Building capability
beyond myself

I take leadership seriously because it carries a responsibility not only for the work, but also for the careers of the people doing it.

Every quarter, I meet individually with each team member for a conversation devoted entirely to their career. We do not discuss current projects or routine work issues. We focus on their goals, the capabilities they want to develop, and what growth means to them personally.

Those conversations are intentionally individual. Not everyone wants to become a manager. Some people want to deepen their creative expertise, while others prioritize stability or work-life balance. Effective development begins with understanding the person rather than applying a standard advancement path.

I extend that philosophy across the team through recurring development discussions with managers and senior employees. Topics have included difficult decisions, imposter syndrome, the distinction between manager- and director-level responsibilities, and how strategic initiatives are developed.

Managers are also included in strategic discussions so they can see how budgets, stakeholder interests, organizational constraints, and competing priorities shape decisions. This strengthens their current leadership and prepares them to become viable internal successors.

That investment has helped create a three-person management team across two legacy organizations. I promoted two long-tenured senior designers into their first formal management roles—one before the merger and the other the following year. Each now leads two direct reports and owns creative review, one-on-ones, workload monitoring, employee advocacy, and performance management. A manager inherited from legacy CBIZ has also grown from occasionally supervising interns to leading a permanent team.

All three are now comfortable challenging my assumptions and disagreeing openly. Their perspectives have changed my position more than once. That willingness to speak candidly is one of the most valuable outcomes a leader can create.

Designing a stronger creative organization

When Marcum and CBIZ combined, the two organizations had very different creative structures.

Marcum had an established five-person team, including two senior designers, a multimedia designer, and two graphic designers. CBIZ had one dedicated full-time designer, along with several hybrid marketing roles that included varying levels of design responsibility.

Because the combined firm had more than doubled in size, the previous staffing and operating models could not support the anticipated volume and complexity of the work.

I designed a new Creative function of approximately ten people. The initial structure separated routine intake work from campaigns, events, and multimedia, supported by a Creative Operations group responsible for workflow, project intake, digital asset management, templates, and vendor relationships.

As demand became clearer, I adjusted the model. The work was more campaign-heavy than anticipated, while expanded template use created opportunities to shift routine production away from Creative. I reorganized the function into two balanced design teams, a multimedia group, and Creative Operations.

Today, the organization includes two three-person design teams, two Creative Operations employees, and two multimedia professionals. The design and Operations teams each have manager-level leadership and senior support.

Campaigns are assigned primarily according to capacity, workload, continuity, and project needs. Some specialization exists, but the design teams remain deliberately flexible. This allows a centralized Creative function to support Content and Digital teams that are increasingly aligned to specific business groups.

The management layer now owns much of the workload monitoring, project oversight, creative review, employee support, and performance management I previously handled directly. That allows me to concentrate on organizational design, technology strategy, brand governance, budgeting, vendor relationships, campaign planning, and cross-functional transformation.

Leading transformation through constraints

The merger coincided with a complete CBIZ rebrand, creating an unusually compressed implementation challenge.

I served on the senior review panel that evaluated and refined the agency’s concepts alongside the CMO, the Vice President of Go-to-Market Strategy, and other Marketing leaders. The brand moved from kickoff to final approval in approximately three months.

Once the direction was approved, I led its implementation across the combined organization.

The brand introduced a new color palette, graphic elements, photography guidance, simplified brand architecture, and an entirely new template system. Agency-created templates had to be evaluated and rebuilt for practical use. Implementation also required significant stakeholder management, particularly around the elimination of service-line logos and changes to established photography practices.

Thousands of client-facing materials had to be prioritized, rewritten, redesigned, and moved into the new system. Because Marcum materials became outdated immediately, files needed for client meetings, proposals, and sales conversations were addressed first. Some received an expedited initial conversion to preserve business continuity, followed by more extensive updates later.

The team also created hundreds of website header images and supporting photography selections while the agency assembled a combined website using content and infrastructure from both firms.

Most priority rebrand materials were completed within approximately six months, with specialized collateral continuing longer in some areas.

The pressure also revealed the need for a more scalable operating model. Partner and senior-manager profiles previously managed manually by Creative moved into Word templates. Expanded use of Canva established demand for self-service production and helped create the foundation for a more capable enterprise template strategy.

Connecting technology to organizational value

Technology is most valuable when it improves how the organization works, not simply when it introduces new features.

I partnered with IT to evaluate an inflated Adobe Creative Cloud environment and redundant stock-photography spending. That work reduced recurring annual costs by nearly $100,000 while preserving the licenses needed to support the business.

I also helped scale Asana into a more effective Creative project-management system. The legacy CBIZ configuration had been developed around a small team, while Marcum used a relatively simple Wrike queue in which designers pulled the next available project. Neither model could adequately support the combined organization.

Working with the Project Management director, I helped establish new boards, intake processes, workload tracking, dashboards, reporting structures, and operating practices.

The next step was developing an integrated template and digital asset management strategy using Marq and MediaValet.

The original Creative need was to strengthen brand governance and reduce repetitive production work so designers could focus on campaigns, major events, and higher-value collateral. Canva had expanded self-service, but it allowed too much unreviewed design and lacked the flexibility required for longer, more sophisticated documents. The growing use of generative AI made governed templates and approved assets even more important.

To gain enterprise support, the proposal also needed to solve problems beyond Creative. I connected the strategy to proposal and RFP production, customized sales materials, rapid-turn social and sponsorship assets, AI governance, and technology consolidation.

I built support across Marketing and Sales before presenting the plan to the CMO. This included vice presidents, influential directors, the CMO’s chief of staff, and stakeholders who had already invested in competing solutions.

The first proposal cleared security, legal, and AI-policy reviews but was rejected because it required a short-term increase to the corporate IT budget. I reworked the rollout, renegotiated vendor payment timing, aligned expenses with expiring contracts, and extended the implementation schedule.

The revised plan became budget-neutral for 2026 and 2027, supports an enterprise rollout in 2028, and is projected to generate approximately $100,000 in recurring annual savings beginning in 2029 compared with the projected cost of the prior technology environment.

The second proposal was approved. The organization has discontinued Canva Enterprise and is actively implementing Marq templates.

Adapting without losing the objective

Transformation rarely proceeds exactly as planned.

I scale a change when it demonstrates a meaningful improvement over the existing process and can perform reliably at the required level. It does not need to be perfect, but it must be mature enough to save time, reduce friction, or improve quality in practice. Contract cycles, budgets, busy seasons, and implementation capacity also affect the timing.

Stakeholder resistance must be evaluated rather than dismissed. Some objections identify legitimate evidence gaps that can be resolved through analysis or testing. Others reflect structural incentives, prior investment, or decision rights that require changes to the implementation or funding model.

I also distinguish between an ideal solution and one the organization can responsibly implement at a given moment.

For example, I initially proposed removing all Adobe Creative licenses from National Marketing to strengthen brand control. When stakeholders demonstrated a continuing need for quick-turn projects, I accepted a controlled compromise and retained a limited number of strategically placed licenses. It introduced some governance risk, but forcing the ideal solution during a merger would likely have damaged trust and collaboration.

I also initially favored moving all working creative files into MediaValet. Concerns raised by the team led me to slow the decision and expand performance testing before committing to a full migration.

The outcome matters more than defending the original method. Adaptability means remaining persistent about the objective while being willing to change the path used to reach it.

Stakeholder resistance must be evaluated rather than dismissed. Some objections identify legitimate evidence gaps that can be resolved through analysis or testing. Others reflect structural incentives, prior investment, or decision rights that require changes to the implementation or funding model.

How my perspective developed

My leadership approach developed across very different creative environments.

I began at a small advertising agency after earning my master’s degree in Marketing. Over approximately ten years, I worked across advertising, identity, print production, web design, front-end development, and vendor coordination.

The agency emphasized research and customer insight as the foundation of creative development. I saw how research changed the brief, shaped brainstorming, and led to more relevant creative solutions. Working alongside talented freelancers in competitive concept development also reinforced that complex problems can have multiple valid answers.

At Deloitte, I moved into a large professional-services organization and developed a deeper understanding of creative work within a single enterprise brand.

I initially supported Marketing through Creative Services and later worked directly with the Tax CEO for Deloitte US. That role gave me greater access to the business strategy informing the work.

While he led Deloitte’s Canadian Tax practice, for example, I participated in discussions with his chief of staff about how broad strategic pillars could be organized for partners, the Canadian CEO, and the board. The work included a strategy video, an accompanying board presentation, and a simplified presentation for the broader Canadian Tax practice.

My promotion to Design Manager recognized that I was contributing beyond execution through strategic input, project ownership, problem solving, and coaching.

At HBK, I became a Creative Director within a six-person Marketing organization that relied heavily on freelance writers, designers, photographers, videographers, editors, and web developers. I coordinated that external network with little formal project-management infrastructure while leading the early stages of a brand refresh and website redesign.

At Marcum, my focus shifted from individual projects to the health of the team and the system around the work. I inherited a five-person function midway through a rebrand, addressed an unresolved performance issue, rebuilt trust with senior designers, and worked with the incoming CMO to simplify a fragmented brand architecture.

During the months surrounding the CBIZ merger, I also maintained delivery and supported the team through significant uncertainty while the future organization was still being defined.

Each role required a different form of adaptation. Together, they moved my work from creating individual outputs to leading people, designing operating models, and connecting creative capability to broader organizational transformation.

Leadership as a responsibility

I am proud of the systems, savings, technologies, brands, and organizational changes I have helped build. But the work I value most is the deliberate inclusion and development of the people I lead.

It is easy to allow professional development to become secondary to immediate deadlines. I have chosen to make it a pillar of my leadership.

I have experienced the lasting impact of both strong and poor leadership throughout my career. That experience shapes how I approach my responsibility to the team. Strong work matters, but leadership cannot be measured only by what the team delivers today. It should also be measured by whether people are becoming more capable, confident, and prepared for what comes next.

My objective is to build an organization that can continue to grow beyond any one person—including me.

I have experienced the lasting impact of both strong and poor leadership throughout my career. That experience shapes how I approach my responsibility to the team.