How "Glow-Up" at Work Became a Survival Strategy: Beauty Rituals, Burnout and the New Boundaries of the Nine-to-Five

Key Highlights:
Introduction
The workday glow-up: how personal care migrated into office hours
Small acts, big signals: what hidden self-care says about workplace culture
Gendered expectations and appearance labor
Wellness reframed as productivity: the commodification of self-care
The risk calculus: job security, visibility and unequal access
How employees are balancing risk and self-care: practical tactics
Managers and organizations: designing policies that respect bodies and boundaries
The legal landscape: rights, protections and limits
Who benefits—and who loses—when self-care migrates into paid hours
Small cultural shifts that make a big difference
Negotiating personal care with professionalism
The limits of individual coping strategies
A manager’s manifesto: what leaders should stop doing and start doing
The broader policy conversation: beyond employee hacks
The future of work: normalization, backlash or hybrid evolution?
Practical guidelines for employers and employees
Final reflections: reclaiming time as dignity
FAQ

Key Highlights:

Young workers are carving personal care into the workday—booking salon appointments, doing facials during video calls and using office time for wellness—as a practical response to burnout and inflexible schedules.
These rituals expose gendered and racial inequities: appearance rules penalize women and Black employees disproportionately, while workplace norms and policies lag behind employees’ needs.
Employers can reduce friction with clearer, fairer policies, flexible scheduling, and anti-discrimination training; employees can minimize risk with strategic scheduling, transparency and performance-focused negotiation.

Introduction

Anastasia, 28 and based in London, treats her weekday hours as “glow-up time.” At her administrative desk in a creative firm she keeps hair oils and supplements in the office, uses lunchtime for walking, schedules beauty appointments between meetings and runs personal research on hair colours while her laptop hums. “I’ve diagnosed myself with a health issue at work using ChatGPT and basically fixed it,” she says. “My number one priority will always be my health, so I use work as time to really pour into myself.”

Her approach is becoming common enough to be visible on social platforms and in quiet corners of offices and co-working spaces. From people trimming baby bangs during a lunch break to freelancers finishing a call from a spa’s café, carving personal care into the workday is a direct response to chronic overwork, squeezed schedules and a workplace culture that often assumes unlimited employee availability.

This pattern demands scrutiny. What begins as a practical adjustment to long hours raises questions about workplace fairness, professionalism and the structural pressures that make personal care a sneaked task rather than a normal part of life. The phenomenon sits at the intersection of burnout, gendered expectations of appearance and the reshaping of work by hybrid models. It also offers a window into how workers—especially younger ones—reclaim time and bodily autonomy within corporate systems that too often position self-care as an optional, private project.

The following investigation unpacks why beauty rituals at work have spread, what they reveal about modern employment, how they reproduce inequalities, and what practical steps both employees and employers can take to make space for personal care without eroding professionalism or fairness.

The workday glow-up: how personal care migrated into office hours

The migration of beauty and wellness into the nine-to-five expresses a simple arithmetic: people work long hours and have less free time. Rather than give up haircuts, manicure schedules or a weekly sauna, workers are squeezing those rituals into work hours. The tactics vary by role and flexibility. Anastasia keeps supplements in the office and uses micro-breaks between tasks to browse trends and schedule appointments. Freelancers like Lauren in New York choose "third places"—bathhouses, cafés with spa facilities—to work from so they can pair a cold plunge with a focused sprint of work. Others pause a hairdresser mid-blow-dry to answer a client question on Zoom.

The practice reflects two trends that collided in recent years. First, younger workers report burnout earlier in their careers and buy more wellness services than previous generations. Burnout is not just fatigue; it is a depletion of time, energy and the psychological resources needed to sustain performance. When evenings and weekends are already claimed by emails, meetings and side hustles, tactical integration of self-care into paid hours becomes a coping mechanism.

Second, remote and hybrid work arrangements have blurred boundaries between private and company time. Where work was once confined to commuting, office lights and a strict start-and-end time, the laptop era expands the workday across locations. That expansion has created small pockets of time—commute windows, lunch breaks, quiet afternoons—that workers reallocate to routine care. For some, this means trimming bangs between meetings; for others, it means taking a brief sauna and jumping on a call wrapped in a towel and a robe at a spa-café.

These decisions are not only pragmatic. They are also negotiated moral acts. Employees weigh job security, office norms and visible professionalism against the physical and emotional costs of delaying personal maintenance. A worker whose employer insists on constant camera availability has a stronger incentive to do beauty work during office hours than someone whose job is evaluated purely on deliverables.

Small acts, big signals: what hidden self-care says about workplace culture

When employees hide a facial or hydrate during a Teams meeting, they are responding to workplace signals about worth and return on time. Many feel their employer does not reciprocate the devotion asked of them. “Gen Zers are looking at work and asking, what are you giving me in return for all this work and availability?” Anastasia says. That question is not rhetorical. It shapes everyday choices: the quiet refill of a water bottle in a conference room, a massage squeezed into a long afternoon between calls, a slow scroll through beauty forums at a desk.

These acts also expose contradictions. Companies promote wellness programs—mindfulness sessions, discounted gym memberships, and mental health apps—while maintaining rigid scheduling expectations and punitive attendance policies. The result is a workplace that sells self-care as an employee responsibility while demanding ever-greater availability. Workers translate the optics into action. If employers won’t create time, employees create it themselves.

The visibility of these acts on social platforms compounds the effect. Viral TikTok clips and Instagram stories of “working in a bathhouse” package personal care as a lifestyle choice and a productivity hack. They normalize the behavior and recruit others into similar practices. For some viewers, that normalization is empowering: it signals that small acts of self-prioritization are possible even within demanding roles. For others, it amplifies anxiety: your colleague’s perfectly timed manicure is another subtle metric by which you measure your own failure to balance life and work.

Gendered expectations and appearance labor

The expectation to maintain a certain appearance at work is not neutral. Women face explicit and implicit pressures to invest time and money in their looks, and the workplace treats those investments differently depending on the worker’s gender and race.

Appearance biases operate in multiple directions. Men in leadership roles can be perceived as authoritative on a golf course while women face censure for bringing business into a yoga class. Women leaders endure dozens of micro-penalties—on attractiveness, age, marital status and body size—that men rarely encounter. The consequence is that personal care, including hair maintenance, becomes part of a woman’s job description. When a Black woman must allocate time and money to manage natural hair or maintain treatments that align with workplace norms, grooming is not a luxury: it is a labor requirement.

Legislation such as the CROWN Act in the United States responds to this reality by banning discrimination on the basis of hair textures and styles. That legal push recognizes what many Black women experience: hair is not a neutral aesthetic choice but a racialized marker that can affect professional advancement. When employers categorize particular hairstyles as “unprofessional,” they impose additional, often invisible, labor on employees of color. That labor—time spent at the salon, money spent on products—gets squeezed into already scarce personal hours, driving the need to perform it during paid time.

The uneven distribution of appearance-related expectations is both a symptom and a driver of inequality. It signals who gets to be themselves at work and who must modify their appearance to fit an imposed ideal. When organizations allow or even require certain looks while penalizing deviations, they perpetuate a culture where bodily maintenance belongs to the job.

Wellness reframed as productivity: the commodification of self-care

Wellness has become a commodity, marketed as a route to higher output and efficiency. Corporate wellness programs frequently frame personal health and beauty as tools for enhanced productivity: if you meditate for ten minutes, your focus improves; if you hydrate often, you can think clearer. That message carries an implicit imperative: investing in yourself is the same as investing in the employer’s bottom line.

This framing robs self-care of its intrinsic value. It converts mental health days into productivity levers and makes a manicure another line item on a performance ledger. The result is a subtle pressure to use personal time for "optimization" rather than genuine rest.

Furthermore, when wellness is presented as an individual responsibility to correct systemic overwork, it absolves organizations of accountability. Employees are told to eat better, move more, and schedule breathing exercises while organizational structures—unrealistic deadlines, overbooked calendars, understaffing—remain unchanged. The presence of an easily scheduled salon appointment during a long workday does not remedy the deeper structural drivers of burnout. It is a stopgap, often paid for with secret, stolen minutes of paid time.

The risk calculus: job security, visibility and unequal access

Not everyone can safely tuck self-care into work hours. Workers in precarious roles, those on short-term contracts, and employees in cultures that enforce visibility or punitive rules face greater risk. Shrinking entry-level markets and high unemployment increase the opportunity cost of being caught. A viral anecdote about a boss accidentally turning on a worker’s camera during a facial—and laughing it off—belies the reality that many employers would not react so benignly.

Access is unequal. Higher-paid white-collar workers who control their schedules or work remotely can more easily book a mid-afternoon root touch-up. Hourly workers, frontline staff and those in manufacturing or customer-facing roles cannot. The result is that self-care during paid hours becomes another marker of privilege.

Women and people of color often bear the greatest burden. For Black women, hair appointments are not optional. For working mothers, quick self-care rituals may be one of the few ways to maintain a sense of identity amid caregiving and employment responsibilities. Those who can access flexible work and trusted managers will make different choices than those who cannot.

Employers and managers play a decisive role. A culture of surveillance—tracking hours, camera-on policies and rigid check-ins—reduces the space for personal care. A culture that focuses on outcomes offers more latitude. When performance is measured by deliverables rather than hours visible on a screen, employees can carve out personal time without necessarily sacrificing professional expectations. That freedom, however, depends on trust and equitable standards.

How employees are balancing risk and self-care: practical tactics

Workers who schedule beauty appointments during the workday do so with a strategy. Several practical tactics emerge from interviews and social accounts.

Calendar concealment: Marking time as “busy” to avoid questions. That tactic works in teams where calendars are private or where short-notice meetings are rare. It becomes risky in cultures that require transparency about location or status.
Results-first framing: Meeting deadlines and maintaining visible outcomes builds a buffer that allows for flexible location and small personal incursions. Employees who consistently meet deliverables earn trust that can be spent on mid-day personal appointments.
Third-place workarounds: Freelancers and some remote employees use cafés, co-working spaces near salons or bathhouses that allow work in communal relaxation areas. That strategy converts leisure spaces into hybrid environments where work and care coexist.
Micro-scheduling: Breaking personal care into small actions during breaks—hydrating, facial sprays, short walks, stretch routines—reduces the visibility of self-care while providing restorative effects.
Transparency with managers: Some workers negotiate flexible schedules explicitly, proposing a shift in hours in exchange for meeting expectations. Others prefer partial disclosure—telling managers they have personal appointments without specifying the details.
On-camera mitigation: Using soft lighting, framing and backgrounds to manage appearances on video calls reduces anxiety about looking tired. Some workers keep a mirror and quick touch-up kit at their desks.

These tactics work best where the employer’s culture tolerates a degree of personal latitude. Where policies are punitive or surveillance-oriented, employees limit visible care and offload it to weekends, if possible.

Managers and organizations: designing policies that respect bodies and boundaries

Employers can reduce the pressure that drives secret self-care by adopting policies and practices that acknowledge human needs without undermining productivity.

Flexible scheduling: Allow employees to shift their hours to accommodate personal care. If an employee can finish their day’s work after an appointment, firms should trust them to manage their deliverables.
Outcome-based evaluation: Shift managerial focus from hours logged to results produced. This approach reduces the incentive to police small personal activities and attracts and retains talent.
Clear, fair appearance policies: Companies must revisit policies that regulate hairstyles, dress and other markers of identity. Policies should be explicit, non-discriminatory and considerate of cultural practices. Anti-discrimination training and compliance with laws that protect natural hairstyles are essential.
Wellness provisions that recognize structural causes of burnout: Rather than offering only apps and discounts, employers should examine staffing levels, workload design and the meeting culture that forces employees to work evenings and weekends. Genuine wellbeing requires structural changes.
Private wellness spaces: Providing rooms for prayer, nursing, meditation and quiet care signals that the organization values bodily autonomy. These spaces cannot be token gestures; they must be accessible and included in scheduling structures.
Manager training in empathy and accessibility: Managers set cultural norms. Training them to negotiate boundaries, allow flexible scheduling and respond equitably to requests can shift team expectations.
Equity audits: Evaluate who benefits from flexible policies. Workers in client-facing, hourly or frontline roles must be included in the design of accommodations otherwise those policies reinforce privilege.

The goal is not to commercialize personal care as productivity but to normalize human needs as part of work life. When firms accept that employees have bodies and lives outside the workplace, the need to sneak a manicure into Tuesday afternoon diminishes.

The legal landscape: rights, protections and limits

Legal protections around appearance and personal care vary by jurisdiction. Anti-discrimination laws increasingly recognize hair and grooming as identity markers. In the U.S., the CROWN Act prohibits discrimination based on hair texture and protective styles in some jurisdictions, and more states and municipalities have adopted similar measures. Those laws do not mandate that employers provide time for grooming during work hours, but they prevent policies that disproportionately target protected characteristics.

Workplace policies that require constant camera presence or penalize off-site care must be evaluated against labour law and employment contracts. Employees with union representation or collective bargaining agreements may negotiate explicit provisions for personal appointments, paid breaks and flexibility.

When navigating legal questions, employees should consult local labour standards and, where available, human resources. Employers must ensure that policies are applied uniformly and are justifiable with a legitimate business need rather than rooted in bias or stereotype.

Who benefits—and who loses—when self-care migrates into paid hours

The proliferation of on-the-clock beauty rituals reveals a broader truth: adaptation strategies look different depending on power, race and role.

Beneficiaries:

Workers with schedule control: Remote-friendly, managerial or high-skilled roles allow people to shape their day.
Freelancers and gig workers with flexible hours: They can reassign work blocks to accommodate personal care.
Organizations that measure output: Firms focused on results generate trust and reduce policing.

Those disadvantaged:

Hourly, frontline and customer-facing workers: Little latitude to leave the floor for a salon trip.
Employees in rigid corporate cultures: Camera-on policies and tightly monitored schedules curtail personal time.
People of colour and women: Face structural pressures to maintain certain appearances and shoulder additional grooming labor.

These differences create uneven access to the same coping mechanism. Employers that do not account for this inequality risk reproducing privileges and deepening disparities.

Small cultural shifts that make a big difference

Not all solutions require sweeping legal or structural change. Small cultural adjustments can reduce the stigma around personal care.

Normalize flexible hours in team rituals: Leaders who openly schedule a lunch appointment and stick to deliverables model a permissive norm that reduces secrecy.
Promote meetings with “camera optional” cues: Label meetings where cameras are unnecessary and avoid making face visibility a default requirement.
Encourage asynchronous communication: Prioritize written updates over synchronous check-ins when possible.
Celebrate boundaries: Recognize when employees leave for appointments as a sign of wellbeing, not shirking.
Publicize equitable wellness benefits: Ensure that wellness stipends or allowances apply across levels and roles.

These shifts require managerial commitment and consistency. When leaders practice and reward boundary-setting, workers feel safer doing the same.

Negotiating personal care with professionalism

Employees who want to integrate beauty rituals into their workday without risking reputational harm can adopt a few practical strategies.

Plan around deliverables: Schedule appointments during times that minimize disruption to core responsibilities. If a team has a standing Tuesday stand-up, avoid booking a facial then.
Communicate outcomes, not minutiae: If your manager requires notice for schedule changes, provide a brief note that you will be unavailable for a period but will complete deliverables by a specific time.
Build credit through performance: Strong performance gives employees latitude to take care of personal needs during the day. Maintain reliability so managers can trust occasional flexibility.
Use private calendar entries: Where acceptable, block time as “personal” or “unavailable.” If organizational norms require transparency, consider a neutral label that signals unavailability without airing details.
Prepare for accidental exposure: If your camera turns on during a beauty routine, a short, confident explanation is usually enough. Humor can defuse minor awkwardness, but assess team culture first.
Negotiate with data: If frequent appointments are necessary—medical or grooming—present a plan that demonstrates continuity of work. Propose shift changes or make-up hours that preserve productivity.
Seek HR support for recurring needs: If a grooming routine is tied to religious observance, medical necessity or hair discrimination, involve HR early to document accommodations.

These tactics do not eliminate risk. They reduce friction by aligning personal needs with professional expectations.

The limits of individual coping strategies

Even the most skillful calendar maneuvers do not substitute for structural reform. When long hours are baked into job design, or when employees must regularly perform emotional labor without adequate support, squeezing self-care into a workday becomes a Band-Aid on a systemic wound. Self-care performed under pressure converts restorative rituals into another project, subject to the same efficiency metrics that generate stress.

Moreover, the trend toward integrating beauty into work risks normalizing an expectation that employees continually optimize themselves for performance. That expectation disproportionately affects those already disadvantaged by workplace biases. Without a systemic reorientation toward humane workloads and equitable policies, the glow-up will remain a survival tactic rather than a sign of organizational health.

A manager’s manifesto: what leaders should stop doing and start doing

Stop:

Policing aesthetics selectively. Scrutinizing hair, dress or visible care when it disproportionately affects certain groups reinforces bias.
Equating camera presence with productivity. Use outcomes as the yardstick.
Treating wellness as an individual problem. Wellness benefits without workload reform are insufficient.

Start:

Measuring work by results, not visible time.
Instituting flexible hours and asynchronous norms where possible.
Offering equitable wellness stipends that frontline and remote workers can use.
Training managers to recognize bias related to appearance and to accommodate necessary care related to culture, religion or health.
Creating private, accessible spaces for quiet, nursing, prayer and short restorative routines.

Leaders who adopt these practices reduce the need for secretive self-care and create workplaces where employees can be whole people without fear of penalty.

The broader policy conversation: beyond employee hacks

Private and organizational responses must be complemented by public policy and social norms that protect workers’ dignity and health.

Anti-discrimination legislation: Laws that protect natural hairstyles and prohibit appearance-based bias are crucial to leveling the playing field.
Labour standards that recognize work intensity: Policies that limit excessive overtime, regulate on-call expectations and ensure reasonable staffing create time for personal care without forcing employees into hide-and-sneak routines.
Public health framing of burnout: Treating burnout and chronic stress as workplace safety issues rather than purely individual woes moves the conversation toward prevention.
Access to affordable personal care: In some regions, limited options for affordable salons, childcare and healthcare make carving out personal time more difficult. Public investments in accessible services reduce time poverty.

These policy moves reshape the environment that makes workplace glow-ups a necessity, not a choice.

The future of work: normalization, backlash or hybrid evolution?

Several trajectories are plausible.

Normalization: If outcome-based cultures continue to grow and companies adopt flexible scheduling, integrating personal care into the workday could be normalized and destigmatized. Employers might offer scheduled personal-care hours as part of wellbeing packages.

Backlash: Visible use of work hours for personal care could provoke employer backlash in certain sectors. Surveillance technologies and strict camera policies might reassert control, particularly where management interprets flexibility as a sign of entitlement rather than mutual trust.

Hybrid evolution: The most likely path blends both outcomes. White-collar, knowledge sectors may increasingly permit personal care during work hours while other sectors retain stricter boundaries. That divergence will make equitable policy design critical, ensuring accommodations across job types.

The tension will persist between individual adaptations and systemic responsibility. Which side prevails depends on how companies, workers and policymakers respond to the underlying drivers: workload intensity, appearance bias and the distribution of time.

Practical guidelines for employers and employees

For employers:

Audit workloads and meeting culture. Identify areas where meetings can be reduced or made asynchronous.
Adopt clear, equitable appearance policies and train managers to implement them fairly.
Offer flexible scheduling with guardrails to prevent abuse and ensure fairness.
Provide wellness stipends accessible to all levels of staff and non-discriminatory accommodations for hair and grooming needs.
Create private, easily bookable spaces for rest, nursing, or quiet care.

For employees:

Prioritize tasks and schedule personal care around deliverables.
Be strategic in calendar blocking; use neutral labels if necessary.
Build a track record of reliability to create flexibility currency.
When negotiating accommodations, frame requests in terms of sustained productivity.
Use the HR route for accommodations tied to health, religion, or discrimination.

Both sides benefit from assuming competence and good faith. Trust becomes the foundational currency that allows humanity during work hours.

Final reflections: reclaiming time as dignity

The trend of bringing beauty rituals into the workday is a symptom of deeper structural failures and a pragmatic response to those failures. It reveals the urgent need to redesign work in ways that respect time, bodies and dignity. When employees feel compelled to hide a facial or squeeze a haircut between conference calls, the workplace has ceded a space that should belong to life itself.

Restorative care should not be furtive. It should be available, accessible and recognized as part of a sustainable work model. Employers that create structures allowing that shift will not only alleviate individual stress but will build trust and retention. Workers who set boundaries and negotiate on results will model a different normal.

As managers and policymakers adjust, the quiet acts of mid-day self-care will either become relics of a time-starved era or a normalized component of humane work. The direction depends on collective choices: whether organizations accept the human rhythms of their people or continue to demand that private life be compressed into stolen moments. The outcome will determine the shape of work—and the shape of life—over the coming decade.

FAQ

Q: Is it acceptable to do beauty treatments during work hours? A: Acceptability depends on workplace norms, job type and performance expectations. In many knowledge and remote roles, scheduling personal care during the workday is becoming common if it does not interfere with deliverables. In customer-facing, hourly or tightly supervised roles, doing beauty treatments during paid hours is riskier. Prioritize clear communication with managers and align personal scheduling with performance.

Q: Will doing a facial or haircut during my shift hurt my career? A: Not necessarily. The key variable is whether you meet or exceed expected results. Consistent performance builds trust and creates latitude. Frequent, visible absences during core team hours without advance notice can harm perceptions, especially in cultures that value presence. Manageable, occasional personal appointments that don’t disrupt teams are less likely to be problematic.

Q: What are my rights if my employer bans certain hairstyles? A: Appearance policies that disproportionately target characteristics associated with protected classes may run afoul of anti-discrimination laws. In many jurisdictions, laws now protect natural hairstyles. Consult HR, your employment contract and, if necessary, legal counsel or local advocacy organizations for specific guidance.

Q: How do I negotiate flexibility for recurring grooming needs? A: Prepare a practical proposal: explain the recurring need, demonstrate how you will maintain productivity, and suggest specific schedule adjustments. Offer to make up time or shift hours. When possible, present data on your performance to build credibility.

Q: How can managers support employees who need personal care time? A: Adopt outcome-based evaluation, allow flexible scheduling, normalize camera-optional meetings and provide private spaces for rest. Train managers in bias awareness and equitable policy application. Small signals—leaders booking personal appointments without penalty—reset norms.

Q: Are wellness perks like stipends effective? A: Wellness stipends help, but they do not replace structural reforms. Stipends are useful for reducing financial barriers to personal care, but they are insufficient if workloads make it impossible to use them. Combine stipends with workload audits, reduced meeting loads and flexible scheduling for meaningful impact.

Q: What if my camera turns on while I’m getting a facial? A: Keep a short explanation ready and stay professional. Read the room: some teams will laugh and move on; others may react differently. If the incident raises concerns, address them transparently with your manager and reaffirm your commitment to meeting responsibilities.

Q: Will this trend widen inequality? A: It can. Those with schedule control and higher pay benefit more from integrating personal care into work hours. To prevent widening gaps, employers should design inclusive policies that extend flexibility across roles, ensure equitable access to wellness benefits and avoid normalizing practices that only privilege some employees.

Q: Should organizations measure time or output? A: Where feasible, measuring output yields better results. Outcome-based systems reduce time policing and allow employees to manage personal needs. For roles where time is critical (e.g., shift work, client-facing services), combine transparency with fair scheduling and equitable accommodation practices.

Q: How should companies revise appearance policies? A: Conduct an audit to identify biased language and impacts, consult legal standards, engage diverse employee input and create clear, non-discriminatory guidelines. Include training to ensure consistent enforcement and mechanisms for employees to request accommodations related to hair, health or religion.

Q: Is this simply a generational trend? A: Younger workers are more visible in social media discussions of these tactics and report earlier burnout, which amplifies the behavior. However, the underlying drivers—time scarcity, workload intensity and appearance expectations—affect workers across generations. The methods vary by role, culture and personal need.

Q: What practical steps can I take right now? A: Assess your deliverables and schedule a recurring personal-care block that minimizes disruption. Communicate with your manager in outcome-focused terms. Keep a reliable track record so flexibility appears earned, not demanded. If your grooming needs are linked to identity, health or discrimination concerns, involve HR early.

Q: How can society support better balance between work and personal care? A: Policy measures such as limits on excessive overtime, anti-discrimination protections, and access to affordable personal-care services help. Cultural shifts that value rest and guard against the glorification of constant availability are equally important.

Q: Will employer acceptance of on-the-clock beauty grow? A: Acceptance will grow in sectors that already value autonomy and results. Where surveillance and rigid presence requirements persist, resistance will continue. Broader adoption depends on managerial trust, equitable policy design and organizational willingness to confront workload and meeting culture.

Q: What final principle should guide decisions about personal care at work? A: Prioritize dignity. Whether through a manager’s policy or an employee’s scheduling choice, treat personal care as a legitimate human need rather than a secret indulgence. Designing work that respects time and bodies is both humane and productive.