When Amazon Web Services went down on Monday morning, chaos ensued. A glitch in its database disrupted numerous apps—from Zoom to United Airlines to Venmo—affecting the work and lives of millions across the globe. It even cost me my hard-won 103-day streak on Duolingo.

Yet I wasn’t too concerned. Surely, I thought, considering how big of an issue this is, someone must be on the case. However counterintuitive it might seem, that line of reasoning is actually quite common, according to Kellogg’s Lauren Eskries-Winkler. She refers to the phenomenon as the “big-problem paradox.” More on that this week.

Plus, are business leaders ready for GLP-1s?

Big problems, small concern

For decades, research has shown that while humans are caring and altruistic toward individuals, we often struggle to relate to the suffering of large groups. Sensing the scale of a problem, it seems, warps our empathy. Eskreis-Winkler and her colleagues wondered if scale not only affects our ability to feel but also changes the way we think.

The researchers investigated this idea across a series of studies that probed a wide range of real-world scenarios. Across each experiment, participants believed the problem was less likely to cause harm after they learned how common it is—and this belief affected their response.

For instance, the team showed participants two online profiles—one for a girl who needed ulcer surgery and the other for a girl who needed upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. Participants who learned about the prevalence of these conditions—ulcer surgery is common, while GI surgery is rare—not only believed that the more-common problem was less severe but also preferred to help the girl with the rare condition.

“The implication is that learning about the prevalence of a problem can sap peoples’ motivation to act in the real world,” says Eskries-Winkler, an assistant professor of management and organizations.

“We live in a world where we constantly encounter information about problems at scale,” she adds. “My coauthors and I were curious: Does this distort our thinking about the problems themselves? We thought it might, and we found it did.”

Read more on Kellogg Insight.

Shifting behaviors

Two of the most common health-related problems in the U.S. are type 2 diabetes and obesity. Fortunately, the recent development of GLP-1 medications has made significant headway in addressing the conditions.

“[But] these drugs are not just influencing physical health,” writes Paul Leinwand, an adjunct professor of strategy at Kellogg. “They’re also reshaping collective behavior—how people eat, shop, move, perceive themselves, and make decisions—with significant implications for business leaders. … This isn’t a passing trend.”

According to an analysis of nearly 100,000 households, which Leinwand conducted with colleagues at accounting and professional-services firm PwC, GLP-1s may be catalyzing a behavioral and economic shift on the level of major technological breakthroughs.

They found that consumer interest in Ozempic, a popular GLP-1 brand, has scaled more quickly than search trends for many popular tech products, including the iPhone. At least 14 percent of households already report that they’re currently using a GLP-1 medication. And in homes where the primary food purchaser was taking a GLP-1, grocery spending declined 6–8 percent within the first 12 months of use.

The surging popularity of the medications has had a ripple effect on many industries beyond food, shifting patterns in purchases for apparel, gym memberships, and travel, as well as people’s priorities on digital dating platforms.

“Executives don’t need to chase every headline about GLP-1s, but they do need a framework for understanding how foundational consumer behaviors are shifting—and where those shifts could create headwinds or opportunity,” Leinwand writes. “This isn’t about prediction; it’s about planning: identifying which consumer habits are vulnerable, which aspirations are emerging, and which parts of your business are least prepared for a demand curve that’s being rewritten in real time.”

Read more from Leinwand in Harvard Business Review.