#VirtualTeams #QuickRead: blog post @drheatherjohnso and I wrote, up on the London School of Economics Business Review, about a systematic review we published (with @justinblaney) for the Journal of Human Resources Management. Hope it's helpful to someone! blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessrevi…

New metric when interviewing for a job? How many boxes of tissues are prominently displayed in meeting rooms?

Instructure took a meaningful step forward this weekend in its response to the Canvas cybersecurity incident. CEO Steve Daly issued a direct, named apology. The company added more substance to its Incident Update page. It disclosed the Free-For-Teacher root cause and named CrowdStrike as part of the response. Those are real improvements. But the response still has a deeper problem: Instructure is describing this as a platform security incident, while its customers are experiencing it as an academic continuity event. Canvas is not just another enterprise system. It is where students get assignments, submit work, access grades, prepare for finals, and communicate with instructors. When Canvas is unavailable, defaced, or tied to exposed messages and identifying information—especially during finals week—the impact is not merely “inconvenience and concern.” It hits the core academic operations of institutions. That distinction matters. Academic leaders from universities including Illinois, Chicago, and ASU have been announcing canceled or delayed finals. Higher ed trade press is still being deflected to static statements. Direct questions about ransom payment are going unanswered. The scale of the breach and end-of-term disruption has not been fully acknowledged by the company at the center of it. There is also a transparency issue. Instructure’s Incident Update page carries a noindex directive, meaning the company has published a public page while signaling search engines not to include it in search results. That may be technically defensible for a live operational page, but it is much harder to defend for the central public source during an active incident, when customers, students, parents, reporters, and institutional stakeholders are searching for authoritative information. The point is not that Instructure has done nothing right. It has. The point is that the form of the response is improving faster than the substance. Canvas built its market position in the 2010s on openness, customer alignment, and trust. That posture is not yet visible enough in Instructure’s response to this incident. One step forward. One step back. I wrote more in today’s On EdTech post: onedtech.philhillaa.com/p/on…

how bored you gotta be to hack canvas

Why is there nothing on the main account for @Canvas_by_Inst or @Instructure about this? At least their website has an FAQ instructure.com/incident_upd…

Canvas' parent company Instructure has been hacked, and the site is being held for ransom after suffering a data breach Over 9000 schools have reportedly been affected and ~225 million users worldwide had their personal information potentially compromised

Why is any educational (or other) entity with a conscience doing any kind of business in this anti-human hell state? Can't believe there are still conferences, etc. going on these places... I refuse to travel to Gilead. Same with Florida and many others. Also, DC.

Dear @Grubhub lil suggestion: i need an easy way to either mark or remove items I dont like from future orders. That way I can build from the previous order without having to worry about re-ordering things we disliked. #continuousimprovement

You can put your zip code in here for specific timing of the solar eclipse in your area: usatoday.com/.../what-time-i… here in 21209, it starts at 2:05, peaks at 3:21 and ends at 4:33, with 88.6% of sun obscured by the moon at peak. Not a total eclipse of the heart! (that song, uff)

When people grumble, not wanting to use Teams/Slack channels for organizational conversations, knowledge sharing/management or document co-creation - I guarantee in early 1990s there were kajillions of people who pushed back against starting to use email. Next paradigm is here.

Using Teams/Slack channels for important conversations in an organization instead of email is not just about knowledge sharing/management, it is actually also about inclusion - for current and for future colleagues to be able to access and participate in the dialog.

COVID opened up the expanding jack-in-the-box of how much work CAN be done remotely & many workplaces trying to messily stuff it back in (losing people) rather than re-think, re-prioritize, re-focus on maximizing the benefits of each location & hybrid work for a new (AI) world.

Arbitrarily making meetings f2f that could be hybrid - and end up leaving people out... Like what specifically requires f2f and can't be done any other way these days? I know there are some things like team-building physical activities but....