We talk a lot about visionary leadership. You know, the ability to see around corners, spot emerging patterns, and imagine futures that don’t yet exist. These are all very important activities for strategic work. But something we rarely consider is what happens when the physical instrument of vision itself is under siege. Said more bluntly, what happens when our eyes succumb to the daily assault of screen time?
I recently spoke with Dr. Valerie Sheety-Pilon, SVP of clinical and medical affairs at VSP Vision Care, whose organization has spent three years tracking the state of vision health in the American workforce. The data she shared stopped me cold—and it reframed how I think about the infrastructure of creative, imaginative work. Here are three of my takeaways.
Insight #1: The Visual Crisis Is Accelerating Faster Than We Think
Three years ago, VSP’s Workplace Vision Health Report found that 50% of workers were experiencing at least one eye issue. I would definitely fall into that category—I have spare pairs of plus-one readers in every room in our house. But by last year, that number had climbed to 63%. Today it’s 66% and rising. That’s a 16-percentage-point jump in just three years, and it spans both desk workers and non-desk workers alike.
The culprit isn’t mysterious. We are now spending upward of 100 hours a week in front of screens: phones, tablets, monitors, and televisions. That sustained “visual load,” as Sheety-Pilon calls it, is generating screen-related visual discomfort at a rate our workplaces haven’t been designed to absorb. The downstream effects, according to VSP’s research, are reduced productivity, diminished ability to focus, and a declining quality of work output.
When I asked Sheety-Pilon whether visual fatigue might also affect higher-order thinking—the kind of imagination, problem-solving, and creative association that I call wonder —she didn’t hesitate. “There are studies that connect visual fatigue as a component of that imaginative deliverable of creativity,” she told me. “High visual load is impacting cognitive health as part of that.”
Insight #2: The Body Is a System, Not a Collection of Silos
This is the point where Sheety-Pilon’s perspective aligned deeply with my own perspective about what we need in our current Imagination Era. In my book Move. Think. Rest., I point out that our sentient intelligence constantly picks up cues and data through our bodies that inform and enrich our cognitive, rational decision-making. We are hardwired to use our whole selves, not just our prefrontal cortex.
Sheety-Pilon frames it as the “visual sensory capacity,” one critical component within a dynamic, interconnected sensory system. “If we improve our vision, and then our hearing, and then the other senses that all come together,” she explained, “we can get that perfect package where we can be the best we can be every day.”
In other words: The eye is not an isolated organ. It is a gateway to neural tissue, to sensory processing, and to the imagination itself. When we treat vision health as a stand-alone wellness checkbox rather than organizational infrastructure, we are, as she put it, failing to understand “the connection between ocular health, systemic conditions, and overall well-being.”
This resonates with what neuroscientist John Medina writes about in Brain Rules for Work, which argues that ideally we should be stepping away from the desk every 35 to 40 minutes, not as a perk, but as a neurological necessity for sustained high performance.
Insight #3: Vision-Forward Culture Is a Leadership Responsibility, Not an HR Benefit
When I pushed Sheety-Pilon beyond ergonomic tactics—beyond the blue-light glasses and screen-distance reminders—and asked what a genuinely vision-forward organizational culture might look like, her answer was pointed: “Allowing the time and space, encouraging the moments of breaks.” Organizations that prioritize health literacy within the employee network can significantly shape work culture.
She also introduced me to the 20-20-20 rule: For every 20 minutes of near-work screen time, take a 20-second break and look at something at least 20 feet away. It’s the ocular equivalent of what I call movement hygiene in the MTR framework: deliberately alternating between modes of engagement to preserve the capacity for both rigor and wonder. I’ve been giving this one a try and feel my eyes relax immediately!
The leaders and organizations that will thrive in the Imagination Era won’t just invest in cognitive tools or AI capabilities. They’ll protect and cultivate the full sensory capacity of their people. Because you cannot lead with vision (metaphorical or otherwise) if you’ve systematically depleted the organ that makes vision possible.
As Sheety-Pilon summarized near the end of our conversation, “You have better quality of work. You have the focus and the ability to deliver better work when you have a supportive employer that understands the importance of overall mental health and visual and physical well-being.”
The hidden cost of screen-era work isn’t burnout or disengagement, it’s the slow erosion of the very sensory capacity leaders need most. Visionary leadership starts with healthy vision. It’s time to build the organizational infrastructure to protect it.
I started working as a remote employee back in 2006, long before it was common. I talked to my colleagues during the day, sure, but they were all in an office with cubicles. I worked alone.
Later in my career, I was part of an executive team at a software company, making decisions about budget and strategy.
So when I started my own business in 2022, many aspects felt like a natural extension of the way I’d always worked.
Most advice about leaving corporate life focuses on the financial safety net: savings, pricing your services, and side hustles. But money isn’t the only reason people leave solopreneur life and go back to a nine-to-five. Some people are genuinely not wired for the day-to-day reality of working alone.
Before you make the leap, it’s worth being honest about whether the nonfinancial parts of solopreneurship are a fit for you.
You’ll be making every decision
In corporate jobs, decisions get distributed across teams, managers, and leadership. As a solopreneur, every call is yours.
You’ll face decisions daily, without the option for a second opinion. You don’t have a colleague to gut-check an idea or a manager to absorb some of the risk. It’s just you.
Some people thrive on this autonomy. Others find it paralyzing. Procrastination and indecisiveness become real problems when there’s no structure forcing you to make a call. In a corporate job, deadlines and approval chains keep things moving, whether you feel ready or not. When you’re solo, nothing moves unless you do.
What to ask yourself: Will I feel confident making decisions without a team to weigh in, and will I be able to move forward even when I’m unsure?
Loneliness is a real consideration
Solopreneurship can be isolating in a way that catches people off guard. I’ll have entire days go by without a single meeting. A survey from Founder Reports found 26% of solopreneurs feel lonely or isolated.
Some people manage this through communities, like Slack groups, virtual coworking, or networks. I’ll have an occasional “coffee chat” via Google Meet with solopreneurs I meet online, just to connect with others. But these require effort to maintain, and they’re not the same as having colleagues who share your day-to-day context.
What to ask yourself: Do I feel energized when working with other people, or do I do my best work alone?
You have to sit with uncertainty
Even experienced solopreneurs deal with income volatility, slow seasons, and the ongoing question of whether a particular business strategy will pay off. The difference between “keep going” and “go back to corporate” is tolerance.
In a corporate job, uncertainty is usually someone else’s problem. Your paycheck still clears. In solo work, you absorb the uncertainty directly. It’s hard to think clearly when you’re worried about your business.
Everyone’s tolerance for risk is different. Even with the most conservative decision-making, you won’t always get it right. And a lot of things are outside your control.
What to ask yourself: How would I feel if I didn’t have enough clients for a month . . . or two?
The financial question isn’t the only question
Solopreneurship is often framed as something anyone can do if they just plan well enough. While it’s true that planning can make a solo business more stable, planning can’t change your wiring.
Being honest about what solo work actually demands—emotionally and psychologically—is one of the most practical things you can do if you’re thinking about going solo.
The financial aspects matter, of course. But so do the questions of whether you’ll be okay on the days when the work is quiet, the decisions are yours alone, and the path forward isn’t obvious.
Below, Nir Eyal shares five key insights from his new book, Beyond Belief: The Science-Backed Way to Stop Limiting Yourself and Achieve Breakthrough Results.
Eyal is a best-selling author, former Stanford lecturer, and one of the world’s foremost e…
One of the biggest barriers people face to their productivity is an inability to focus. Most people are highly distracted and distractable, which makes it hard to sustain the level of attention required to complete complex tasks and to think through d…
Lowe’s Foundation is making a major investment in future skilled tradesworkers. On Tuesday, the home improvement retailer announced it would commit an additional $200 million to training 250,000 tradespeople by 2035 through its Gable Grants prog…
For all the advances in data science, artificial intelligence, and behavioral assessments, one hiring ritual remains stubbornly unchanged: the job interview, where candidates are still subjected to awkward brainteasers about golf balls in airplanes, forced to disclose their “biggest weaknesses” to amateur psychologists, asked whether they would keep working after winning the lottery, or made to present to silent panels who seem less interested in evidence of competence than in observing how gracefully applicants endure a mildly humiliating social experiment.
Despite decades of research showing that traditional interviews are only moderately reliable predictors of performance, organizations continue to rely on them heavily. In fact, the typical interview still resembles what it looked like decades ago: a loosely structured conversation in which hiring managers form impressions based on intuition, chemistry, and gut feeling.
From a scientific standpoint, this is not ideal. Unstructured interviews are vulnerable to a long list of well-documented biases. Interviewers may favor candidates who resemble themselves (“similarity bias”), appear confident or attractive (“halo effects”), or simply fit the cultural stereotype of what a successful employee looks like (“culture fit”). First impressions loom large, even when they are based on thin evidence. Charisma often outperforms competence.
And yet, interviews persist. Why? Because hiring managers, like most humans, remain convinced they can “spot talent” when they see it. In other words, the interview is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.
The end game
Fortunately for candidates, this irrationality does not mean human behavior is unpredictable. As behavioral economist Dan Ariely famously put it, people are “predictably irrational.” That predictability matters, and you can use it to your advantage. Even if interviews are imperfect, there is a growing body of research on how interviewers evaluate candidates and what signals tend to shape their judgments. Understanding those signals does not mean manipulating the system. It simply means avoiding the common mistakes that cause many candidates to underperform, or ensuring that you come across as well as you can.
One of the most overlooked opportunities occurs at the very end of the interview, when the interviewer – at times without a proper underlying plan or deliberate strategy – asks a deceivingly simple question: “Do you have any questions for us?” Many candidates treat this moment as a formality. Some (usually the unprepared ones) say “not really.” Others improvise a question on the spot, which rarely has a significant positive impact. Indeed, both approaches are somewhat risky and could result in decreasing candidates’ ratings even after an overall good performance.
Studies on interview dynamics suggest that most employers expect candidates to ask questions, and they interpret this behavior as a signal of preparation, motivation, and interest. When candidates decline to ask anything, interviewers often interpret it as a sign of disengagement or lack of curiosity or preparation. At the same time, asking the wrong question (or too many of them) will likely backfire. The difference between leaving a strong impression and undermining one often comes down to a few subtle signals.
Five rules
With that, here are five basic rules to inform your interview question strategy:
First rule: Avoid questions that make the conversation about you
A bad type of questions candidates often ask at the end of interviews are typically self-centered, focused on maximizing personal value at the expense of the organization or employer, and, above all, signal a total lack of social skills (lack of awareness of, or interested in acknowledging, the basic etiquette or rules of interaction governing any professional setting).
Examples (from most to least acceptable) may include:
“What is your working from home policy?”
“What would my vacation time be?”
“How soon could I be promoted?”
“What are the working hours like?”
“How quickly could I get a raise?”
“If I get bored after a few months, would the company help me find a more interesting role somewhere else?”
“Is it acceptable if I continue applying for other jobs while working here, just to keep my options open?”
“How flexible are you if I decide I’m not really a morning person?”
“Would it be a problem if I occasionally skipped meetings that seem unnecessary to me?”
“How soon before I could start delegating most of my work to other people?”
To be sure, these may be legitimate concerns. But raising them too early signals that your primary focus is personal gain rather than contribution. It is also a good illustration of a broader point I made in Don’t Be Yourself, authenticity is often overrated as a career strategy. Saying exactly what you think, when you think it, regardless of what others may think, may feel courageous and honest to you, but in professional settings it can simply reveal poor judgment and be a suicidal career move. Successful people don’t just express themselves; they also know when to edit themselves and how to say things to maximize positive effects and minimize negative effects, which requires quite a bit of strategy.
A more effective strategy is to instead ask questions that focus on the organization, the team, or the work itself. This signals interest in the role and demonstrates that you are thinking about the broader context.
Second rule: Demonstrate preparation
One of the easiest ways to impress an interviewer is to show that you have done your homework.
Instead of asking generic questions like …
“What does the company do?”
“What are your priorities?”
“How has the role evolved over the past few years”
“What would success look like in the first 12 months?”
… try referencing recent public information, which signals engagement. For example:
“I saw that the company recently expanded into the European market. How does this role contribute to that strategy?”
“I noticed the company has been investing heavily in AI and data capabilities. How is that changing the way this team operates day to day?”
“I saw your CEO recently emphasized sustainability as a strategic priority. How does that translate into concrete initiatives for this role or department?”
Or:
“I read about the recent partnership your firm announced. What challenges does that create for the team?”
Questions like these demonstrate that you are informed, engaged, and attentive.
Third rule: Use questions to signal the traits employers value
Smart candidates use the final questions not just to gather information but to highlight desirable traits indirectly. Consider the following examples.
To signal curiosity and learning orientation: “What are the most important things someone in this role needs to learn during the first six months?”
To signal teamwork and emotional intelligence: “Which teams or stakeholders does this role interact with most closely?”
To signal ambition and drive: “What does success look like in this role after the first year?”
To signal self-awareness and self-criticism: “What distinguishes people who really thrive here from those who struggle?”
To signal adaptability and resilience: “What challenges tend to surprise people when they first take on this role?”
Each of these questions subtly communicates something about the candidate asking it.
Fourth rule: Listen carefully to the answer
Asking the right question is only half the equation. What happens next matters just as much. Strong candidates treat the answer as an opportunity for dialogue rather than simply nodding politely. For example, if the interviewer describes the challenges of the role, you might respond:
“That’s interesting. Could you say a bit more about what has made that particularly difficult for the team so far?”
“That’s useful context. From what you’ve seen, what distinguishes the people who end up thriving in this role from those who struggle?”
“That’s helpful to know. In my previous role we faced something similar when we expanded our client base, and one thing that helped was…”
This approach allows you to reinforce your experience without sounding rehearsed. More importantly, it shows that you are paying attention and treating the occasion as an opportunity for smart dialogue and interaction, making the most of it. Similarly, if the interviewer describes a key success factor, you might respond:
“That’s interesting; building cross-team relationships was actually a big part of my last project.”
“That resonates with me; in my previous role we found that clear communication across functions made a huge difference in delivering results.”
“That’s helpful context; in my last position we faced a similar priority, and one of the things that worked well was…”
In short, the goal is not to prolong the interview unnecessarily, but rather to connect your experience to what the interviewer values, and showcase your ability to react, improvise, and share relevant experiences on the fly.
Fifth rule: Don’t overdo it
Candidates who ask no questions risk appearing uninterested. But candidates who ask too many questions risk appearing unfocused or overly demanding. A good rule of thumb is to ask one or two thoughtful questions.
Remember that interviewers are usually busy. Turning the last five minutes of the interview into a 15-minute interrogation is unlikely to win you many points. Curiosity is good; monopolizing the conversation is not, and could make you come across as a self-centered narcissist or someone with zero self-awareness if you fail to get the signals that is timed to shut up.
Equally important is the tone. Questions should feel prepared but not scripted. If they sound rehearsed, they may come across as performative. If they are entirely improvised, they may reveal a lack of preparation. The goal is to appear thoughtful, engaged, and authentic, which requires you to pay a great deal of attention to how interviewers evaluate you.
The worst possible response?
Of course, there is one response that consistently creates a poor impression:
“No, I think you’ve covered everything.”
This answer suggests either a lack of curiosity or a lack of preparation. Neither interpretation works in your favor.
The real purpose of the question?
In theory, the opportunity to ask questions at the end of an interview exists to help candidates evaluate whether the role suits them. In practice, it often functions as another evaluation moment.
Interviewers are not just listening to what you ask. They are asking themselves what your question reveals about you: your curiosity, your priorities, your preparation, and your interpersonal skills. In that sense, the final question is less about information gathering and more about signaling. The irony is that while the science of hiring has advanced enormously (from predictive analytics to AI-assisted assessments) the human interview remains stubbornly subjective.
But once you accept that reality, the strategy becomes clear. You cannot eliminate the biases embedded in interviews. But you can learn to navigate them. And sometimes, the difference between a forgettable interview and a memorable one comes down to something as simple as asking the right question at the very end.
The airport is chaos. Lines snake beyond the designated barriers and out the doors as frazzled travelers tug their luggage and scowl at their phones, their grimaced faces even more dramatic in the harsh lighting.
I stand in the security queue, sens…
Below, Leanne ten Brinke shares five key insights from her new book, Poisonous People: How to Resist Them and Improve Your Life.
Leanne is Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of British Columbia, where she directs the Truth and…
We’re in the midst of a child care crisis in America, but when fathers want to take on more childcare to equal their partners’ efforts, they are being stymied by their employers.
Max, who requested to go by a pseudonym, spent 15 years as a contract…
You know the expression, “If you want to get something done, ask a working mother?” Surprising as it may seem, the same holds true for cancer patients.Conventional wisdom holds that cancer patients are too sick and fragile to work, at least not to the…
