Duke Fuqua Insights

"Does Thinking About Legacy Make Work Feel More Meaningful?" w/ Prof Kimberly Wade-Benzoni

Professor Kimberly Wade-Benzoni explains how reflecting on long-term impact shapes motivation, behavior, and decision-making Many people ask themselves, “does my work actually matter?” Concerns about engagement, burnout, and job satisfaction are common, and they relate to a basic need to feel that work has an impact not only today, but also in the future.  In this episode of Fuqua Insights Podcast, Professor Kimberly Wade-Benzoni [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/faculty/kimberly-wade-benzoni] of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/] discusses her research on the psychology of legacy. She defines legacy as “an enduring impact attached to one’s identity that persists after one has left the context in which the lasting effect was created.” Her research examines how thinking about legacy influences decisions, especially those involving tradeoffs between present and future outcomes.  One of the main findings of Wade-Benzoni’s research is that when people reflect on the legacy they want to leave, their work feels more meaningful. They are also more satisfied in their jobs and more likely to help others. These results come from studies showing that activating legacy motivation can produce positive outcomes in workplace settings.  Legacy reflection changes how people think about their work. As Wade-Benzoni explains, “it’s a way that our actions can have impact that outlasts our individual lives.” This process allows people to think about how part of their identity can continue through others, which helps create meaning and shifts attention from immediate tasks to longer-term goals.  The research also identifies practical applications. A structured reflection exercise—for example, asking individuals to write about how they want to be remembered and the impact they want to have—can activate legacy thinking. This approach can be used in leadership development, career planning, and other organizational contexts. It also encourages people to behave in a more future-oriented and other-oriented way, helping counter short-term, self-focused decision-making, and supporting more meaningful and lasting impact. Duke Fuqua Insights features digestible conversations with our faculty about the most impactful research from their careers, including studies they teach in Fuqua classes. New episodes every other week in season. For more from Duke Fuqua, visit us on LinkedIn [https://www.linkedin.com/school/fuqua-school-of-business/posts/], Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/dukefuqua/], Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/Duke.Fuqua], Bluesky [https://bsky.app/profile/fuqua.duke.edu], and the Duke Fuqua Insights [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights#campaign_form]newsletter.

Special Episode: "Is AI Replacing—or Reshaping—Jobs?" w/ Prof John Graham

Professor John Graham explores how AI is affecting productivity, hiring, and firm strategy based on new CFO survey data Artificial intelligence is everywhere—from automating routine tasks to generating insights in seconds. Yet despite the hype and anxiety, especially around job loss, the real impact of AI on companies may be more nuanced than headlines suggest. In this episode of Duke Fuqua Insights, Professor John Graham [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/faculty/john-graham] of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu] draws on data from The CFO Survey [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights/CFO-Outlook-Holds-Up-Despite-continued-tariff-concerns-uncertainty], which included responses from nearly 750 financial executives across industries. The survey, conducted in late 2025, asked how firms are currently using AI and what they expect in 2026. By focusing on CFOs—"leaders who know what the spending is on AI,” Graham said—the research offers a grounded perspective on how AI is affecting productivity, workforce composition, and investment decisions.  The central finding: AI is expected to boost productivity without causing widespread job losses—at least in the near term. CFOs forecast productivity gains of up to 3% in 2026, “a significant increase,” Graham said, while overall employment remains largely stable. Instead of mass layoffs, firms anticipate modest declines in routine clerical roles, partially offset by hiring in technical positions. Interestingly, the AI-driven productivity gains aren’t fully reflected in increased revenue forecasts. Graham points to a modern “productivity paradox.” As he explains, “we’re hearing more about productivity than we’re seeing it in the revenue numbers,” suggesting a lag between implementation and financial results. Companies may improve output per worker first, but it takes time for those gains to translate into sales due to production cycles and human-driven sales processes. For business leaders and MBA students, the implications are that AI’s value today lies less in cost-cutting and more in enhancing quality, innovation, and customer satisfaction. To students, Graham suggests focusing on core strengths: “Do what you do really well, and improve it through AI.” Technical skills are increasingly valuable, but equally important are critical thinking, communication, and the ability to interpret AI-generated outputs. In a world where “anybody can produce numbers,” the real advantage lies in understanding and explaining them.   Duke Fuqua Insights features digestible conversations with our faculty about the most impactful research from their careers, including studies they teach in Fuqua classes. New episodes every other week in season. For more from Duke Fuqua, visit us on LinkedIn [https://www.linkedin.com/school/fuqua-school-of-business/posts/], Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/dukefuqua/], Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/Duke.Fuqua], Bluesky [https://bsky.app/profile/fuqua.duke.edu], and the Duke Fuqua Insights [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights#campaign_form]newsletter.

"Are You Building Your To-Do List Backwards?" w/ Prof Jordan Etkin

Professor Jordan Etkin explains how “time-first budgeting” can help people improve performance and set smarter goals It’s a familiar pattern: You begin your morning with a lengthy to-do list and a plan to complete it, and somehow the day ends with unfinished tasks and a sense that time slipped away. Is there a better way? Professor Jordan Etkin, a consumer behavior scholar at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business, explores why people consistently misjudge how much they can accomplish. Drawing on her research on motivation and performance, she proposes a simple shift: “time-first budgeting.” Instead of starting with goals and assuming the time will follow, she suggests beginning with a realistic assessment of how much time you have, then allocating it across tasks.  Etkin finds that people routinely overestimate how much they can do because they ignore real time constraints. In experiments, participants’ estimates of how long tasks would take exceeded their available time by as much as 50%. When people instead budget their time first, they set more realistic goals and report greater progress.  Etkin explains that people often fail to account for everything a task involves, from transitions to competing priorities. “If I'm thinking about a workout, I might not account for the getting to the gym piece, the washing my hands afterwards piece, needing a few minutes to clean up and move on with my day,” she said. Time-first budgeting works because it flips that process: “What if we start by thinking about what time I have available, and given that available time, how much time am I willing to spend on those different types of goals?” The approach applies broadly, from managing personal workloads to professional settings where colleagues depend on what you deliver. As Etkin puts it, “we can’t do things we don’t have time for,” making it critical to treat time as a finite resource when setting expectations. Duke Fuqua Insights features digestible conversations with our faculty about the most impactful research from their careers, including studies they teach in Fuqua classes. New episodes every other week in season. For more from Duke Fuqua, visit us on LinkedIn [https://www.linkedin.com/school/fuqua-school-of-business/posts/], Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/dukefuqua/], Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/Duke.Fuqua], Bluesky [https://bsky.app/profile/fuqua.duke.edu], and the Duke Fuqua Insights [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights#campaign_form]newsletter.

Special Episode: “How Is CMO Pessimism Reshaping Marketing Strategy?” w/ Prof Christine Moorman

Marketers are increasingly pessimistic about the economy, with sentiment reaching its lowest level since the pandemic in 2020. In response—and facing organizational pressures for returns—marketing activities are contracting, lowering spending and prioritizing existing customers over expansion opportunities. At the same time, companies are accelerating adoption of artificial intelligence, projecting that AI will account for more than half of all marketing activities within three years. Yet this rapid technological progress is outpacing organizational readiness, with no marketing technology activity currently delivering at its full potential. These are among the findings of the 35th edition of The CMO Survey, directed by Professor Christine Moorman of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business and co-sponsored by Deloitte and the American Marketing Association. The survey was conducted from January 7 to January 29, 2026. It polled 308 marketing leaders at for-profit U.S. companies, 97% of whom are VP-level or higher. Duke Fuqua Insights features digestible conversations with our faculty about the most impactful research from their careers, including studies they teach in Fuqua classes. New episodes every other week in season. For more from Duke Fuqua, visit us on LinkedIn [https://www.linkedin.com/school/fuqua-school-of-business/posts/], Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/dukefuqua/], Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/Duke.Fuqua], Bluesky [https://bsky.app/profile/fuqua.duke.edu], and the Duke Fuqua Insights [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights#campaign_form]newsletter.

"When Does Corporate Secrecy Work Against You?" w/ Prof Christine Moorman

Professor Christine Moorman on why keeping marketing secrets may cost more than letting them go Companies spend billions safeguarding their marketing secrets—from customer insights to pricing algorithms—assuming these secrets are key to competitive advantage. The global data loss prevention market is valued at an estimated $1.5 to $2 billion annually and continues to grow. But does locking down knowledge undermine performance rather than protect it? In this episode of Duke Fuqua Insights, Professor Christine Moorman [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/faculty/christine-moorman] of Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu], a leading scholar of marketing strategy and the director of The CMO Survey [https://cmosurvey.org/], examines whether protecting marketing knowledge is worth the cost. Drawing from in-depth interviews with senior executives across industries, Moorman and her co-authors explore how firms manage three types of marketing knowledge: customer and competitor insights, marketing plans, and marketing know-how, such as pricing algorithms. Their research [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00222429251408341] challenges the conventional wisdom that tighter control always leads to stronger advantage. The research found that efforts to prevent knowledge leakage often generate significant costs, while the external benefits may be overstated. Firms frequently rely on “leakage prevention strategies” that restrict who can access or share information. But Moorman finds these controls can create a set of “hidden costs” that can undermine decision quality, slow execution, and even weaken morale. Protection can also unintentionally block learning as well as leaks. “If you put up all of these barriers, those same barriers are going to also prevent information from coming to you,” she said.  On the benefit side, Moorman points out that these benefits may be overestimated. The reason is that even when information escapes, competitors must first notice it, interpret it correctly, and have the resources to act on it before any real harm occurs.  Moorman suggests that instead of obsessing over preventing leaks, companies should first weigh a careful assessment of these costs and benefits. Companies should also consider alternative knowledge protection strategies that do not have these costs. These include investing in harm prevention strategies, like refreshing their marketing knowledge faster than competitors can use it, and out-executing rivals even when information escapes. Competitive advantage may depend less on secrecy and more on speed. Duke Fuqua Insights features digestible conversations with our faculty about the most impactful research from their careers, including studies they teach in Fuqua classes. New episodes every other week in season. For more from Duke Fuqua, visit us on LinkedIn [https://www.linkedin.com/school/fuqua-school-of-business/posts/], Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/dukefuqua/], Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/Duke.Fuqua], Bluesky [https://bsky.app/profile/fuqua.duke.edu], and the Duke Fuqua Insights [https://www.fuqua.duke.edu/duke-fuqua-insights#campaign_form]newsletter.