in real time, nor are they official,' the report stated. 'Mr. Nago states that the official count begins when the ballot envelopes are scanned by the Counties and recorded in the SVRS. This, then, is where the chain of custody begins, but there are opportunities to remove or add ballot envelopes prior to scanning.' The group's report does not identify by district or precinct where the extra votes were cast. But only 3,491 people on Kauaʻi voted in person in 2024, compared with the 27,075 who voted by mail or dropped ballots off at a dropbox location. The state says total turnout on Kauaʻi was 30,566. The PIG's recommendations include requesting an audit of ballot envelopes collected by the county and transferred to a counting center. The group wants the state to do another audit to confirm the 27,075 mail-in paper ballots in the state's possession. The group also wants the Elections Commission to hold a hearing to find out more about what state and county elections officials know about the vote discrepancies. The commission has also formed a permitted interaction group to examine the results of the Hawaiʻi County general election, something that Cushnie has also raised concerns about. That PIG hasn't started work yet. ___ This story was originally published by Honolulu Civil Beat and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Forbes
25 minutes ago
- Forbes
AI Is Changing Work. Is Your Talent Strategy Evolving Too?
The Archetype Effect asks why companies know so little about their employees—and offers a path to a ... More more inspired workforce. Why do so many companies know more about their customers than their own employees? This is the central question posed by my colleague James Root in his new book, The Archetype Effect. It is indeed an intriguing mystery. Business today segments customers in all sorts of ways to construct value propositions highly tailored to their needs. Personalized marketing—down to the individual consumer—is now quite commonplace. Not so with employees. Most HR systems are built on the assumption that everyone goes to work for the same reasons. In reality, it's a very different story. Deaveraging employees The book highlights six distinct archetypes of workers, each with unique motivations: These archetypes challenge long-standing management assumptions. The conventional wisdom in many organizations is that people need to be motivated by a vision. In fact, many, including most operators, don't particularly care; they find meaning outside of work. Similarly, it's often assumed that employees naturally want to advance to the next level. In fact, many, including most artisans, are not particularly interested. Just like with customers, we need to 'deaverage' employee motivations. Earlier this month I had lunch with a group of graduate students just starting their summer internship. They all had some degree of work experience already and, through this internship, were trying out the world of management consulting. The conversation focused on their career aspirations, why they were interested in this industry, and what they wanted to get out of the summer. As they told their stories, Root's insights reverberated in my head. Each intern had quite different motivations. One was clearly a striver, interested in climbing the corporate ladder as quickly as possible. Another seemed more of an explorer, wanting exposure to global opportunities and asking questions about mobility and cross-border assignments. The lunch left me convinced that if we treated them all the same, we would not tap into their true motivations or full potential. The business imperative Nearly 10 years ago, Michael Mankins and Eric Garton wrote Time, Talent, Energy about the power of employees who are not only satisfied but truly engaged and even inspired. Their research showed that engaged employees are 44% more productive than satisfied employees, and those who feel inspired at work are nearly 125% more productive. If we think about human capital the way we do financial capital, the returns on building a more inspired workforce become clear. Management must do a better job understanding and motivating people. Of the approximately 3.5 billion people who go to work each day, nearly 1.2 billion feel 'not engaged' and more than 500 million are 'actively disengaged,' according to research in The Archetype Effect. Surely there is a better way to maximize time, talent, and energy. How AI can help build a more effective talent strategy We live in a time of rapid change, in which workers often seem less committed to their firms and firms less committed to their workers. Young people struggle to get started in their careers, not knowing where or how to begin. Older workers are among the more motivated, but many firms don't fully embrace them. Artificial intelligence, already reshaping so many jobs, could help to close this disconnect. A new generation of digital, AI-assisted HR management tools might be able to match people to jobs more effectively, improving our ability to design tailored career journeys instead of having everyone climb one monolithic ladder. As we feed models more data about who we are at work—skills, achievements, qualifications, prior roles, trainings, motivations—they in turn will feed us more insights into performance and potential career pathways. It's possible for gen AI to make HR more human, not less. A recent analysis by John Hazan and Susan Gunn suggests that a typical company can save, on average, up to 20% in HR labor time through AI automation and augmentation. Think how that 20% could be more productively redirected toward identifying and addressing different employee motivations for work. This could elevate HR's role in the organization, from transactional operator to strategic adviser. Many companies are already collecting quantitative and qualitative data about their teams and experimenting with greater personalization for workers. This can include flexible options for where and when work can be done; flexible benefits such as financial planning services, additional personal leave, and wellness programs; flexible career paths with more sophisticated learning and development programs; internal mobility options; and the opportunity to spend work time on projects outside one's job description, something that started at companies like Google but is beginning to be extended to blue-collar workers as well. My lunch with the summer interns sparked deeper engagement with our leadership team on ways to inspire the diverse people in our organization. Armed with quantitative data as well as insights from supplemental interviews and focus groups, we now better understand the different motivations of different workers and are tailoring action plans accordingly. We need a diverse set of skills and backgrounds, and it only stands to reason that everyone won't be looking for the same things. The key to motivating them, as The Archetype Effect eloquently argues, is to deaverage workers as we have consumers. The business case for an engaged—and inspired—workforce is clear. The question is whether leaders will act.
