You might expect creative directors to be digitally native these days, but this was not always the case. When I entered the advertising industry agencies hired people like me for our digital experience. Traditional creative leaders barely understood what digital was, never mind how to deliver it. Let me take you through that journey so you can see why this background produces creative leaders who are operating on an entirely different level.
I spent more than a decade working independently before I joined Ogilvy. I started designing in 1998, taught myself everything and delivered full projects end to end. Back then the only work you could consistently find online was traditional advertising, so I learned the industry by studying the best print, TV and brand campaigns from around the world. That exposure shaped my sense of craft and helped me understand how traditional creative thinking worked long before I ever entered an agency.
In 2007 I was approached to be a Creative Director at a digital agency, but after six months I left and continued on my own. When the recession hit in 2008 I had to explore new options, and in 2009 I entered the advertising world full time.
My move into advertising was not a natural transition. Traditional agencies were built around writers and art directors, and digital was treated as an add on rather than a core part of the work. The digital landscape itself was still taking shape. We were building microsites, putting local brands online for the first time, creating rich media banner ads, experimenting with early social media, exploring mobile formats and figuring out how to bring technology into campaign ideas in ways people had never seen before. I stepped into environments where digital was expected, but very few people understood the channels, the platforms or the production required to make any of it work.
That gap in understanding meant I ended up carrying far more responsibility than the title suggested. I was expected to lead digital, but I was also expected to support traditional teams, help shape campaigns, guide the craft, ensure the ideas could live across channels and solve the technical challenges that came with them. I was directing visuals one moment, shaping interaction flows the next, reviewing code, fixing production problems, helping pitch ideas and building the assets needed to bring everything to life.
At the same time digital teams were rarely given the support that matched the expectations placed on us. Traditional teams had established roles, departments and processes behind them, while digital was expected to deliver at the same level with a fraction of the time, budget and resources. We often had no writers dedicated to digital, no art directors who understood the medium, no motion or animation support and limited development capacity. Budgets were smaller, timelines were tighter and the pressure was higher, yet the work still had to feel seamless within integrated campaigns.
It also meant I stepped into leadership with a very specific challenge. I was highly skilled in the work because I had done everything myself for years, but that did not mean I had a team who could deliver at the same level from the start. I had to learn how to articulate direction clearly, guide people through execution and trust them to carry ideas forward, even when I knew I could produce the work faster and to a higher standard. Balancing that with the expectations of clients, the demands of production and the speed of agency life became one of the most intense parts of the role.
As digital expectations grew the traditional side of the agency relied on me more than anyone realised. I was pulled into campaign development, pitch strategy, brand work and anything that required a deeper understanding of how ideas translated into real experiences. While traditional creative directors had writers, art directors and production teams supporting them, I often had to cover multiple disciplines myself while helping lift the broader creative department at the same time.
A lot of the work that won integrated awards in those years only qualified because the digital teams made it real. We built the microsites, the experiences, the mobile components, the social integrations, the data capture and the interactive mechanics that allowed traditional ideas to be entered into bigger categories. In many cases we even hosted elements on our own servers just to ensure the work existed online. Yet our names were rarely included in the credits, even when the work could not have been entered without what we built. And when it came to entering our own digital work we almost never had the budget, because our departments were consistently underfunded despite carrying the heaviest load.
On top of all that there was almost no operational support. Traditional teams had traffic managers, producers and well defined structures behind them. Digital teams often had none of that. We were writing briefs, estimating work, scoping development, managing production, handling QA, preparing files, coordinating with media teams and chasing down missing assets while still delivering the creative. It was leadership, production and execution all happening at once, every day, with no buffer and no safety net.
The further I moved into senior roles the more this complexity increased. I was running digital, supporting traditional campaigns, leading pitches, shaping technical solutions, guiding creative teams, educating clients and filling the gaps between departments because digital touched everything. Traditional structures were not built for this level of integration, so I had to create my own ways of working, define new processes and build bridges between teams so the work could move faster and with more consistency.
As the role expanded I was also expected to take on the leadership responsibilities that come with senior creative positions. This included hiring, giving feedback, managing performance, handling sensitive conversations and making decisions that affected people and the business. I had run my own studio for years, but formal HR practice was completely new to me. There was no handbook and very little support. I learned how to lead teams in real time while carrying all the creative, technical and operational responsibility the work demanded. Far more than my fellow creative directors shouldered in the traditional side of the agency, this was handled by our ECD.
Despite everything the work still had to be delivered at the same standard as traditional campaigns. Clients did not care about the lack of support or the limitations we faced. They expected the work to look polished, feel seamless and function perfectly. Every digital asset had to be designed, developed, tested, refined and launched with the same level of craft associated with TV, print, radio, activation and brand work. There were no shortcuts, and the pressure to get it right was constant.
Traditional teams had dedicated DTP artists, film crews, photographers, retouchers, sound engineers and production partners behind them, while digital teams often had none of that support. We had to source imagery, create motion, design interactions, test functionality and build entire experiences with limited help. Every component had to be crafted by hand, and the responsibility for quality landed entirely on us.
On top of that we were building work for channels that changed constantly. Platforms updated, browsers broke things, devices behaved differently and nothing stayed stable for long. Every project required new problem solving, new methods and new technical decisions. Traditional campaigns could rely on fixed formats. Digital work had to adapt in real time, and the pressure to keep up never stopped.
All of this happened while still carrying the expectation to contribute to traditional creative work. I was brought into print reviews, TV concepts, radio scripts, activation ideas and brand discussions because my perspective helped strengthen the work. Even without formal training in those disciplines I could hold my own, guide direction and help sell the ideas. Years of learning from traditional work gave me an instinct for it, and that made it easier to bridge the gap between old and new ways of thinking.
That ability to move between worlds became one of the biggest advantages people like me brought into agencies. Traditional teams understood storytelling, craft and brand, but digital required a level of technical depth they were not equipped for yet. I understood both, so I became the person people turned to when ideas needed to work across every channel. It meant more responsibility, more pressure and less room for mistakes, but it also meant the work reached a higher standard because every angle was considered.
We also had to fight for equipment that could keep up with the work. We were not only surfing for inspiration, doing mockups, moodboards and pitch decks, we were designing full experiences, creating motion, exporting assets, testing builds and preparing production files that pushed machines to their limits. Slow hardware did not just make the work frustrating, it added hours to already tight timelines. Yet our budgets for tools, software and machines were minimal. Traditional teams had production partners and established pipelines. Digital had to deliver everything with underpowered equipment and shared resources, even as the expectations kept rising.
Many days were spent educating the agency as much as producing the work. I was explaining platforms, formats, constraints, possibilities and risks to people who had never worked in digital but were expected to sell it. I had to translate technical challenges into language clients could understand, guide account teams through decisions they had never managed before and teach creatives how to integrate digital thinking into their ideas. It was part leadership, part production and part ongoing education, all happening alongside the actual delivery of the work.
Client expectations added another layer of pressure. Digital was still new to many of them, so they wanted certainty in a space that changed every few weeks. We had to reassure them, manage their fears, guide their decisions and take responsibility for outcomes even when the platforms, tools or technologies were unpredictable. Traditional campaigns had decades of precedent. Digital had none. Everything we delivered carried risk, and every problem became our problem to solve.
Inside the agency that responsibility expanded even further. I was pulled into every pitch that required a digital layer, and almost every brief came with that expectation. While traditional teams could focus on concept and craft, digital had to work out how the idea would function, scale, adapt and be built. I was shaping creative, mapping interactions, exploring technology, scoping effort and helping sell the solution, often all in the same meeting. Pitch work was relentless, and digital was expected to make every idea bigger, smarter and more integrated without ever slowing the team down.
All of this happened while still running a team that needed guidance, feedback, mentoring and direction. People relied on me to help them grow, to set standards, to solve problems and to make calls when things got tough. I had to balance their development with the workload, protect them from unrealistic demands, keep the quality high and push the work forward even when the pressure was heavy. Leading a digital team meant carrying responsibility for both the people and the output at a level few truly understood.
Despite the pressure I loved the work. Digital gave me freedom to imagine things that did not exist yet and build experiences people could interact with. It let me combine design, technology, storytelling and craft in ways no other channel could. The work demanded constant learning and constant reinvention, and that challenge kept me sharp. Even in the toughest moments there was satisfaction in solving the problems, delivering the impossible and proving how powerful digital thinking could be when it was done well.
That background became even more valuable when I moved into in house product work. Instead of fast campaign cycles I was working with engineers, product managers, analysts and business teams to build systems, tools and platforms that needed long term thinking. The same instincts that helped me shape digital ideas in agencies helped me define user journeys, refine interfaces, guide content and influence brand and marketing work. I could bridge conversations between design, engineering and leadership because I understood how everything connected.
Even inside a product environment the expectations did not shrink. I was still contributing to brand, shaping creative direction for marketing, advising on campaigns and helping teams find clarity in the work. The difference was that everything had to scale. Every decision affected thousands of users instead of a single campaign cycle. The responsibility grew, but the years of navigating complexity in agencies made it easier to handle.
That is why digital creative directors bring something different to the table. We did not only learn how to give direction, we learned how every part of the work is made and how to guide it from idea to delivery under pressure most people will never see. We had to adapt to new platforms, new tools, new behaviours and constant change, long before the industry understood the value of that skill set. So when the world shifted again into product, systems, experience and now AI, it was a natural progression. The challenges we faced built creative leaders who can move across disciplines, solve problems at scale and stay ahead of whatever comes next.