The other kind of creative director
If you're shaping creative work but questioning your credentials, this one's for you
I have a confession: I've been hesitant to call myself a Creative Director™.
Not because I don't direct creative work. I absolutely do. I guide strategy, shape narratives, give feedback that shifts entire campaigns. I build brands from scratch and help teams find their voice when they're lost in the weeds.
But I didn't go to design school. I can't kern type or push pixels until they sing. When someone asks me about grid systems, I nod knowingly while secretly googling "what is a grid system" under the table.
So what makes someone a Creative Director, really?
The "Capital-C" Creative Director
Let's start with the archetype we all know. The "Capital-C" Creative Director comes from the design world. They have taste that could cut glass. They see compositions where others see chaos. They know why that shade of blue feels "wrong" and can explain it in terms of color theory and brand semiotics.
These people are magic. They turn abstract concepts into visual languages. They make Pinterest boards that somehow capture the exact feeling you couldn't articulate. They're the reason you stopped scrolling on that Instagram ad.
I deeply admire this archetype. Many have inspired me. Their work shapes culture and moves markets.
But they're not the only type.
The "lowercase" creative director
There's another kind of creative director. The translator. The writer with vision. The one who ensures the visual expression tells the right story.
They don't necessarily design the thing, but they absolutely shape what the thing means. They're the ones asking "but what are we actually trying to say here?" when everyone else is debating font weights.
Their superpower? They give structure to creative thinking. They help teams find the why behind the what. And yes, they have taste too. But their taste shows up differently. It's editorial. It's strategic. It's knowing which story to tell and how to tell it.
Maybe you're reading this and thinking "wait, this sounds familiar."
The "lowercase" creative director is the person who can look at a campaign and immediately spot that it's solving the wrong problem. They're the ones who push back when beautiful work doesn't ladder up to anything meaningful.
They come from humanities backgrounds, editorial backgrounds, communications. They might have started in brand, or content, or even product marketing. They didn't set out to direct creative work, but they find themselves naturally gravitating toward the intersection of story and execution (while the rest of you hang out at art and technology).
They're the ones writing the brief that makes everything click. They're translating business goals into unexpected creative territories that changes the trajectory for your brand. They're the connective tissue to ensure your design positions your company to win.
And honestly? Many of you reading this probably do this job. You just might not have realized it.
Why this matters
Story-first creative leadership is often undervalued. But without it, even the most beautiful work becomes gorgeous nonsense.
You've seen this happen. The campaign that's visually stunning but leaves you asking "okay but what was that about?" Or even worse, doesn't make you give their brand a second thought. The rebrand that looks expensive but feels empty. The social content that's perfectly on-brand but somehow says nothing at all.
"lowercase" creative directors make sure your design lives up to its potential. They're the guardrails between good-looking work and work that actually works.
And that's about to become even more important. AI is going to make the visual stuff commoditized. But the strategic thinking about what story to tell and how humans will react? It's only going to become more valuable.
Don't believe me? Here's what one of my clients at Rho is actually looking for right now:
A "lowercase" creative director to lead founder-first campaigns that stop founders mid-scroll, challenge category norms, and make Rho the obvious financial partner for early-stage startups. (hmu if you want an intro, huge oppt)
The Mount Rushmore of "lowercase" creative directors
Look around and you'll see this hybrid leadership shaping some of the best creative work out there.
Take Emily Heyward at Red Antler. She's built an agency that's famous for creating brands with distinct points of view. But her background is strategy, not design. Her gift is seeing the story inside the business and then building everything else around that narrative spine.
Or Danielle LaRoy of Goodside, who takes the most abstract brand concepts and turns them into words that sing. She's not designing the assets, but she's pairing with her co-founder Jess to ensure they come to life in the most powerful way.
Or even Rion, the co-founder of Day Job, who is leading some of the most talked about work in CPG. He's not a designer but consistently ships creative work that's both funny as hell and strategically sound. He's directing the creative by directing the thinking.
These people are creating their own category. And the results speak for themselves.
So what is a creative director really?
The more I think about it, the more I wonder if the title even matters.
If you're shaping the creative, you're directing it. If teams come to you when they're stuck on the strategy behind the execution, you're already doing the job.
And if you're both? You might be one of the rare “ALL-CAPS” CD’s. (RIP Virgil)
The creative industry is bigger than one archetype. There's room for the visually-led directors and the story-led ones too.
Maybe you're not a "capital-C" creative director. But if you're shaping the story, guiding the work, and making it hit, you can still wear a low cut beanie to work.
- Elan
P.S. If any of this resonates, if you're one of these "lowercase" creative directors out there, I’d love to hear from you. What's your story? How did you end up shaping creative work without the traditional design background? Hit me up.
Elan is a lowercase creative director at Off-Menu, where he helps startups find their voice, shape their story, and bring creative to life.



Man, this hits. I'd like to think that I span the weird world between these two (a middle C?). Something about the converging spaces of creative, business, and language and how together with a kind of fortune telling, there is incredible value for the people ready to invest in it.
I've been doing a lot of thinking recently about this convergence, especially where these attributes align with significant business pain and tension, and require the relief that these talents provide. Lately, AI has been a huge multiplier in that mix. Not as a gimmick or shortcut, but as a way to compress the time between idea and articulation. I use it to test multiple strategic narratives in parallel, pressure-test messaging before it goes live. I use it to interrogate beliefs and theories that would have taken hours of conversation. It's not live, it's not perfect, but it's something that aids in my ability to sharpen and hone my take, and my taste. It's fuel for my capabilities as a taste editor.
It’s also become a way to keep one foot in the weeds and the other at the 30,000-foot view. I can zoom in on execution details without losing the thread of the larger story (which I might do sometimes as someone with significant ADHD) then zoom out and make sure that story still serves the business goal. The AI layer isn’t replacing the my judgment, taste, or connective thinking, it’s just clearing more space for it to breathe.
Let’s hop on the horn and discuss sometime soon. Great writing brother. Been enjoying it coming through.
I had never thought of it this way, it’s an interesting perspective. I do lean more towards the capital C than the lowercase one. I sincerely do wish to move the needle to the middle for more impact. Would be curious to hear your thoughts on that. Cheers!