The challenge leaders face
At some point, leaders sense that something in the organization is no longer working as it once did. Projects slow. Decisions feel heavier. Teams appear busy, yet progress is inconsistent. Friction increases in places that previously ran smoothly. The instinct is to focus on performance or capability. Leaders search for gaps. They consider adding headcount.

What is often overlooked is a more foundational issue. The team structure itself has stopped serving the organization. Structures built for one phase of growth rarely sustain the next. What worked when the team was smaller or the mandate simpler may not withstand scale and complexity.

This is not a failure of leadership effort. It is a failure of structural evolution.

Why structures quietly fail
Most structures are created during moments of urgency. A company launches a new initiative. Growth accelerates. A function is brought in-house. Roles are defined quickly. Early wins reinforce the design. What rarely happens is a disciplined reassessment as the organization evolves. Responsibilities expand. Priorities multiply. Expectations rise. Reporting lines and decision rights remain static.

Patterns begin to surface:

• Roles accumulate responsibility without clarity
• Decision-making slows as stakeholders multiply
• Overlap increases in some areas while gaps appear in others
• Accountability becomes diffuse

These symptoms are often misdiagnosed as performance issues. In reality, they are design issues.

What strong leaders recognize
Effective leaders understand that structure is a living system. They ask:

• Is our structure aligned to current strategy
• Are decision rights clearly defined
• Do leaders know what they own
• Are we organized for the future, not the past

They treat structural review as leadership discipline, not crisis response. Structure shapes behavior. When structure is misaligned, even strong teams struggle. When aligned, friction decreases and momentum builds.

The cost of ignoring misalignment
When structural problems persist, teams compensate. Workarounds form. Escalations increase. High performers absorb excess load. Others disengage. Over time this results in:

• Burnout
• Slower execution
• Declining trust in leadership
• Tension between functions

The longer leaders wait, the more credibility erodes. Structure, when ignored, quietly undermines strategy.

Team structures fail not because leaders are ineffective, but because structures are rarely redesigned as organizations evolve.

How structure should evolve
As organizations grow, complexity demands clearer systems. Effective evolution includes:

• Defined decision ownership
• Clear separation of strategy and execution
• Accountability tied to outcomes
• Processes that support clarity without bureaucracy

This is not about hierarchy. It is about alignment. Leaders who proactively evolve structure preserve trust, speed and focus.

The post Why Team Structures Break as Organizations Grow appeared first on UpSource.

The challenge leaders face
Growth rarely follows a perfect hiring plan. Organizations expand into new markets. A rebrand demands sharper execution. A digital transformation exposes capability gaps. A new CMO inherits a team that needs structure and direction.

The need for senior leadership becomes obvious before budget, alignment or timing allows for a permanent hire. In these moments, teams feel stretched. Decision-making slows. Priorities compete. The CEO wants progress. The CMO wants clarity. HR wants stability. Yet adding full-time headcount may not be realistic or strategically wise.

This is where embedded leadership becomes a powerful model.

What embedded leadership really means
Embedded leadership provides senior-level guidance inside an organization without formal authority or long-term staffing changes.

• It is not traditional consulting that delivers a presentation and exits.
• It is not interim leadership that replaces existing executives.
• It is not advisory from the sidelines.

Embedded leadership means working alongside leadership teams in real time. Participating in real decisions. Helping translate strategy into execution. Coaching tomorrow’s leaders while strengthening today’s teams. The embedded advisor:

• Brings outside perspective while respecting internal culture
• Supports existing leaders rather than overriding them
• Connects brand, marketing and team structure to business outcomes
• Builds internal capability instead of creating dependency

The goal is not control. The goal is clarity, momentum and confidence.

When this model works best
Embedded leadership is particularly effective when organizations are navigating complexity but are not ready to commit to permanent senior hires. It works best when:

• A CMO is restructuring or building a new team
• A CEO needs brand and marketing leadership stabilized
• An organization is navigating brand or digital transformation
• Internal politics are slowing decision-making
• A new leader needs experienced support during transition

For CMOs and CEOs, this model provides breathing room. It allows thoughtful decisions about structure and talent without rushing into reactive hires.

For HR leaders, it reduces risk. It ensures that organizational shifts are guided by experienced perspective rather than pressure.

Embedded leadership provides senior expertise inside your organization without adding permanent headcount.

Why executive teams choose this approach
Leaders choose embedded leadership because it offers:

• Perspective without politics
• Experience without disruption
• Momentum without long-term risk

It creates space to assess what the team truly needs.

Sometimes that results in a permanent hire. Sometimes it results in clearer roles, refined processes or stronger internal leadership development. An embedded advisor can:

• Evaluate current team strengths and capability gaps
• Clarify roles, accountability and decision rights
• Align positioning and messaging to execution
• Guide complex website or brand programs
• Mentor managers evolving from manager to leader

Most importantly, embedded leadership leaves the organization stronger than it found it.

The strategic advantage
In fast-moving environments, waiting too long to add senior perspective can stall progress. Hiring too quickly can create misalignment and unnecessary cost. The real question is not simply who to hire next. It is what kind of leadership support will create clarity now.

Embedded leadership strengthens strategy, steadies teams and accelerates progress without adding permanent headcount. For organizations serious about building stronger teams and stronger leaders, it is not a stopgap. It is a strategic choice.

The post Embedded Leadership Without Headcount appeared first on UpSource.

The challenge leaders face
Marketing teams are often busy yet still perceived as misaligned. Leaders feel pressure from above while teams feel overwhelmed below. This disconnect erodes confidence on both sides.

Why alignment breaks down
When priorities are unclear, teams default to activity (busy work). Misalignment usually happens when:

• Business priorities are unclear or shifting
• Marketing is expected to support everything
• Success metrics are vague or conflicting

Misaligned teams are often a signal of unclear priorities, not poor performance.

What alignment actually requires
Alignment is not created through more meetings. It comes from leaders translating business objectives into clear focus and next steps. Goals need to be set and expectations need to be understood to see positive change. Far too often you see strategic goals created and not shared with the organization. It takes a village to create change, therefore goals must be shared and well known from the top down. Aligned leaders:

• Define what matters most
• Set boundaries around what does not
• Connect goals directly to outcomes

The leadership responsibility
Alignment is a leadership responsibility, not a marketing failure. When leaders provide clarity, teams gain confidence and burnout decreases. Marketing alignment happens when leaders clearly connect business objectives to marketing priorities and protect teams from unnecessary work.

The post Aligning Marketing Goals with Business Strategy appeared first on UpSource.

The challenge leaders face

Many leaders are told they need to be more strategic right after a promotion. What they are not given is a clear explanation of what strategic thinking actually looks like in practice. The result is frustration, self-doubt and reactive decision making disguised as leadership.

What strategic thinking really is

Strategic thinking is not about being visionary or charismatic. It is the discipline of slowing down decisions to assess impact, risk and long-term consequences.

This skill can be learned, practiced and strengthened. Strategic leaders consistently:

• Pause before reacting
• Separate urgency from importance
• Consider second-order impact
• Make decisions that hold up over time

“Strategic thinking is a leadership skill that helps leaders assess impact, prioritize long-term outcomes and make better decisions under pressure.”

Why capable leaders struggle with it

Most leaders are promoted for execution. Speed, responsiveness and problem-solving are rewarded early in a career. As responsibility grows, those same habits can become liabilities.

Common patterns include:

• Jumping to solutions before defining the problem
• Treating decisiveness as a substitute for clarity
• Confusing activity with progress

How strategic leaders operate differently

Strategic leaders do not make more decisions. They make fewer better ones. They ask sharper questions, invite perspective and create clarity that reduces confusion downstream.

The post Strategic Thinking is a Leadership Skill appeared first on UpSource.

I am often surprised to hear that many in-house creative leaders are not running their own budgets for their departments. And because they are not the budget owner, they have very little say into what and how much goes into the budgeting process.
We all know running an in-house creative team is similar to running your own design studio. You have staff costs, hardware and software costs, paper, toner and professional development costs, just to name a few common line items.
Even for small teams under five people, this is a lot to track and manage properly, so why would you want a non-creative leader managing the creative budget for you? Well you don’t, so speak up.
If the creative budget in your organization cannot be broken out separately from the marketing budget, then at least get involved. Let your boss know that you would like to review a line-itemed budget for the following year that you can assist in controlling throughout the year.
For those of you who have trouble getting approval for conferences, membership fees and professional development initiatives, here’s your chance to plan for it, get it in the budget up front and let your boss know what it’s all about way in advance.
Robin Colangelo
I AM IN-HOUSE : White & Case
VP, Board of Directors, InSource
@RobinColangelo4

The post 2-Minute Tip: Budgeting appeared first on UpSource.

I can’t see straight when clutter begins to take over. I can’t think clearly and lose focus. I’m sure I’m not the only one but I may be more sensitive to recognizing this issue within myself.
Even though I’m a constant purger/straightener/cleaner, my work space still becomes cluttered with assets from multiple projects happening simultaneously.
At the beginning of each year I like to do an extra purge to clear the decks and take a moment to think about what’s been bugging me that I can address at my in-house job. Tackle it now before the year takes off faster than you can say Happy New Year!

The post New year clean-up! appeared first on UpSource.

From messaging to visual identity
Design is a unifying factor to support marketing and business development efforts. The best way to demonstrate how design drives value for a brand is to point out how creative work touches virtually every aspect of your organization.

In years past, I’ve worked for businesses with inconsistent branding. There were the obvious things –different logos or a wide variation in the look and feel across offices and collateral. However, there was a larger problem: The brand inconsistency confused employees, clients, and prospects.

Employees who don’t understand their brand or value proposition can’t sell it to anyone else. Business development becomes more challenging when your messages are conflicting, you have a different logo on your collateral versus your website, and you’re not even prepared for your elevator pitch on who you are and why anyone should care.

Recruiting
Another area in which your business can fall short from inconsistent branding and loose messaging is recruiting. The top talent will always choose the company that comes across as buttoned-up.

Use examples
When speaking with peers from other departments about marketing and design, I often rely on the Coca-Cola brand as an example. Everything about that brand is consistent: The logo usage, color pallet, and messages are the same so the customer always knows what to expect.

Making an impact
It’s tricky to measure the success of great design. But I can tell you that design professionals can help you brainstorm ways to improve all of the above on top of creating design guidelines to train your staff, so your employees have clarity in how to speak and represent the organization.

Clients value a fresh perspective which is hard to see when your visuals are sloppy, your content isn’t proofread, and your messages are different every time they meet you. Clients gravitate toward modern messaging and branding that speaks to their needs and business objectives.

Design professionals want to make an impact with their work, so collaborate with them on all of your brand touchpoints and you’ll see how employees and business development will flourish.

The post Demonstrating the value of design in business appeared first on UpSource.

It’s ok, you’re not the only one. Here’s some advice from a woman who was in that very same spot. Let’s call it “In hindsight advice”:
Day one
Drink.
Do not pass go!
Do nothing but cry in your beer.
No phone calls, drunk driving or drunk texting.
Tell your spouse and stop right there.
Breathe.
Day two
Wake up hung over and starved.
Make full breakfast.
Whip out the laptop and update your LinkedIn profile, resume, portfolio, and any other bells and whistles that make you sound cool.
Prepare your “out-of-work story” to explain to recruiters and potential hiring managers. Why did you loose your job and how can you put a positive spin on this so you don’t come across as the disgruntled person you really are right now?
Day three
Begin calling everyone and their mother, with confidence. No backstabbing or crying about the company that let you go, just get to it about what you’re looking for.
Keep a list of everyone who even gave you a small ray of light that they can help and follow up within a week.
Day four
Contact every recruiter in the industry. Not just one or two—all of them. Sometimes they have the same clients and sometimes they don’t, so don’t hold back
Day five
Apply to every role online that seems like it could be a possibility, even if there are a few responsibilities that you have not had in the past. Hiring managers are always looking for the “unicorn”. So again, don’t hold back.
Day five and thereafter
Rinse and repeat steps three, four, and five until something sticks. Be patient—the right role will come.

The post So you got kicked out? appeared first on UpSource.

In our final interview with Michael Beirut he shared some solid advice: “You don’t learn anything by talking; you learn by listening”.
Robin: “You’ve been managing design staff for the bulk of your career. Any management advice or tips for the design managers and leaders out there trying to hone their skills?”
Michael: “The advice I tend to give people at any age is what made me more effective as a designer, design leader or even a manager: You don’t learn anything by talking; you learn by listening, and that’s the only way you learn anything actually. When I used to hear about something that’s going wrong, I would get scared and think, I’ve got to go on the defense and figure out a way to fix this thing through sheer force of will. But now I know about the idea of simply calling the person up and saying, “I hear you don’t like that thing or I’m sorry they got messed up. I still can’t figure out how it happened, can we talk it through?” You know, it’s just that it’s amazing once you do that. If they’re not happy with something or they like everything except that one thing, that one thing, most of the time, is the thing that I knew wasn’t 100 percent there anyway.
So part of what makes managing design much easier is that you don’t view it as sort of a competitive game that has winners and losers but a fun game. It’s really one of those things where everyone could win if everyone’s collaborating and if you’re patient enough to figure out what everyone’s agenda is and how you can help them achieve it.
You guys think a lot at InSource about the specific challenges that in-house designers face and what creative people face. So you know better than me what those are. But it always strikes me that a consulting designer seems to have the luxury of parachuting in, coming up with a bunch of ideas and not having to take the responsibility for following through on them. It’s a matter of not having to take the day-to-day—sometimes the hour-by-hour—responses that in-house designers get from the frontline. So I can have the option of simply persuading a few powerful people at the top of our organization to do something, and then a million other people have to sort through the repercussions of that, right? The reason people admire that work is, in part, because I really had talented people on the client side who were supporting the ideas, who were authoring the ideas, who made sure that we are all following through on the ideas so we were able to use the depth of their knowledge about their situation, their company and their institution.
Paula Scher talks about this a lot more; she said she’d opt to do nothing but set up effective in‑house design departments. She thinks that anything you see and admire is almost always because there are really talented people on the inside who are supporting the work, making it happen and taking it forward.
There’s also some thinking that I’ve just started to see this year where there’s this obsession with innovation as a goal and as an ideal and as the one and only true purpose of anyone’s work is to be innovative, and that’s great. Who doesn’t want to be known for their innovative and design innovation, which are really linked both in the popular mind and I think in the minds of a lot of designers and minds who work with designers?

But there have been a couple of articles—and I think there’s a conference—about if we spent less on innovation and more on maintenance, the world would be a better place. The reason things work isn’t just because of an amazing idea at the very beginning. They work because there was an amazing idea that was sustainable so people are able to contribute to it and make it stronger over time rather than just watch the slow and inevitable degradation of it, right?
A lot of times when I’m doing work for bigger organizations, I try to figure out how few elements to provide that would give the people on the inside enough to work with if they could really make connections that I couldn’t think of and make connections they can’t think of today because they get a different challenge tomorrow. I’m not favored to be there tomorrow or the day after that but they will be, and how can they figure out to do that. And I think that goes against what designers tend to do. I think all of us—whether in-house or out-house—just love the idea of something that’s complete and finished and fully developed; it’s the perfectly frosted cake with the cherry on top, you know. I think so much of the work you see in the world that’s actually worthwhile and admired in terms of design, particularly in terms of large-scale, complex design problems, is because really talented people didn’t take it on as a project that had a phase 1, phase 2, phase 3, phase 4, invoiced it and then done with it. Instead, they owned it and committed to it, and part of this commitment involves knowing it so well, inside and out, that they know all they can do and they know what people needed to do but they are able to retain within themselves the ability to push it forward so it does unexpected things that no one imagined when it was born.”
Robin: “It’s a full circle process in that all these different types of people and their expertise are involved to make it work. In my experience, it does seem as if you need both sides of the fence that you didn’t see concepting and design taking and maybe some fresh perspectives. And it’s all about that in-house group that loves their brand, knows their organization and wants to take it forward and make it explode.”
Michael: “Yeah! And boy, you know, there’s nothing that I like more—and it’s true for my whole team—that we are working with people on the inside of the organization who know it well and who are able to navigate the organization with confidence, who are really ambitious on behalf of the people they work for. I think there’s so much to work in that sort of situation, and that’s tough because I don’t think it’s just sheer force of will. There are places where the management confidence isn’t there in the group so they don’t value it. Usually there are a lot of problems above and beyond, and that’s what the poor in-house designers are putting up with. I think if they are treated that way, God only knows what else is happening to people there. And so not every place has an unlimited potential, not every project has unlimited potential and not every designer has unlimited potential; it’s just the way the world is. But a lot of times it’s just a matter of people, and it’s just understanding what people are trying to get out of their jobs from day to day and what their ambitions are overall. It’s not always true but a lot of times you can figure out a way to make design play into those desires.”
Robin: “So what’s next in design?”
Michael: “I just agreed with Jessica Helfand to teach a course in Design Management at Yale, and this is a big, serious commitment. It’s not just like a little lecture for a few times. We are going to put together some serious coursework and start to figure on a way to introduce or reinforce a design culture at this great business school for the MBA program.
Jessica received both her BA in graphic design and architectural theory and her MFA in graphic design from Yale University, and she and I both taught in the School of Art. I taught a little bit in the School of Management before so we know the place, and I think there’s an interesting opportunity to figure out what managers, future clients, future in-house managers, future CEOs, CFOs and CMOs need to be exposed to in terms of design to understand what its potential is.
One of its strengths is the walls between departments and schools are more porous than permeable. So one of the opportunities, I think, is what happens if there are architects or design students taking this class alongside the business students? Also, not just that, but what if there are medical students, or forestry students or law students taking the class? One of the great things about design is it’s a field of knowledge on one hand but it’s also a way to synthesize different fields of knowledge; it’s a way of thinking as well as stuff to think about, and I think that’s one of the fun things. It reaches right in the middle of all these really brilliant academics centered within Yale who can really all have so much potential in making contributions to what we know about design and what makes it so cool.”
Robin: “That’s amazing. I don’t know how you have time for all of this. Thank you for everything you do for the creative community!”
 

The post “HOW TO” – Exclusive interview with Michael Bierut – Part 3 appeared first on UpSource.

Check out part two of our exclusive interview with Michael Beirut and learn what frustrates him most in the design industry.
Robin: “One of the things that made me smile at the very end of the book was the statement: ‘And Paula Scher is the person that I’m endlessly trying to impress.’ You guys sound like brother and sister.”
Michael: “A little bit, yeah. We started at Pentagram at the same time although we are very different people and had very different backgrounds. She had worked in Corporate America at CBS Records and Atlantic Records for the first part of her career but at that point had been running an independent office for 7 or 8 years, and she did work that I thought was famous. As a music enthusiast I knew her album covers already. She has a poster she did for Elvis Costello that was described in detail in the book “Less than Zero” by Bret Easton Ellis, and I was thinking, WOW!
She’s extremely honest to the point of being blunt. If you show her something just fishing for a compliment, chances are she’ll maybe compliment you but also probably tell you how to improve it. On the other hand, I’m always afraid to offend people. I never want to make them feel bad so even constructive advice, which is something that I give so delicately that sometimes people can’t tell that I actually think something is horrible and you need to fix that now, please! I’m getting better as I’m getting older, but she was always blunt that way. And so I would show her things and ask her questions, and she could just give me really fast answers. I had nothing but questions because when I joined Pentagram I’d never run my own business before. I’d really been in this protective environment working for Massimo where he was the one whose charisma basically sold the work. I was implementing things according to his vision. I felt really inexperienced from the first day I joined Pentagram. I looked up to Paula as a slightly older sister who sort of knew all kinds of stuff; it was as if she was kind of like a year ahead of me at school and knew all the teachers, knew what would happen if you got in trouble, knew how to get ahead and just had all of this advice. So I think we ended up having a close working relationship, which has been going on now for 26 years.”

Robin: “What frustrates you the most in the design industry?”
Michael: “I remember when I was in my 30s and started being in a room with people talking business. It’s just so easy to get infatuated with what designers think after they graduate from school; their heads are full, not only of creative ideas but also with design jargon, a language that only other designers and design teachers and design students use. Then you discover that regular people don’t talk that way; you’ll be describing the merit of something to someone and they won’t understand what you’re talking about because you’re not using any words that they understand.
So then people say, “Oh shoot! No one cares about design jargon,” they switch into business jargon, and my business jargon is awful. I’ll take design jargon any day but you hear people doing presentations that are empty and monotone; they say silly things that take the juice out of what’s exciting and interesting and magical about design as a desperate attempt to make it understandable and palpable to what they think is business people.
They try to reduce it down to this long string of platitudes and clichés—whatever the platitudes and clichés of the moment are, whatever the last thing you’ve heard at the last conference you attended or the last all hands meeting you went to, the last memo you got or whatever. If you’re lucky you sort of realize no, people actually do find design exciting. You can’t use it as a way to make people feel stupid but a magic trick doesn’t make people feel stupid. They don’t understand how it works but they are pleased it gives them the moment of delight.
I don’t think what we do is magical all the time. But if you do a magic trick for someone and they don’t seem to appreciate it, I suspect you’re not doing the trick exactly right. Or you haven’t set it up the right way. You’re missing it somehow but the solution isn’t to show people how the trick is done or to make them learn how to do the trick. The solution is to figure out how you can manage to give them the sense of how the trick is supposedly engineered. I think you need to acknowledge people’s eagerness to believe in magic, right? And just because you sort of know what happens behind the curtain, what the actual tricks are to produce the effect doesn’t make it any less potentially magical for people.”
Check back next week for the final part of our three-part interview

The post “HOW TO” – Exclusive interview with Michael Bierut – Part 2 appeared first on UpSource.