Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Lending Survey Results Reveal Recent and Dramatic Concern Due to Tariff Policy

Global consulting firm J.S. Held releases its proprietary “Lending Climate in America” survey results from Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held. The second quarter survey results highlight lenders’ views on important issues, including policy decisions along with their national and global impact. Each quarter, Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held, surveys lenders to identify important trends focused on the latest economic issues, business drivers, and credit trends in the current lending climate. The “Lending Climate in America” survey provides valuable information to lenders, attorneys, private equity sponsors, and the financial news media, exploring topics like: What factors do lenders see as most likely to impact the US economy in the next six months? Phoenix’s Q2 2025 “Lending Climate in America” survey asked lenders which factors could have the strongest potential to impact the economy in the upcoming six months. Sixty-seven percent of lenders are paying the most attention to the possibility of a U.S. recession, while 40% of lenders believe overall political uncertainty has the strongest potential to impact the economy. Lenders also expressed moderate concern regarding the possibility of constrained liquidity in capital markets. To see the full results of Phoenix’s “Lending Climate in America” Survey, please visit: https://www.phoenixmanagement.com/lending-survey/ What shifts do lenders observe in their customers’ hiring and capital improvement plans? Lenders revealed what actions their customers may take in the next six months. Over half of the surveyed lenders believe their customers will raise additional capital. Most telling was that lenders believe only 3% of their customers have plans to hire new employees (down from 56% in 1Q) and only 23% have plans for capital improvements (down from 67% in 1Q). Which industries are expected to see the most volatility over the next six months? For the first time in recent memory, the 3 industries that respondents identified as most likely to experience volatility in the next six months were different from the prior quarter - consumer products (60.0% versus 20.7%), retail trade (43.3% versus 31.0%), and manufacturing (33.3% versus 20.7%). How do lenders plan to adjust their loan structures? Additionally, Phoenix’s “Lending Climate in America” survey asked lenders if their respective institutions plan to tighten, maintain, or relax their loan structures for various sized loans. For larger loan structures (greater than $25M), the plan to maintain loan structures remained relatively constant from Q1 to Q2, decreasing by 8 percentage points. As loan sizes decrease, the percentage of lenders that plan to maintain (as opposed to increase) their loan structures increased – quite dramatically in the under $15M range. How has lender sentiment toward the US economy changed from Q1 to Q2? Lender optimism in the U.S. economy decreased for the near term, moving from 2.33 in Q1 2025 to 2.10 in Q2 2025. In this current quarter, there is heavy expectation of a C level performance (63%), with the remainder split between D and B levels. More telling, lender expectations for the U.S. economy’s performance in the longer term increased sharply from 2.11 to 2.53. Of the lenders surveyed, 57% believe the U.S. economy will perform at a B level during the next twelve months, a hefty increase from the prior quarter. The “Lending Climate in America” survey is administered quarterly to lenders from various commercial banks, finance companies, and factors across the country. Phoenix Management, a part of J.S. Held, collects, tabulates, and analyzes the results to create a complete evaluation of national attitudes and trends. To view the full results, click on the button below: To connect with Michael Jacoby or for any other media inquiries, please contact: Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com

FAU Data Analysis: Falling Rates Bring Some Relief to Banks

Falling interest rates brought some relief to banks’ portfolios for unrealized losses on investment securities, according to a data analysis from a finance professor at Florida Atlantic University. Only two banks with assets over $1 billion reported unbooked securities losses greater than their total equity in the first quarter of 2025, down from three in the last quarter of 2024, according to the U.S. Banks’ Unrealized Losses on Investment Securities screener. For unbooked losses equal to 50% of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (CET1) equity, 24 banks were on the list for the first quarter of this year, down from 34 in the fourth quarter of 2024. Rates dropped from the end of 2024 through the end of March, providing some relief to banks that had extensive interest rate risk in their investment securities portfolios. The yield on the 10-year treasury bond fell from 4.57 to 4.25 as of the end of March. “While this would appear to be good news for the U.S. banking industry, with unrealized securities losses declining by $69 billion from the end of 2024 to March, rates have climbed back to where they were at the end of 2024 so that losses today would be back up close to $500 billion,” said Rebel Cole, Ph.D., Lynn Eminent Scholar Chaired Professor of Finance in the College of Business. The aggregate unbooked securities losses on bank balance sheets declined by $69 billion from $483 billion at the end of the fourth quarter in 2024 to $414 billion at the end of the first quarter this year. The quarterly U.S. Banks’ Unrealized Losses on Investment Securities Screener, produced as part of The Banking Initiative in FAU’s College of Business, measures banks’ exposure to risk based on their unrealized losses in their investment securities portfolios. To calculate a bank’s risk, Cole uses the most recently available data from quarterly call reports published by the U.S. Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council. Of the 4,543 banks reporting in the first quarter for this year, Cole focused on 1,042 banks with more than $1 billion in assets to calculate unrealized losses on investment securities and compare those losses to a bank’s CET1. Regulators would force a bank that lost half of its CET1 capital to take remedial actions, such as raising new capital or seeking a merger partner; in the worst case, a bank may face closure by the FDIC. “It’s likely that unbooked losses will continue to grow as interest rates continue to move higher” Cole said. “Both the 50-day and 200-day moving average rate on the 10-Year Treasury bond are rising so losses are growing, not shrinking. And this is only one part of banks’ balance sheets that are suffering from rising rates. There also are massive unrealized losses on banks’ residential and commercial mortgage portfolios that total to another $500 billion.” Looking to know more? We can help. Rebel Cole is available to speak with media about banking and the impact on interest rates. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

J.S. Held Announces the First Global Consulting Company Chief Intellectual Property Officer

Global consulting firm J.S. Held proudly announces the appointment of intellectual property (IP) expert James E. Malackowski as the first Chief Intellectual Property Officer (CIPO) of a global consulting company. J.S. Held Chief Executive Officer Lee Spirer observes, “In today's knowledge-based economy, the role of CIPO serves an important strategic and operational role both internally and in support of clients.” Protecting J.S. Held Intellectual Property and Other Intangible Assets J.S. Held experts have developed methodologies, frameworks, proprietary tools, and research that support client work. The CIPO partners across the business to ensure that these intangible assets are identified, protected, and leveraged to benefit the business. “Having dedicated IP leadership will help the company move faster in developing and deploying new methodologies, while ensuring reasonable measures of protecting our innovations,” noted James E. Malackowski. Managing J.S. Held Intellectual Property and Other Intangible Assets J.S. Held maintains a robust portfolio of patents including a “System and Method for Financing an Insurance Transaction”, trademarks, data, trade secrets, and other proprietary technologies that support client work. “As CIPO, I intend to partner with company leadership and our professional experts across the globe to manage and monetize the many patent, trademark, data, and other proprietary assets that set J.S. Held apart among our competitors, benefitting clients and our investors,” added James E. Malackowski. Industry’s Most Comprehensive Global Intellectual Property Consulting Group Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held, is rooted in an expansive understanding of intellectual property (IP) value and risk, providing a foundation of Expertise for the Innovation Economy™. Built upon more than three decades of experience assessing IP in the most rigorous of venues - state, federal, and international courts, Ocean Tomo clients benefit from continuous feedback between litigation economic damage outcomes, transaction pricing, capital market valuations, debt financing terms, equity assessments, and deep technical insight. The team possesses the most comprehensive and market-tested understanding of IP value. Financial, market, and technical experts uniquely understand the contributory value of patented inventions, know-how, brands, and copyrights that permeate every business, viewing IP not simply as an isolated asset, but as an integral component of enterprise value. Multidimensional Intellectual Property-Informed Experts Benefit J.S. Held Clients Intellectual property expertise permeates the global organization. Beyond the expertise within J.S. Held’s dedicated IP practice Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held, multidisciplinary experts across J.S. Held combine intellectual property expertise to core specializations, including: • Artificial Intelligence (AI) • Business Intelligence • Construction Advisory • Enterprise Risk Management • Fraud Investigations • Forensic Accounting • Insurance Claims Consulting • Restructuring, Turnaround, Receivership, and Bankruptcy Tangible and Intangible Asset Value Understanding The depth and breadth of J.S. Held’s work in the property and casualty insurance market and Ocean Tomo’s work across all forms of intellectual property and other intangible assets uniquely combine to create a strong foundation in risk assessment, data analysis, global awareness, regulatory compliance, technological adaptability, and risk mitigation. Collectively, these skills better equip J.S. Held experts to assess business risk across diverse geographies, geopolitical landscapes, regulatory frameworks, and technological advancements for the benefit of our clients. Learn more about the new J.S. Held Chief Intellectual Property Officer, James E. Malackowski: Looking to know more or connect with James E. Malackowski? Simply click on the expert's icon now to arrange an interview today. For any other media inquiries - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com

Supply Chain Report: Logistics Leaders Predict Tight Capacity, High Prices Through Mid-2026

The Logistics Managers’ Index rose for the second consecutive month due to rising costs as the economy remains uncertain, according to researchers at Florida Atlantic University and four other schools. May’s index read in at 59.4, up slightly from April’s reading of 58.8. The reading is up 3.8 from the year prior. A score above 50 indicates that the logistics industry is expanding, while a score below 50 indicates that the industry is shrinking. Costs, particularly inventory costs, led to this month’s expansion. Inventory costs rose to 78.4, the highest level since October 2022, while inventory levels were only 51.5. The gap between the two suggests that many inventories are sitting stagnant. “The persistent uncertainty with respect to tariffs seems to be causing upward pressure on inventory costs, likely because of stockpiling effects,” said Steven Carnovale, Ph.D., associate professor of supply chain management in the College of Business. “The previous pause on tariffs opened up an opportunity to stockpile, which is also likely reflected in the rise in warehousing utilization and costs, as well as the rise in upstream warehouse utilization.” The LMI, a survey of director-level and above supply chain executives, measures the expansion or contraction of the logistics industry using eight unique components: inventory levels, inventory costs, warehousing capacity, warehousing utilization, warehousing prices, transportation capacity, transportation utilization and transportation prices. Along with FAU, researchers at Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rutgers University and the University of Nevada at Reno calculated the LMI using a diffusion index. Warehousing readings also point to further uncertainty among firms on the direction of the U.S. economy and tariff policy. Warehousing capacity was flat at 50, while warehousing costs and warehousing utilization read at 72.1 and 62.5, respectively. The readings suggest that inventories are sitting longer amid slower consumer demand and firms have been holding goods in anticipation of future tariff changes. “At a certain point, the see-saw effect of increased/decreased tariffs is likely going to lead to firms stockpiling when tariffs come down, and likely be forced to sit on excess inventory,” Carnovale said. “In this case, the decision will be: are the holding costs of excess inventory less than the (potential) future tariffs? And to what degree will these increased prices pass through to consumers?” Overall, respondents expect inventory levels to increase in the year ahead, with capacity growing tighter and costs expanding, highlighting the overall sentiment that trade issues and uncertainty will be wrapped up by the end of the year. Looking to know more - we can help. Steven is a supply chain strategist specializing in interfirm networks, risk management and global sourcing/production networks. He is available to speak with media. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today

Video Insights: What Boards of Directors Need to Know About Tariffs

Boards of directors globally are confronting unknown circumstances as a result of the current quickly shifting tariff and trade environment. Business risks and opportunities are magnified during such times, compelling boards to seek the right strategies in order to meet these challenges. In this video, Brian Gleason, John Peiserich, James E. Malackowski, and Mariano de Alba – experts in business turnaround, supply chain, intellectual property, and political risk – outline emerging considerations for boards of directors in light of changing tariff policies, including: • Tracking the financial impact of tariffs and effects on company supply chains • Understanding changes to regulatory requirements and whether internal policies need to be modified • Planning for short- and long-term effects on intellectual property • Adjusting communications between the board and senior management To view more of our Tariffs and Trade Series expert analysis and commentary, visit: Looking to know more or connect with John Peiserich and James E. Malackowski? Simply click on either expert's icon now to arrange an interview today. If you are looking to connect with Brian Gleason or Mariano de Alba - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com

Why Your Experts Might Not Show Up in Google AI Overviews — And How to Fix It

The way we find expert information online is changing fast. With the rise of Google’s AI-generated overviews (formerly called Search Generative Experience), the top spot on the search page no longer goes to the highest-ranking blue link. Instead, AI now summarizes answers using a blend of machine learning, structured data, and trust signals—pulling directly from a variety of select sources across the web. If institutions—whether academic, healthcare, corporate or others—aren't aligning its expert content with these new rules of discovery, your experts may be left out of the conversation altogether.  Don't miss being featured in media stories, invited to speak at events, or approached for business and collaboration opportunities. This is the moment to double down on structured data and transparent authorship—because AI-first search is rewarding expert clarity, not just content volume. The following provides a quick breakdown as to how AI Search, Google’s EEAT principles, and Schema.org structured data work together—and what you can do to ensure your expert content...and your experts, gets surfaced, cited, and trusted. What Is EEAT and Why It Matters in AI Search EEAT stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness—the core framework Google uses to evaluate whether content is reliable and deserves to rank, especially in high-stakes areas like health, education, and finance. In AI-powered summaries, Google doesn’t just look at keywords—it looks for: Real people with demonstrable credentials Clear affiliations with reputable institutions Consistent authorship and transparency Trust signals like citations, bios, and professional history EEAT in Action: Why Schema Markup Is Your AI SEO Power Tool EEAT signals work best when they’re machine-readable—that’s where Schema.org structured data comes in. It acts as a translator between your content and Google’s AI.  Schema tags are pieces of structured data that help search engines understand the content and context of your web pages. They translate human-readable information—like author names, job titles, and article types—into machine-readable signals that boost visibility AI overviews and search results. Implementing Schema helps ensure your expert content is eligible for inclusion in AI overviews. Key schema types include: {Person} – for expert bios {ScholarlyArticle}, {Article}, {FAQ} – for authored content {Organization}, {MedicalOrganization}, {EducationalOrganization} – to establish credibility {sameAs} – to reinforce expertise by connecting external profiles (LinkedIn, ORCID, Google Scholar) Schema in Action: AI Overviews Favor Structured, Credible Expert Content Google’s AI overviews are designed to synthesize trustworthy sources—not just surface-level blog posts or SEO-churned pages. That means expert content that is: Authored by named individuals with clear credentials Structured for readability and machine parsing Linked to institutional authority and trust domains If your experts don’t meet these criteria—or if Google’s crawlers can’t understand the relationships between person, organization, and content—your insights may never reach the surface of the AI summary box. How ExpertFile Optimizes for AI-Driven Search AI search is no longer just about keywords—it’s about credibility, structure, and clarity. Institutions that invest in properly structured expert content will not only rank better—they’ll become the source quoted in the next generation of search. ExpertFile is purpose-built to maximize visibility and trust in this new era of AI search. Here’s how: Structured Expert Profiles: Every expert has a dedicated page with rich Person schema, bios, credentials, affiliations, and publication history. Schema-Tagged Content: Articles, media spotlights, and FAQs are marked up using Schema.org types like ScholarlyArticle, FAQPage, and Article. Institutional Credibility: Profiles are embedded within .edu, .org, or corporate domains—reinforcing trust with Google’s algorithms. Cross-Linked Authority: Integration with Google Scholar, LinkedIn, and ORCID ensures a 360° trust profile across the web. Mobile-Ready & Indexed: ExpertFile content is fully indexable and distributed across web and mobile platforms—supporting discoverability everywhere AI pulls from. With ExpertFile, your experts are not just listed—they’re positioned, structured, and ready for the AI spotlight. Learn more about how ExpertFile helps organization's benefit in the new era of AI.

Video Insights: What Investors Need to Know About Shifting Tariffs

Unprecedented uncertainty brought on by quickly evolving tariff policies is creating challenges and additional considerations for investors and other capital providers. In this video, J.S. Held experts Brian Gleason, John Peiserich, James E. Malackowski, and Tom Burns – experts in turnaround, supply chain, intellectual property, and political risk – pose twelve questions to private equity sponsors and their portfolio companies to explore amid the continued tariff uncertainty. Restructuring and operations expert Brian Gleason has managed or participated in more than 300 turnaround engagements over the past 29 years and applies the principles utilized in J.S. Held's work advising companies in crisis. In the video, Brian addresses three essential questions that investors should consider with their portfolio companies during this period of unprecedented tariff-policy-induced uncertainty: 1) How have tariffs impacted business forecasting and investor confidence? 2) What are the key actions portfolio company management teams should take during tariff-induced uncertainty? 3) What leadership strategies are recommended for navigating the economic stress caused or complicated by tariffs? Business intelligence expert Tom Burns has extensive experience leading intelligence collection assignments for financial institutions, law firms, and blue-chip multinationals around the world. Tom explores the additional pre-acquisition diligence essential amid tariff uncertainty in the video. He addresses three questions, including: 4) How have tariffs changed the due diligence process in acquisitions? 5) What is transshipment, and why is it a concern for investors and their portfolio companies? 6) What steps should investors take to manage tariff-related risks in acquisitions? Capital projects, environmental risk, and compliance expert John Peiserich has over 30 years of experience advising heavy industry and law firms throughout the country with a focus on Oil & Gas, Energy, and Public Utilities. In the video, John reflects upon: 7) Why is it important for investors to assess the owner-operator's understanding of supply chain risks? 8) How have tariffs introduced new challenges for large-scale projects? 9) What is the potential impact of supply chain and tariff-related delays on investment outcomes? James E. Malackowski has a unique perspective on intellectual property litigation risk, strategic management, and monetization, which benefits from his prior work at a leading private equity firm. In the video, he advises investors and their portfolio companies to consider: 10) How do tariffs influence decisions around manufacturing relocation and intellectual property? 11) What IP-related risks should companies consider when relocating manufacturing operations? 12) What steps should investors take to ensure IP is properly managed in response to tariffs? The J.S. Held Tariffs and Trade Series is a collection of intelligence, insights, and action plans that inform strategic business decision-making and foster resilience in an increasingly volatile global market. To view more of our Tariffs and Trade Series expert analysis and commentary, visit: Looking to know more or connect with John Peiserich and James E. Malackowski? Simply click on either expert's icon now to arrange an interview today. If you are looking to connect with Brian Gleason or Tom Burns - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com

Google's New AI Overviews Isn’t Just Another Search Update

Google's recent rollout of AI Overviews (previously called “Search Generative Experience”) at its annual developer conference is being hailed as the biggest transformation in search since the company was founded. This isn’t a side project for Google — it fundamentally alters how content gets discovered, consumed, and valued online. If you're in marketing, PR, content strategy, or run a business that depends on online visibility, this requires a fundamental shift in your thinking. What Is AI Overviews? Instead of showing users a familiar list of blue links and snippets, Google now uses artificial intelligence to generate a summary answer at the very top of many search results pages. This AI-generated box pulls together content from across the web and tries to answer the user’s question instantly—without requiring them to click through to individual websites. Here’s what that looks like: You type in a question like “What are the best strategies for handling a media crisis?” Instead of just links, you see a big AI-generated paragraph with summarized strategies, possibly quoting or linking to 3-5 sources—some of which might not even be visible unless you scroll or expand the summary.  Welcome to the new digital gatekeeper. Elizabeth Reid, VP of Search at Google states "Our new Gemini model customized for Google Search brings together Gemini’s advanced capabilities — including multi-step reasoning, planning and multimodality — with our best-in-class Search systems. Let's breakdown this technobabble. Think of Gemini as the brain behind Google’s search engine that’s now: Even More Focused on User intent For years, SEO strategies were built around guessing and gaming the right keywords: “What exact phrase are people typing into Google?” That approach led to over-optimized content — pages stuffed with phrases like “best expert speaker Boston cleantech” — written more for algorithms than actual humans.  But with Google Gemini and other AI models now interpreting search queries like a smart research assistant, the game has changed entirely.  Google is no longer just matching phrases — it’s interpreting what the user wants to do and why they’re asking. Here’s What That Looks Like: Let’s say someone searches: “How do I find a reputable expert on fusion energy who can speak at our cleantech summit?” In the old system, pages that mentioned “renewable energy,” “expert,” and “speaker” might rank — regardless of whether they actually helped the user solve their problem. Now Google more intuitively understands: • The user wants to evaluate credibility • The user is planning an event • The user needs someone available to speak • The context is likely professional or academic If your page simply has the right keywords but doesn’t send the right signals — you’re invisible. Able to plan ahead Google and AI search platforms now go beyond just grabbing facts. They string together pieces of information to answer more complex, multi-step queries.  In traditional search, users ask one simple question at a time. But with multi-step queries, users are increasingly expecting one search to handle a series of related questions or tasks all at once — and now Google can actually follow along and reason through those steps.  So imagine you’re planning a conference. A traditional search might look like: "Best conference venues in Boston” But a multi-step query might be: “Find a conference venue in Boston with breakout rooms, check availability in October, and suggest nearby hotels with group rates.” This used to require three or four different searches, and you’d piece it together yourself. Now Google can handle that entire chain of related tasks, plan the steps behind the scenes, and return a highly curated answer — often pulling from multiple sources of structured and unstructured data. Even Better at understanding context Google now gets the difference between ‘a speaker at a conference’ and ‘a Bluetooth speaker’ — because it understands what you mean, not just what you type.”  In the past, Google would match keywords literally. If your page had the word “speaker,” it might rank for anything from event keynotes to audio gear. That’s why so many search results felt off or required extra digging. Now Google reads between the lines. It understands that “conference speaker” likely refers to a person who gives talks, possibly with credentials, experience, and a bio.  And that “Bluetooth speaker” is a product someone might want to compare or buy. Why this matters for marketers: If you’re relying on vague or generic content — or just “keyword-stuffing” — your pages will fall flat. Google is no longer fooled by superficial matches. It wants depth, clarity, and specificity. Reads More Than Just Text Google now processes images, videos, charts, infographics, and even audio — and uses that multimedia information to answer search queries more completely.  This now means that your content isn’t just being read like a document — it’s being watched, listened to, and interpreted like a human would. For example: • A chart showing rising enrollment in nursing programs might get picked up as supporting evidence for a story about healthcare education trends. • A YouTube video of your CEO speaking at a conference might be indexed as proof of thought leadership. • An infographic explaining how your service works could surface in an AI-generated summary — even if the keyword isn’t mentioned directly in text. Ignoring multimedia formats?  Then, your competitors’ visual storytelling could be outperforming your plain content.  Because you're not giving Google the kind of layered, helpful content that Gemini is now designed to highlight. Why This Matters There's a big risk here.  Marketers who ignore these developments are in danger of becoming invisible in search. Your old SEO tricks won’t work. Your content won’t appear in AI summaries. Your organization won’t be discovered by journalists, customers, or partners who now rely on smarter search results to make decisions faster. If you’re in communications, PR, media relations, or digital marketing, here’s the key message. You are no longer just fighting for links. You need to fight to be included in the Google AI summary itself at the top of search results - that's the new #1 goal.  Why? Journalists can now find their answers before ever clicking on your beautifully written news page. Prospective students, donors, and customers will often just see the AI’s version of your content. Your brand’s visibility now hinges on being seen as “AI-quotable.” If your organization isn’t optimized for this new AI-driven landscape, you risk becoming invisible at the very moment people are searching for what you offer. How You Can Take Action (and Why Your Role Is More Important Than Ever) This isn’t just an IT or SEO problem. It’s a communications strategy opportunity—and you are central to the solution. What You Can Do Now to Prepare for AI Overviews 1. Get Familiar with How AI “Reads” Your Content AI Overviews pull content from websites that are structured clearly, written credibly, and explain things in simple language. Action Items: Review your existing content: Is it jargon-heavy? Outdated? Lacking expert quotes or explanations? Then, it's time to clean house. 2. Collaborate with your SEO and Web Teams Communicators and content creators now need to work hand-in-hand with technical teams. Action Items: Check your pages to see if you are using proper schema markup.  Are you creating topic pages that explain complex ideas in simple, scannable formats? 3. Showcase Human Expertise AI values content backed by real people—especially experts with credentials. Action Items: Make sure your expert profiles are up to date.  Make sure you continue to enhance them with posts, links to media coverage, short videos, images and infographics that highlight the voices behind your brand and make you stand out in search. 4. Don’t Just Publish—Package AI favors content that it can easily digest and display such as summary paragraphs, FAQs, and bold headers that provide structure for search engines.  This also makes your content more scannable and engaging to humans. Action Items: Repurpose your best content into AI-friendly formats: think structured lists, how-tos, and definitions. 5. Monitor Your Presence in AI Overviews Regularly search key topics related to your organization and see what shows up. Action Items: Is your content featured? If not, whose is—and identify what they doing differently. A New Role for Communications: From Media Pitches to Machine-Readable Influence This isn’t the end of communications as we know it—it’s an evolution. Your role now includes helping your organization communicate clearly to machines as well as to people. Think of it as “PR for the algorithm.”  You’re not just managing narratives for the public—you’re shaping what AI systems say about you and your brand. That means: • Ensuring your best ideas and experts are front and center online. • Making complex information simple and quotable. • Collaborating cross-functionally like never before. Final Thought: AI Search Rewards the Prepared Google’s new AI Overviews are here. They’re not a beta test. This is the future of search, and it’s already rolling out. If your institution, company, or nonprofit wants to be discovered, trusted, and quoted, you can no longer afford to ignore how AI interprets your online presence. Communications and media professionals are now at the front lines of discoverability. And the best way to lead is to act now, work collaboratively, and elevate your role in this new era of search. Want to see how leading organizations are getting ahead in the age of AI search? Discover how ExpertFile is helping corporations, universities, healthcare institutions and industry associations transform their knowledge into AI-optimized assets — boosting visibility, credibility, and media reach. Get your free download of our app at www.expertfile.com

Vishesh Agarwal, M.D., Appointed Chief of Addiction Medicine Services

Vishesh Agarwal, M.D., has been appointed chief of Addiction Medicine Services at ChristianaCare. In this role, Agarwal will lead and expand ChristianaCare’s comprehensive addiction treatment services, guiding care for people with substance use disorders across inpatient, outpatient, emergency and consultation settings. He will oversee addiction programs across all campuses, help create consistent care guidelines and support teams of experts working together to provide safe, effective and compassionate care for patients. A key priority for Agarwal will be to explore strategic growth opportunities to broaden ChristianaCare’s reach and strengthen its impact on individuals and families affected by substance use disorders. His leadership will be instrumental in ensuring that ChristianaCare continues to set the standard for innovation and excellence. Agarwal will continue in his role as vice chair of the Department of Psychiatry at ChristianaCare, maintaining his leadership of clinical and operational initiatives in the Behavioral Health Service Line. He will continue to lead efforts to improve provider well-being, develop care pathways and foster clinical growth. He also oversees the Behavioral Health Unit, Emergency Department crisis services and psychiatric consultations for hospitalized patients. Agarwal is board certified in general adult psychiatry, addiction psychiatry and obesity medicine. He has published research on substance use and behavioral addictions in peer-reviewed journals and has presented at national conferences. His 2021 study linking gambling disorder, major depression and suicide risk was published in Addictive Behaviors and gained national attention. Agarwal holds an Executive MBA from Quantic School of Business and Technology and completed an addiction psychiatry fellowship at the Zucker Hillside Hospital. He completed his psychiatry residency and served as administrative chief resident at Einstein Medical Center. He earned his medical degree from Gauhati Medical College. Agarwal teaches and mentors psychiatry residents and medical students as a clinical assistant professor at Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University. He also co-chairs system committees and serves on the board of the Mental Health Association in Delaware. He reports to Mustafa Mufti, M.D., chair of the Department of Psychiatry.

Why Simultaneous Voting Makes for Good Decisions

How can organizations make robust decisions when time is short, and the stakes are high? It’s a conundrum not unfamiliar to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Back in 2021, the FDA found itself under tremendous pressure to decide on the approval of the experimental drug aducanumab, designed to slow the progress of Alzheimer’s disease—a debilitating and incurable condition that ranks among the top 10 causes of death in the United States. Welcomed by the market as a game-changer on its release, aducanumab quickly ran into serious problems. A lack of data on clinical efficacy along with a slew of dangerous side effects meant physicians in their droves were unwilling to prescribe it. Within months of its approval, three FDA advisors resigned in protest, one calling aducanumab, “the worst approval decision that the FDA has made that I can remember.” By the start of 2024, the drug had been pulled by its manufacturers. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight and data from the public’s use of aducanumab, it is easy for us to tell that FDA made the wrong decision then. But is there a better process that would have given FDA the foresight to make the right decision, under limited information? The FDA routinely has to evaluate novel drugs and treatments; medical and pharmaceutical products that can impact the wellbeing of millions of Americans. With stakes this high, the FDA is known to tread carefully: assembling different advisory, review, and funding committees providing diverse knowledge and expertise to assess the evidence and decide whether to approve a new drug, or not. As a federal agency, the FDA is also required to maintain scrupulous records that cover its decisions, and how those decisions are made. The Impact of Voting Mechanisms on Decision Quality Some of this data has been analyzed by Goizueta’s Tian Heong Chan, associate professor of information systems and operation management. Together with Panos Markou of the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, Chan scrutinized 17 years’ worth of information, including detailed transcripts from more than 500 FDA advisory committee meetings, to understand the mechanisms and protocols used in FDA decision-making: whether committee members vote to approve products sequentially, with everyone in the room having a say one after another; or if voting happens simultaneously via the push of a button, say, or a show of hands. Chan and Markou also looked at the impact of sequential versus simultaneous voting to see if there were differences in the quality of the decisions each mechanism produced. Their findings are singular. It turns out that when stakeholders vote simultaneously, they make better decisions. Drugs or products approved this way are far less likely to be issued post-market boxed warnings (warnings issued by FDA that call attention to potentially serious health risks associated with the product, that must be displayed on the prescription box itself), and more than two times less likely to be recalled. The FDA changed its voting protocols in 2007, when they switched from sequentially voting around the room, one person after another, to simultaneous voting procedures. And the results are stunning. Tian Heong Chan, Associate Professor of Information Systems & Operation Management “Decisions made by simultaneous voting are more than twice as effective,” says Chan. “After 2007, you see that just 3.4% of all drugs and products approved this way end up being discontinued or recalled. This compares with an 8.6% failure rate for drugs approved by the FDA using more sequential processes—the round robin where individuals had been voting one by one around the room.” Imagine you are told beforehand that you are going to vote on something important by simply raising your hand or pressing a button. In this scenario, you are probably going to want to expend more time and effort in debating all the issues and informing yourself before you decide. Tian Heong Chan “On the other hand, if you know the vote will go around the room, and you will have a chance to hear how others’ speak and explain their decisions, you’re going to be less motivated to exchange and defend your point of view beforehand,” says Chan. In other words, simultaneous decision-making is two times less likely to generate a wrong decision as the sequential approach. Why is this? Chan and Markou believe that these voting mechanisms impact the quality of discussion and debate that undergird decision-making; that the quality of decisions is significantly impacted by how those decisions are made. Quality Discussion Leads to Quality Decisions Parsing the FDA transcripts for content, language, and tonality in both settings, Chan and Markou find evidence to support this. Simultaneous voting or decision-making drives discussions that are characterized by language that is more positive, more authentic, and more even in terms of expressions of authority and hierarchy, says Chan. What’s more, these deliberations and exchanges are deeper and more far-ranging in quality. We find marked differences in the tone of speech and the topics discussed when stakeholders know they will be voting simultaneously. There is less hierarchy in these exchanges, and individuals exhibit greater confidence in sharing their points of view more freely. Tian Heong Chan “We also see more questions being asked, and a broader range of topics and ideas discussed,” says Chan. In this context, decision-makers are also less likely to reach unanimous agreement. Instead, debate is more vigorous and differences of opinion remain more robust. Conversely, sequential voting around the room is typically preceded by shorter discussion in which stakeholders share fewer opinions and ask fewer questions. And this demonstrably impacts the quality of the decisions made, says Chan. Sharing a different perspective to a group requires effort and courage. With sequential voting or decision-making, there seems to be less interest in surfacing diverse perspectives or hidden aspects to complex problems. Tian Heong Chan “So it’s not that individuals are being influenced by what other people say when it comes to voting on the issue—which would be tempting to infer—rather, it’s that sequential voting mechanisms seem to take a bit more effort out of the process.” When decision-makers are told that they will have a chance to vote and to explain their vote, one after another, their incentives to make a prior effort to interrogate each other vigorously, and to work that little bit harder to surface any shortcomings in their own understanding or point of view, or in the data, are relatively weaker, say Chan and Markou. The Takeaway for Organizations Making High-Stakes Decisions Decision-making in different contexts has long been the subject of scholarly scrutiny. Chan and Markou’s research sheds new light on the important role that different mechanisms have in shaping the outcomes of decision-making—and the quality of the decisions that are jointly taken. And this should be on the radar of organizations and institutions charged with making choices that impact swathes of the community, they say. “The FDA has a solid tradition of inviting diversity into its decision-making. But the data shows that harnessing the benefits of diversity is contingent on using the right mechanisms to surface the different expertise you need to be able to see all the dimensions of the issue, and make better informed decisions about it,” says Chan. A good place to start? By a concurrent show of hands. Tian Heong Chan is an associate professor of information systems and operation management. he is available to speak about this topic - click on his con now to arrange an interview today.