What the f*#@ is an Art-Director?
On the origins and evolution of titles in design and advertising
‘What do you do for a living?’
‘Oh, I’m a creative director.’‘Sounds like something they do in film?’
‘Actually it is, but that’s not what I do. Basically I’m just a designer that has a group of other designers that work for me.’‘Huh. That sounds confusing.’
‘Yeah. I know.’
This was my conversation with an Uber driver as I was on my way to audit a convention in San Diego. The conversation came up because he seemed to not understand why a ‘Creative Director’ from San Francisco would be in town to attend a construction convention. Without getting into the backstory, let me first assure you that it did indeed make sense.
Let me also assure you that this whole title thing is also definitely very confusing.
This is particularly true when it comes to the title Art Director. ‘Art Director’ is used for a number of similar job functions across a wide variety of industries, including but not limited to: Theater, Marketing, Design, Animation, Publishing, Fashion, Film, Video Games, Technology, and Advertising. In general, a singular Art Director is charged with identifying, unifying, and supervising the high-level vision of any creative project. These efforts usually focus on visual communication; but also extend into mood, style, and overall conceptual approach.
For the purpose of this article, (and since I don’t have the experience to adequately comment on the other permutations) we’ll stick with a much more closely related pair of industries: Design and Advertising.
In order to understand how we arrived at our current definition of the term ‘Art Director’, we should start at the beginning… Although rudimentary forms of advertising existed as far back as ancient Egypt and Rome, the most contemporary forms of it really sprung up in the 18th century in England following the proliferation of the printing press. In the early 1900’s we began to see a globalization of the practice, flowing outward from London and Paris into America, Egypt, South Africa, Asia, and beyond.
In 1920, Louis Pedlar initiated the ‘Art Directors Club’ in response to a growing confusion of the relationship between advertising and fine art. His original idea was that advertising could, and in fact, should be judged by the same stringent standards as fine art.
This is important for several reasons, but for the purpose of the topic-at-hand, it indicated the beginning of a sort of standardization and organization of advertising as well as the more common usage of the term ‘Art Director’. This would eventually become the industry standard and persist to this very day. Personally, I think that the idea that a commercially viable form of art should be judged by the same standards as traditional fine arts is largely erroneous, and likely motivated by self-interests. They were ad-men after all. This idea is probably worthy of its own post. I digress. Let’s move on.
The Rise of the Agency Model
Following the end of World War II and at the Great Depression, Advertising exploded once again. Budgets had returned to their normal levels, millions of Americans moved into new housing (primarily in the rapidly growing suburbs), increased leisure activities occurred, and consumption levels spiked. Television, Radio, and a number of popular media added fuel to the fire, giving rise to many of the largest advertising firms of today: BBDO, TBWA, DDB, WPP… you know… ‘Mad Men’ type stuff. I won’t spend too much time here, since we’re all familiar with it thanks to the show, but I’d first like to take a deeper look into the career of a non-fictional Don Draper: the celebrated designer Paul Rand.
Paul Rand
If you don’t know who Paul Rand is, stop reading here… feel a little ashamed… and go look him up. We’re good now? Ok. So, Paul is a hero to most designers and widely considered to be the most influential designer in contemporary history. He amassed a huge body of influential work, most notably for his corporate identity initiatives in the 1950's and 1960’s (IBM, ABC, UPS, Enron, NeXT Computers, etc.). Steve Jobs even went so far as to say, just prior to Rand’s death in the 1996, that he was “The greatest living graphic designer”.
So, I guess the biggest question I’d have is: How did one designer create such a prolific and influential body of work over the course of his lifetime? Most firms by today’s standards can’t even roll-out a single project of this type under three years. Well… the answer is that in addition to being an amazing designer, Paul was also an amazing Art Director.
Keep in mind that at the time ‘Art Director’ meant something very different than it does today. An ‘Art Director’ was the head of the entire Art Department; which consisted of any number of other craftsmen… Commercial Artists, Illustrators, Art Buyers, Copywriters, and Layout Artists. Although he famously had final sign-off on every one of the department’s creations, he was more of an inspirational and directorial figure, co-ordinating and facilitating the efforts of the various roles below him. There was only one Art Director per department or agency. By today’s standards, he would be considered an Executive Creative Director.
“Wait! Executive Creative Director?! What’s that?!”
Let me explain.
Evolution and Fragmentation
After graduating and working in Ohio for several years, I moved to New York in 2006 in pursuit of my dream job: to work at one of the country’s large branding agencies. I had hopes of one day producing the same large scale identity projects as Paul Rand, Wally Krantz, Michael Beirut, and many of my other idols at the time. New York was — and in my opinion, still is — the Mecca of corporate identity. So off I went.
Soon enough, I found myself fortunate enough to be working at Landor Associates — named for another one of my idols, founder Walter Landor — on a team of 6 freakishly talented people working on some of the largest consumer-facing brands in market. A couple of months in, during a critique, someone who I’d never seen before came into the room. He looked at the wall, pointed out a few finer details, re-framed the larger problem that we were solving, said ‘You guys are so good. I’m so happy we were smart enough to hire you’ and left. I turned to our Creative Director:
‘Who was that guy?’ I asked
‘That’s the boss.’ He said.‘Wait. I thought you were the boss.’
‘No. He’s all of our boss.’‘Wait. What?’
‘Yeah. The big boss. That’s the ECD. (Executive Creative Director)’‘Executive Creative Director?…Really?’
‘Yep.’
Now, I’m paraphrasing this exchange a bit, as it happened over 10 years ago, but that was the general gist of it. I was from Ohio. I was used to a Creative Director being in charge of everything. In smaller organizations this is basically how the structure went. But, organizations creating at scale and for scale are quite different. Let me lay it out for you (I’ll map it back to Art Directors at the end).
Interns, Junior Designers, Designers, and Senior designers are the workers of an organization, with the more experienced advising and assisting the efforts of those on the team (I was a Designer in the above exchange). They are primarily focused on mastering craft. The actual execution of the work. Expect 2–4 to be on a project at any given time depending on scale and lifecycle.
Design Directors are the most proficient designer on an individual project. They guide the efforts of the designers on the team to make sure it stays in line with the higher level project goals. Having already mastered craft, they are primarily concerned with quality assurance and will generally split their time between execution and mentorship. These efforts are all focused inward, leaving client and interdepartmental management to the creative directors. They are primarily focused on mastering the strategy of the work. One DD per project.
Creative Directors and Associate Creative Directors will lead a number of different projects and several client relationships. My experience is that although the roles are quite similar, in order to transition from ACD to CD they need to be responsible for a very large chunk of retainer business. This is to say, CDs are responsible for not only the final quality of work as it leaves the studio, but also maintaining continuing relationships and revenue streams. They are primarily concerned with influence. These concerns manifest both internally and externally – in relationships with clients, other vendors, and other agency departments. They oversee 3–5 large projects or initiatives at a time.
The Executive Creative Director is the big boss. Having mastered craft, strategy, and influence (ideally), they are very rare indeed. The vast majority of their efforts are oriented around influence; and as such, they tend to be extremely charismatic, with high IQ and EQ. They’re responsible for the efforts of everyone in the Design Department and for the group’s overall vision. Although most ECDs aren’t directly involved in the day-to-day workings of a studio, they will occasionally provide high level guidance on projects, advice on framing/presenting ideas, or final review on major initiatives. There’s one per organization. If Paul Rand was working today, he would be an ECD.
Advertising agencies, where the term ‘Art Director’ is most common, are basically structured the same way. Only in this case replace the term ‘Designer’ with ‘Art Director’. Most of my students or interns that have accepted jobs in advertising received the title ‘Junior Art Director’ (and then moved on to Art Director, Senior Art Director, etc…). This seems to be quite common in the advertising firms that I have freelanced for as well. I work in tech now, and although the title nomenclature isn’t nearly as standardized (in fact it vacillates quite significantly from company to company) the same 3-tier structure generally seems to apply. Although, at a tech company, almost all efforts are inwardly-facing rather than client-oriented.
What’s next?
So, that’s the general structure explained. From past to present. But what about the future? What will it mean for the industry moving forward? Since becoming familiar with this model, I’ve witnessed a few things happening that may be indicative of future trends. When coupled this with historical data these trends becomes all the more prophetic.
First, there’s a sort of inflation that’s occurring in titles. A devaluation over time. Sort of like the US dollar. $10 for a day-rate was pretty great back in the 1920’s, as was the title Art Director. Now… not so much. In Paul Rand’s time, Art Director was a monolithic leadership position. The highest achievable rank in the profession. Now, an entry level designer, just out of school and with no real experience, can attain this title.
I’ve also observed an increase subdivision in the 3-tiered career-progressional model. Now-a-days, it’s not uncommon to meet a Junior or Senior Design Director, or even a single office that has multiple ECD’s. I think this practice is often political, but also quite frequently compensation-oriented. Rather than give a designer the deserved bump in salary that’s associated with a promotion, they’ll receive a smaller pay bump with a slight increase in title. Don’t fall for it. This is a manipulative practice and we all suffer because of it. I’d prefer to not cite specific examples of this — maybe over a beer — but trust me, it happens. And it’s increasing. Do us all a favor; and get the pay and associated title that you deserve.
Second, there is an increased confusion about roles and responsibilities. Personally, I prefer a much more egalitarian approach to structure. The flatter, the better… however, I’m willing to admit that titles are important in a certain context (beautifully articulated in this thought piece by Dan Mall) since they tend to communicate the general responsibilities and level of contribution to the work. Unfortunately, adding additional rungs to the ladder can promote unnecessary class-conscious behavior on teams. Jostling for position and an often snobbish assertion of seniority occur. This can be counter-productive, divisive, and ultimately unhealthy for an organization. Put in your time, do great work, and trust that others around you have as well.
“Your title tells your colleagues how to interact with you.” Dan Mall
Third, is personal confusion. I think this lack of clarity is unhealthy for individuals’ careers as it takes the focus off of what skills we should be focusing on any given time in our development. Rather than asking: ‘Have I mastered craft, and am now ready to begin concentrating on the strategic goals of each project?’. We ask ‘Can I get a new title?’. This seems wrong to me. Instead let’s ask ‘Have I mastered this skill set?’ If so, then great! If not, keep working at it.
Instead look to appropriately titled co-workers in immediate proximity to serve as excellent examples as to what to strive for next. They should be learned from. Not to mention, someone nearby who can offer guidance around short-to-long-term success. These people are extremely important for each of us to know and learn from in order to achieve professional and personal growth.
Now that we’ve reviewed the historical significance of the Art Director title, the industry divisions, general structure of labor, and potential trending; I hope I have provided some additional clarity. Never again shall you ask me ‘what does a creative director do, anyways?’ I look forward to hearing your comments, thoughts, and own personal experiences.
♡ Curmy
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are by no means universal. They are simply my general understanding of how contemporary titles came to be — based on historical context, observation, and my own personal career.
