A case study on a Creative Team and how different personality groups respond within the same operating system.
Context: The organization is still growing, but is “no longer strong enough”
In early 2025, a marketing agency of approximately 80 employees approached Jungji to clarify an issue: the organization continued to grow in revenue and number of projects, but the output quality of the Creative Team had declined compared to earlier periods.
The Creative Team was still delivering projects on time and retaining clients. However, work quality began to deteriorate: ideas became less breakthrough-driven, the number of revision rounds increased, and strategic initiatives were repeatedly delayed due to a lack of people and time to execute them.
Previously, the organization had tried familiar measures such as 1-on-1 discussions, review meetings, and team-bonding activities, but improvements were not clearly visible. As a result, the organization decided to conduct an Organizational Health Audit with Jungji to analyze the issue at a system level, instead of continuing to address individual cases separately.
The Creative Team bears the greatest operational pressure
The Creative Team consists of 30 employees and is the department where operational capacity issues are most evident. This team must simultaneously handle professional direction, work execution, and client demands.
Audit results showed that the Creative Team had an average burnout score of 66.8, placing it in the Red Zone. Burnout was concentrated mainly in roles directly responsible for idea generation and professional leadership, where the Innovator and Visionary personality groups account for a large proportion.
Approximately 67% of Creative Team members fell into the high-risk group, with an average performance loss of 19.2%. When converted into actual working capacity, the organization was lacking approximately 5.8 FTE of creative capacity, even though the headcount of the Creative Team had not changed.
Within the same Creative Team, different personality groups responded differently to the same operating approach.
The Creative Team’s issue did not stem from a lack of people or excessive workload. Data showed that the root cause lay in a shared operating model applied uniformly to all roles, while each group creates value in different ways.
Innovators experience a decline in idea quality and complex problem-solving ability
Within the Creative Team, Innovators recorded the most significant decline in work effectiveness, primarily holding roles such as Copywriter Lead, Design Lead, and Content Manager.
This group performs best when given time to focus on thinking, analysis, and idea development. However, in day-to-day operations, Innovators frequently had to handle ad-hoc requests. Constant interruptions reduced the time available for long-term thinking and the development of new ideas.
Audit results showed that Innovators had an average burnout score of 76.1, the highest within the Creative Team, along with a performance loss of 24.7%.
Achievers maintain delivery speed, but work effectiveness plateaus
Achievers in the Creative Team mainly take on roles responsible for keeping progress on track and ensuring work is delivered on time, commonly found in positions such as Senior Graphic Designer, Content Writer, and Motion Designer.
The average burnout score of Achievers was 59.4. However, when goals and evaluation criteria became unclear, this group focused more on completing immediate requirements. Over time, Achievers’ contributions shifted from driving improvement to maintaining existing results.
Visionaries lose their role in direction-setting and long-term alignment
In the Creative Team, Visionaries are responsible for long-term direction and for connecting current tasks with the organization’s development goals, typically in roles such as Head of Design, Art Director, and Creative Director.
Audit results showed that this group had an average burnout score of 65.5, while readiness for change reached only 66.1%. The main cause was not workload volume, but the fact that Visionaries had to spend most of their time on short-term tasks and ad-hoc problem-solving within projects, leaving insufficient time to fully perform their long-term directional role.
How does Jungji approach organizational capacity recovery?
Instead of implementing generic welfare programs, Jungji designed a 90-day capacity recovery roadmap, focusing directly on how the organization operates and allocates resources.
Month 1: Reduce immediate overload
Priority was given to reducing unplanned tasks, urgent requests from multiple stakeholders, and decisions that had to be made within short timeframes. At the same time, the organization clarified priorities and intervened early in teams located in the Black Zone and Red Zone to limit prolonged burnout and the risk of employee turnover.
Month 2: Reassign work to the right roles
The organization reviewed task allocation within the Creative Team to better match specific roles.
• Innovators were relieved from ad-hoc tasks and allowed to focus on thinking, analysis, and idea development.
• Achievers received clearer goals and completion criteria to prioritize the right tasks first.
• Visionaries were relieved from detailed, short-term tasks to focus on direction-setting and long-term alignment.
Month 3: Monitor and detect burnout risks early
Operational capacity tracking tools were established, regular pulse surveys were implemented, and managers were trained to recognize early signs of burnout risk, ensuring that implemented adjustments would not be reversed when workloads increased again.
Results after 90 days of implementation
• Capacity recovery without additional hiring
The organization’s average performance loss was expected to decrease from 14.4% to approximately 6-8%. With a workforce of 80 employees, this is equivalent to recovering 6-7 FTE of actual working capacity, instead of continuing to hire additional staff to compensate for capacity lost in operations.
• Clear improvement in team working state
The proportion of employees in the Black Zone was expected to decrease from 6.2% to 0%, while the Red Zone was expected to drop from nearly 40% to around 15%. The Green Zone group employees with stable and effective working states began to return.
• Teams realigned to fit their roles
After adjustments, capacity within the Creative Team was used more appropriately, reducing fragmentation and improving output quality.
• Operational-level impact
When working capacity is applied to the right roles, strategic initiatives are no longer delayed due to a lack of execution resources. New changes can be proactively integrated into operations.
Next steps for growing organizations
Many organizations only realize that operational capacity is declining when performance and work quality have already been significantly affected. Meanwhile, the cost of early diagnosis and intervention is often much lower than the cost of remediation once issues have spread widely.
Through the Organizational Health Audit, Jungji helps leaders clearly see the real operational state: which capacities are being lost, which departments are under the greatest pressure, and why the same operating model creates different impacts across employee groups.
To learn more about the Organizational Health Audit and the 90-day capacity recovery roadmap, you can leave your email to receive a sample report and illustrative dashboard, or speak directly with Jungji about your organization’s specific context.
en 
