Thoughts
Notes on running creative teams and making complex ideas clear.
Article 01
AI and the death of creative
I don't think AI is going to replace creative work. I think it will expose which parts of the job were never creative to begin with.
The useful question is not “Can a machine make this?” It is “What would a designer do with the time back?”
Where the time goes
Designers spend hours resizing approved assets, sorting material, preparing variations, and moving information between systems. Those tasks matter, but they do not always require the full weight of a designer's attention.
The harder work is deciding what a person needs to notice, what the idea should say, and whether the result feels right for the situation. AI can help explore, organize, and deliver. It cannot take responsibility for the judgment behind the work.
What leadership owes a team
When I introduced Midjourney and DALL·E at Vanguard, some designers worried that these tools would make their jobs disappear. I created regular teach-and-learn sessions so people could test the technology together, talk about its limits, and keep ownership of the decisions.
That is the future I want: less repetitive production, more time for research, sketching, critique, and design thinking. I learned to draw before I learned design software. A new tool can widen what I try; I still decide what is worth making.
Article 02
Why creative organizations fail
When difficult projects keep going to the same few people, a team becomes dependent on availability. The dependable people become the safety net, and the way work is organized stays invisible.
The pattern I look for
- Requests arrive through private channels.
- No one can see the whole workload.
- Assignments follow familiarity instead of fit.
- The same designers keep rescuing the process.
At Vanguard, shared intake gave us a way to discuss capacity before assigning the next project. A skills view helped us match the work to the team and identify where mentorship would help.
Creative leadership is often practical: a clear brief, a suitable assignment, and a decision made in time. Fixing those conditions gives better work a chance to happen.
Article 03
What brand governance actually means
A brand guideline can specify a color precisely and still leave a team unsure how to make the next presentation. People need to know what is fixed, what can adapt, and whom to ask when the rules run out.
Governance is the part of the brand system that helps people make the next decision.
I look for the practical gaps: a template that no longer fits the content, competing versions of an asset, or an approval that depends on finding one person. These gaps turn routine work into negotiation.
A useful system has three things
- Clear ownership.
- Current, findable assets.
- Examples that show how to adapt the standard.
Consistency becomes easier when the right choice is easy to find. That leaves room for creative attention where a project actually needs it.
Article 04
Why AI changes operations more than creativity
Before adding AI to a creative workflow, I want to know where the team's time is going. Resizing approved artwork, preparing variations, sorting assets, and assembling a first draft each need different support.
Start with a task you can check
Choose a repetitive task with a clear input and a result someone can review. Define what good looks like. Decide who owns the review. Measure the whole effort, including corrections.
A faster first pass is useful only if it reduces the work that follows. The handoffs matter too: which version is approved, where it belongs, and what can be reused.
AI will not resolve an unclear brief or an approval process with no owner. Those still need attention. Used carefully, it can give designers time back for conversations with users and the decisions that shape the work.
Article 05
Designing teams instead of org charts
An org chart shows reporting relationships. It does not show who develops the first idea, who turns it into a system, or who catches the detail that makes it ready to use.
People contribute in different ways. One designer may be comfortable with an open brief; another may see how to simplify a complicated flow. Someone with deep production knowledge may spot a problem while it is still easy to fix.
Design the team around the work
I map the capabilities a project requires against the skills we have. A gap might call for mentorship, a different partnership, or a hire. It does not always call for another layer of management.
People should have room to develop beyond what they already do well. The reporting lines are one part of that design.
Article 06
Business-to-human communication
A patient reading about a treatment and a plan sponsor reviewing retirement data arrive with different questions. Both need to find the information that matters to their decision.
I work for the person at the other end of the message.
Before choosing a headline or a layout, I want to understand what someone is trying to do, what they already know, and where they might hesitate. That applies just as much to an internal process as to a public campaign.
The test is simple
Can someone understand what matters, make a decision, and take the next step? A shorter paragraph can still leave out the explanation a person needs. A complete page can still bury the answer. Language, sequence, and visual hierarchy have to work together.
I want people to leave an experience better able to understand, decide, or act. That is the connection I look for between what an organization wants and what its audience needs.