Let’s begin with your personal journey. How did you first step into the advertising world, and more specifically, the media buying industry? What inspired or influenced that move—were there particular mentors who guided you, or did you simply find yourself transitioning into marketing and communications after university?
After completing university as an economics student, our ambition was to work in banks. I graduated in 1997, but unfortunately, a banking job didn’t come along. At the time, I was also playing cricket, and one of my mentors, the late Abbey Kits Lutaaya, called me and asked me to visit MCL McCann.
I was interviewed by Mike Daugherty, the owner of the agency, then, and was hired as a media executive. Just three months later, I became media manager after the then media director, Nicholas Shalita, left for Rwanda to become the personal assistant to President Paul Kagame. Later, Shalita went on to serve as Rwanda’s representative to the UN in the United States.
So that’s how I found myself in the media industry—through a sports connection. I was recommended by A.K. Lutaya, who was then General Secretary of the National Council of Sports, after he had seen me play cricket. I really owe my entry into the industry to my sports network.
MCL McCann, where I began, was, by and large, the first known advertising agency in Uganda. Mike Daugherty had come from America to cover the famous boxing match in Zaire between George Foreman and Muhammad Ali. On his way through Uganda, he saw opportunities and, in 1980, came back to set up MCL. According to history, the agency played a role in marketing the 1982 World Cup, helping brands advertise around the event.
Fast forward to February 1998, when I joined as a media executive. Within three months, I was promoted to media manager. And that’s how my journey in the agency world began.
What was the Ugandan advertising scene like when you began—who were the key clients and agencies, and how did that environment shape your early career?
When I joined the industry, MCL was a fully-fledged agency, although the staff numbers were much smaller compared to a modern agency today. We were a team of about 14, and at that time, we were considered the biggest agency in Uganda.
That changed later in the year, around October, when Adapt TBWA (which later became QG Saatchi & Saatchi) opened. They seemed to have more staff and quickly rivalled us in size. By comparison, their core team was about 18 to 20 people then. Scanad was the other competitor.
Within that structure, media buying was the largest department. The creative team was very lean—just three people: a copywriter, a designer, and one production person. We also had one administrator, two finance staff, and a client service department that had about three people, and a PR department with two and media with four, making it the biggest team functionally.
There was enormous pressure on me as a young manager to perform in a role new to me. I had to learn very first to give confidence to our clients, given the weight of the media decisions I had to make, which impacted client budgets.
By then, the biggest clients were in the beverage sector, and the two traditional breweries and soft drink companies had the biggest advertising share. There was a fair share of health promotion messages and substantial government sector communication. Some of the top sectors we know that have the biggest share of voice, like telecoms and banking, only placed occasional adverts in the newspapers.
In those early days, how did agencies operate in terms of tools, briefs, and communication? Were you already using email and the internet, or was it mostly face-to-face interactions?
Internet access was very limited when I first joined. We had only two internet connections in the office—one for the Managing Director and another for the Creative Director, a Kenyan called Thomas Omamo, who doubled as both copywriter and creative lead.
For the rest of us, if you wanted to check email, you would wait until after work to use one of those two machines. Most client briefs came in face-to-face meetings, well-typed and presented in person. Only a few clients, like Coca-Cola, were sending briefs by email at the time.
About six months after I joined, the agency finally set up a proper office network. By the end of 1998, all our computers were connected to the internet, which completely changed how we worked.
How was compensation structured in those days compared to now? Were agencies relying more on retainers or commissions, especially for media buying?
As a media buyer, most of the agency’s income came through commissions. We did both media and PR work, but PR clients were usually on small retainers, while the media side relied heavily on commission. In fact, the only media client who consistently paid a retainer was Coca-Cola.
Some of our biggest clients at the time included the Coca-Cola Group, which was still based in the Nakawa Industrial Area, and Uganda Breweries (UBL). We handled both their beers and spirits until the spirits account was taken away when one of the account executives left and joined Uganda Waragi. At that time, the spirit business was a standalone company separate from the beer business. When the executive moved, she began doing her own advertising.
Beyond beverages, we also worked in the social marketing sector, DISH Project (Delivery of improved health Services), one of the earliest USAID-funded initiatives in Uganda, aimed at improving the availability and quality of health services in 12 districts. Another notable client was SOMARC (Social Marketing for Change), which marketed Protector condoms. SOMARC later evolved into what became Population Services International (PSI).
So by and large, we were servicing some of the biggest corporate clients of the day, with significant marketing budgets. And as a young professional at the time, the pay was comfortable. With the entry of Adapt TBWA into the market, the industry standards began shifting to a whole new level.
At what point did you leave MCL McCann, and what led to your transition to Adapt TBWA and later QG Saatchi & Saatchi?
I left MCL at the end of April 2001 after a conflict with my boss, which forced me to move on. I was out of work for a short while before joining Adapt TBWA, which later that same year became QG Saatchi & Saatchi. I officially joined them in February 2002 and worked there until February 2008.
From your perspective, what really caused MCL McCann’s decline—was it client losses, competition, or financial management challenges?
When I first joined, the agency was called Media Consultants Limited (MCL). Later in 1998, it became affiliated with McCann. Mike Daugherty had spent years knocking on the doors of global networks and eventually managed to secure the McCann affiliation. By the time I left, we were still operating as McCann Uganda.
However, around 2003–2004, the agency began losing major accounts. Coca-Cola’s creative and media business moved to Scanad, and Uganda Breweries followed soon after. When we pitched for the MTN account in 2005, MCL had already lost the McCann affiliation and was now aligned with AY&R. Over time, they were left with fewer big clients. The DISH project remained, and later they picked up Celtel, which briefly rejuvenated the agency.
But another challenge was the loss of key talent. For instance, the media executive who replaced me, Anthony Wanyoto, later moved to ZK Advertising to handle media buying for Airtel after MCL lost that account. Mulindwa Sekanwagi, another media resource I left behind, had already moved to Scanad. In client service, Twebese Rukandema (who managed PSI) left, as did Geraldine Kalyegira and Miriam Lwanga, the head of PR. Many of these were seasoned professionals, and once they left, the agency was left with a fairly new and inexperienced team. This didn’t inspire much confidence in clients, and more accounts slipped away.
At the same time, the industry itself was growing. New agencies were springing up, competing aggressively for both clients and talent. For Mike Daugherty, it became harder to sustain the agency.
From the inside, I could also see issues of poor financial management. Suppliers were often not paid on time, and the agency accumulated debt. That lack of financial discipline, coupled with the loss of major accounts like Celtel—which I would consider their cash cow—made survival difficult. Ultimately, I believe those factors led to Mike’s exit from the industry.
Would you say the loss of Celtel was the final straw that broke MCL McCann’s back?”
I believe so. Celtel was really their biggest client at that time, and they had it for about two to three years. After Coca-Cola and the breweries had already left, what remained was mainly the DISH Project. But even then, that wasn’t very lucrative, since PSI had divided its products among different agencies.
So, Celtel became the mainstay. Once that account was lost, it was a huge blow. Yes, MCL still had a few PR jobs with Uganda Breweries, and in fact, it was among the first agencies to run professional PR work in Uganda. They continued to do some good campaigns in that space, but nothing strong enough to sustain the business, especially before John Chihi of Mediage PR came onto the scene.
I once heard an interesting story about how MCL lost the Celtel account. Apparently, Mike Daugherty and Zaddock Kola, who later founded ZK Advertising, travelled to South Africa to meet John Little, then Ogilvy’s Head in Africa (2002–2007). Ogilvy was said to have strong links to Celtel Africa through contacts in the Netherlands, and MCL had been assured that once Ogilvy signed the deal, Celtel would be theirs. But as the story goes, John Little missed his flight to Amsterdam, leaving Zaddock alone with Tito Alai, Celtel International’s Chief Commercial Officer. That meeting supposedly led to Celtel being handed to ZK Advertising, which then set up shop in Uganda on the back of that account. Are you aware of this story, and does it reflect what actually happened?
I can’t authoritatively comment on that. What I can say is that during those years, as we were affiliated with McCann, we knew who the key players in the East African region were. I remember Zaddock’s name being mentioned often. He was the owner of McCann Tanzania and a major player in the outdoor industry there, even before setting up his agency.
I am unaware of the circumstances that led him to open shop in Uganda, but it’s no surprise that he was able to pick up business on the media front from MCL, since he was already well-regarded in the network for driving media in his home country.
What I heard is that by the time MCL lost Celtel, Mike and Zaddock were no longer seeing eye to eye.
Now, looking at your time at MCL and later at QG Saatchi & Saatchi, what were some of the key highlights and lessons you took from those experiences? And how did those insights eventually lead to the founding of Maad Advertising?
I joined Saatchi & Saatchi in February 2002. At the time, the biggest client was MTN. By and large, Saatchi was the MTN agency, with only a few other clients. Soon after I joined, we went on a pitching drive for additional accounts.
Coming from MCL, I immediately noticed the difference in management styles. Mike Daugherty at MCL had been an aggressive, hands-on leader. He was tough, sometimes shouting over small mistakes, but he taught me discipline, independence, and the importance of perfectionism. Long hours were the norm. There were days I worked 24-hour shifts, waiting for presentations, only to freshen up quickly and return to deliver them. Mike would insist on reviewing everything, even late at night. A spelling mistake could drive him crazy—but he was a perfectionist, and I learned a lot under him with support from the McCann network, which we were affiliated with. At QG, things were different. Patrick Quarcoo was more laid-back, letting you operate independently. The management approach by the two was totally different and helped shape how I defined myself when we opened MAAD..
Together with the teams I worked with in the two agencies, the work we did in the department, to grow the media budgets of the key clients, but also overall share of the agency pie. This was achieved through a radical shift in how we approached media buying, putting emphasis on media research, insights, In-house tools and spreading investment across different platforms and markets.
This gave me the belief that once we put together a solid proposal for any client, possibilities were endless. Furthermore, it underpinned the criticalness of our role and gave me the confidence that, if replicated elsewhere, it could deliver results.
A lean organisation where multi-tasking was encouraged was key in not only managing costs but ensuring value for money as we serviced our clients.
Finally, getting affiliated with the right partner was key in determining growth in the Industry. Global affiliations not only deliver new global accounts, but the support from a management and human skill perspective is critical. In my formative years, the McCann affiliation came in handy, offering training to network members, especially the media management teams.
Were you still at QG Saatchi & Saatchi during the difficult period when they lost both the MTN and Stanbic Bank accounts?
By then, I had already left. I was involved in the first pitch to defend the MTN account, but the second pitch came around 2009. That’s when they lost the MTN account, so I wasn’t there at the time.
Great. Let’s talk about Maad Advertising—how did it all begin? What led you to start Maad Advertising Limited?
When I joined Saatchi & Saatchi, I met two colleagues who would later become my co-founders at Maad. Adris Kamuli was a designer in the creative department, while Mike Kafeero worked with a sister production company, Kool Graphics, which handled pre-press and film work. We often went out for lunch together in Kamwokya, and during those walks, our conversations began turning into ideas.
At first, we thought of starting a training school for advertising professionals, because most people in the industry learned purely on the job. But from my boardroom experiences and exposure to media strategy, I felt strongly that there was also a gap for an agency that could serve SMEs—businesses that advertised on the radio but whose adverts lacked professionalism. My belief was simple: if we brought professional quality to those clients, they would see value, and their businesses would grow. I sold that idea to the team, and they embraced it.
By 2007, we registered the firm on paper while still working at Saatchi. In December that year, we set up and furnished our first office, quietly planning our exit. By January 2008, Maad Advertising officially opened its doors. Initially, Mike and Adris ran the office while I kept juggling my jobs at Saatchi, but by February, I resigned and joined Maad full-time.
We had no clients at the beginning, so we leaned on old contacts and pitched aggressively to SMEs. I remember visiting Movit Group with what we thought was a solid proposal. The MD joked by calling us abashuma—thieves—but we did open their eyes to new branding ideas, even though they never came back to us. Our real break came from a DANIDA-supported project under the Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture, empowering women in the agricultural value chain. That three-month project put the first real money in our pockets.
From there, doors began opening. A friend introduced us to the British Council, which connected us to Standard Chartered Bank. We pitched, and soon after, we ran a campaign for them—Yola Omudidi. Around the same time, we reached out to Warid Telecom through a former colleague, Miriam Wanjohi. She introduced us to their Commercial Director, Tushar Maheshwari. He didn’t give us a formal brief but verbally challenged us with product ideas. We turned around creative work in record time, impressing him so much that he arranged a meeting with the Managing Director, Zul Javaid.
I still remember that visit. Our office was barely furnished, with empty desks and just a few machines. We had told them we had 12 staff, but in reality, only a handful were there. When Zul arrived, straight from golf, he grilled me with tough business, finance, and operational questions. My colleagues had positioned me as MD, so the pressure was squarely on me. I remembered Mike Daugherty’s advice: if you’re unsure, ask for pardon. I must have said “pardon me” countless times, but I gathered myself and answered what I could, drawing from my unfinished MBA classes. In the end, Zul appreciated our technical expertise, while Tushar was impressed by our turnaround time compared to the incumbent agency, which took days, whereas we delivered in hours.
That was the breakthrough. We landed Warid Telecom, and with campaigns like Mega Bonus and Paka Last, we helped reshape the brand’s identity. By mid-2008, we were also doing work for the British Council and Standard Chartered, which gave us real momentum.
As for the team, we mostly brought in fresh graduates whom we trained ourselves. We couldn’t afford salaries at first, so we paid transport and lunch stipends. But gradually, we built capacity. Notable recruits included David Gonahassa and David Musiime in client service, Alemu Emuron in copywriting, and, later, young talents like Eric Mununuzi and Geoffrey Luyuyo in media. We also brought in an old colleague from MCL, George Wasswa, as Finance Manager. George was instrumental because he understood agency finances deeply. Having seen MCL collapse due to financial indiscipline, I was determined not to repeat that mistake.
That became one of my key lessons and one I always share with aspiring agency founders: never eat supplier money. The moment you fail to pay your partners, you lose credibility, and that’s the first step to going out of business. Financial discipline is the bedrock of survival in this industry.
When new businesses start out—especially agencies—there’s usually a lot of anxiety around landing that very first client. But in your case, within the first year, Maad was already winning big accounts, so money didn’t seem to be the biggest challenge. What other challenges did you encounter—particularly the ones you hadn’t anticipated?
When we started out, we pooled our savings and agreed that the first priority was to secure a decent office space. We chose the Uganda Manufacturers Association (UMA) showgrounds, which we thought was a good location. Apart from the partition for the reception and boardroom, the rest of the office was an open sitting area for all of us.
The next step was to bring in all the machines and computers we had—even those that weren’t working—just to create a proper setup. We also invested in decent furniture, which served us well for about three or four years before we replaced it. Importantly, we paid six months’ rent upfront. The thinking was that even if we failed to win business immediately, at least we would have an open and fully functional office for a year.
Luckily, by May 2008, we managed to bring Warid Telecom on board. They signed us on with a retainer, and from that point, finance stopped being a problem.
So, Daniel, can you share what your very first Warid Telecom retainer was like? How much was it, and what did it mean for you as a young agency at the time?
It was modest in comparison to what other agencies handling telecoms were earning, way much lower than the agency we were replacing. For us, that was quite decent for a young agency. We were managing our costs carefully, and honestly, we were so carried away with the work itself that the financial reward wasn’t our biggest excitement in the short term. Yes, we wanted to make money, but our philosophy was simple: if we did good work, the money would follow.
The bigger challenge wasn’t the money, but rather credibility. Getting people to believe in us was tough, especially competing against established agencies. Some were sceptical—despite the great work we were producing for Warid Telecom, because of our background at QG Saatchi & Saatchi. Many assumed we were only comfortable with telecoms.
Another major challenge was human resources. As a startup, our philosophy was to hire fresh talent rather than seasoned industry professionals. I wanted to mould young men and women into great ad people. But it wasn’t easy—getting them to appreciate the work culture, adapt to the pressures, and keep up with the pace. It took a lot of effort. Thankfully, many did adapt and grew stronger work ethics. But retaining them was a different story. Because we had a strict salary structure and weren’t willing to compromise much, some left—like Alemu Emuron, who joined Fireworks Advertising, and later Eric Mununuzi, among others.
Competition also intensified. Warid’s success with us woke up rival agencies, and we faced significant backlash both as individuals and as a firm. On top of that, we were learning management on the job. There’s no school for becoming an MD—you learn by doing. And sometimes that meant mistakes—carrying emotions into decisions, or being overly aggressive.
Related
Qcil CFO, Frederick Kakooza on Transforming Finance: Integrity, Governance, and the New CFO MandateStill, finance was never our biggest challenge. My biggest lesson from MCL and later QG Saatchi & Saatchi was financial discipline. I had learned the importance of planning for the future—saving during the good days to sustain us through the tough ones. That’s why when we lost Warid Telecom in 2010 to Scanad, we didn’t lay off a single staff member or cut salaries. The same thing happened when we later lost Orange Telecom (after it transitioned to Africell). Because we had managed our finances wisely, we could withstand the shocks. That, to me, was one of our strongest survival lessons.
Earlier, you spoke about lessons learned, especially around financial discipline and integrity. In the agency world, and particularly in media buying where you specialised, issues of trust, integrity and transparency often come up. Did you carry those lessons into Maad, and how did you instil that culture of integrity within your team?”
Yes, I did. Honesty was something I took very seriously. No client is ever going to believe in you if you are being dishonest. If a plan was put out, I made sure it was justified, and I spent client money exactly according to what we had agreed on—based on research and solid insights.
If you ask around in the industry, I don’t think you’ll find anything negative about me when it comes to exchanging money for business. I refused to compromise on that, and I think I proved it to the MTN team. They were confident enough to grow their budgets to those levels because they trusted that the right man was handling them. That culture of integrity was something I hammered into my team.
I didn’t mind if someone said “Merry Christmas” and slipped you an envelope, but to plan or execute anything based on a kickback—that was completely unacceptable. Even when I became an MD and handed over media responsibilities to younger staff, I insisted that nothing went to the client without proper justification.
This carried through to all facets of the agency, including production. For every decision—why we used a certain supplier, why we chose one option over another—there had to be a clear justification. For me, justification was essential. And because I came from a strong background of saving money and driving bargains, I always pushed my team: if it didn’t make sense, go back and renegotiate, or let’s find another supplier. There was no room for shortcuts or “manyanga” (shenanigans).
I’m proud that this culture of integrity and accountability became part of Maad’s DNA. The truth is, when agencies take shortcuts, sooner or later, the client finds out. And once a client loses confidence in you, you’ve lost everything. That’s why we were strict on this value—and I believe it’s one of the reasons Maad built its reputation and sustained itself.
Like Moses leading the Israelites to the Promised Land, you had guided Maad through the desert years into a season of big retainers. Naturally, when significant revenue started flowing in, how did you manage your fellow shareholders’ expectations—especially the temptation to spend? How did you convince them to save for the rainy day and tame those appetites?
I must give credit to my fellow shareholders because, by and large, they were willing to listen. I had been exposed to more boardrooms than most of them, having worked as a media manager and later media director, which meant I had sat in many high-level agency and client meetings. That experience gave me a deeper understanding of the issues at stake, and I often reminded the team that if we didn’t manage our finances prudently, we risked losing the very dream we had built. Thankfully, they took that seriously.
Our approach was always to resolve issues through dialogue, not by voting. I never believed in “winner takes it” decisions. If we disagreed, we would debate the matter, weigh the pros and cons, and sometimes even sleep over it before coming back to find common ground. This culture of consensus extended to financial management. No one woke up demanding a salary simply because of what they had earned elsewhere. It was more like a ujamaa spirit—shared sacrifice and parity. In fact, as MD, there were moments when the Creative Director earned more than I, and the difference between my salary and that of some junior staff was deliberately kept small. It was a conscious decision to sacrifice in the short term so the business could survive and grow.
The bigger salary adjustments only came later, particularly when we hired Stella Khan as Managing Director. By then, we had gained confidence, overcome some major hurdles, and realised that to reduce our high staff turnover, we needed to pay more competitively. Many times, we lost good talent to slightly higher offers from other agencies. At the same time, we wanted to retain the essence of Maad—a lean, low-cost model where fewer people worked harder, were more accountable, and eventually earned better.
That model was inspired by cultures in some organisations where people sometimes chose lower pay in exchange for a better cultural fit and sense of belonging. And it worked for us—though some staff left, a number later asked to return, because while other agencies offered more money, they couldn’t replicate Maad’s culture. For me, that was proof we were building something stronger than just a payroll.
Managing agency culture and values—keeping everyone aligned and moving at the same pace—is never easy, especially in a high-pressure environment like advertising, where demands can be relentless. It requires clarity, composure, resilience, and the ability to make the right decisions under pressure. Looking back at your time leading Maad Advertising in its formative years, what were some of your key experiences and lessons in managing culture and keeping the team focused?
I will tell you, it wasn’t easy. Coming from a media background, I wasn’t the kind of person who delegated much. Suddenly, as a manager, I had to oversee different functions and trust others to lead in areas where previously I would have been hands-on. I was confident about creative and production, and I continued handling media directly while training a young man, Geoffrey Luyuyo, who later moved on to Limelight and Moringa. At the same time, I stepped in whenever we had PR gigs, drawing on the little I had picked up back at MCL. In effect, I was overseeing three departments—Client Service, Media, and PR—while Adris focused on creative and production.
The challenge came in trusting young people. At times, my reluctance to fully let go meant we probably lost a few bids because we were late to learn or respond. My management style was also quite aggressive. Generation X staff could manage that intensity, but millennials and Gen Zs often found it uncomfortable and frustrating.
Another big challenge was networking. As technocrats, we believed our good work alone would win us clients. We thought we would impress them in the boardroom with strategy and execution. But we later realised that deals are often made outside the boardroom, in the relationships and networks you build. That was a weakness, especially for me as MD. Balancing the delivery of work with the need to build those external connections was tough.
Looking back, it was almost like the biblical story of Mary and Martha. Martha was busy in the kitchen, focused on serving, while Mary chose to sit with Jesus and listen. Jesus commended Mary because she had chosen what mattered most. We were more like Martha—focused on “cooking” the work, convinced that the quality of our campaigns would be enough. But then we would see campaigns go elsewhere and wonder why, even when we believed our work was stronger. At the start, we didn’t fully understand that in this industry, good work alone isn’t enough—you must also be present in the networking spaces where decisions are made.
Looking back, what would you say were some of the key highlights and defining milestones in your journey at Maad Advertising? Beyond the big client wins, what other turning points or achievements stand out to you as shaping the agency’s growth and identity?
One of the early milestones came after our first year, in 2008/09, when we moved into bigger premises in Kanjokya. That was a significant step for us because it allowed the team to grow from about 13–14 people at the end of 2008 to more than 20. We also invested in upgrading our infrastructure, especially design machines, which were critical in pushing the agency’s creative output to the next level.
By the time I left the role of Managing Director in June 2015, we were preparing to move again—this time to Ntinda, where the agency is currently based. However, I personally didn’t move to Ntinda. We had agreed as a board to hire a new MD in 2016, and I was supposed to revert to my role as Media Director. But given that I had also been MD and Board Chair, I felt my presence in the day-to-day would make it difficult for the new MD to freely do her job.
So, I chose to step back. I began working from home—not as a protest, but as a way of giving space. All media work, especially pitches and proposals, would still be sent to me for review, but I wasn’t coming into the office regularly. In many ways, you could say I started “working out of office” even before COVID made it a norm. Later, when we hired a new Media Director- Claire- I fully transitioned into the role of Board Chairman and left the operational leadership to the new team.
Let’s talk a bit about succession planning. Often, founders struggle with what is sometimes called the “founder’s syndrome”—the difficulty of stepping back and letting the organisation take on a life of its own. How was your experience in planning for succession, and how did you personally manage to separate yourself from your “baby” and allow it to grow under new leadership while you watched from a distance?
Yes, founder’s syndrome is real, and I must admit it’s a big issue. It’s one of those things that can easily influence how you make decisions, sometimes leading you to dismiss ideas from others or overshadow the team. I became conscious of it quite early, so with every decision I made, I always tried to put it at the back of my mind.
At Maad, we developed what I would call a unique management system. From the beginning, the shareholders also doubled as the board, so everyone was involved in key decisions. This structure made it easier to let go when we brought in a new Managing Director, Stella. Even though she was an outsider, the shareholders remained engaged, especially in financial oversight. For example, all payment processes and supporting documents were shared transparently among us, which prevented misunderstandings or conflicts over money. That openness has been one of the things that has kept us together.
Of course, challenges remained. Founder’s syndrome can also affect how an outsider MD fits in. Without going into too much detail, there were mistakes along the way, but as shareholders, we were clear and firm about where we wanted to go and how we wanted to get there. That clarity made it harder for anyone to derail the vision.
When Stella eventually left, we reflected and agreed it was time to have one of our own step into the MD role. It was a way of ensuring continuity, protecting the culture, and balancing the lessons learned from bringing in external leadership.
When I interviewed billionaire businessman Dr. Sudhir Ruparelia, he told me that at this stage in his career, he’s not so concerned about money coming in but rather focuses on how it goes out. Did you also reach a point at Maad Advertising where your main priority shifted from just chasing revenue to carefully managing expenditures, and how did that shape your leadership decisions?
I think one of the biggest challenges with today’s generation is that there’s a rush to get rich quickly. Everyone seems eager to drive the latest VX, build a mansion overnight, or live large, without realising that true success takes time. Personally, I’ve been in this industry since 1998, but it took me nearly 10 years before I even laid the first brick for my house.
What I see lacking among many young professionals today is integrity. Some are too willing to take shortcuts just to get ahead financially. We built systems over time that have worked perfectly well. We’ve always kept a very close eye on how money goes out. It’s not just about the revenue coming in, but about ensuring that expenditure is managed wisely and transparently. For me, this was a major lesson from early on, and it’s something I never stopped emphasising.
Even now, though I may not be in management, I still keep an eye on things. I have access to the Maad accounts, and honestly, 90% of what crosses my desk relates to finances. I don’t interfere with day-to-day operations—the board and the MD handle that—but once in a while, I’ll have a chat with the MD or board chair to question a few decisions, offer guidance, or share my perspective.
When I left the board last year, it wasn’t about stepping away completely and sitting back in the Bahamas waiting for updates. I still check in with the team, catch up with a few long-serving staff to understand their challenges, and stay connected. After all, Maad has always been like a family. Beyond that, I also find myself doing some marketing for the agency through my personal networks, which means I have to stay informed about both the industry and the business.
So yes, while I’ve learned the importance of “walking away” to let others lead, I believe you never completely disconnect. You still have to keep your foot on the ground—sometimes lightly, sometimes firmly—because that’s how you stay relevant and ensure the business continues to thrive.
As Maad Advertising began to grow, win major clients, and establish itself in the industry, did you ever receive buyout offers or approaches from investors interested in acquiring the agency, especially from foreign agencies seeking to bite into your wins or enter the Ugandan market?
No, we haven’t really had buyout offers. What we’ve had are offers for partnerships, but those have never been something we seriously entertained. I think there were one or two people who wanted to buy in, but again, it wasn’t something we pursued. What I’ve learned over time is that when cultures differ, aligning visions becomes very difficult—and for me, that’s a recipe for disaster. You can easily end up unhappy, walking away, or selling out altogether.
Personally, I’ve never been keen on partnerships or buy-ins unless they are very clear on what they bring to the table. At what level do you want to buy in? What’s your vision? Where do you want to take us beyond where we already are? Those are the tough questions.
At one point, we thought about regional expansion. But through our affiliation with McCann, we realised it wasn’t always necessary to move into a market if McCann was already there. And in some markets—like Tanzania—you really need a local partner to succeed, otherwise it’s extremely challenging. Rwanda, too, has its own complexities. And when you start bringing in partners, you face clashing cultures and different work ethics.
For us, Maad was founded on principles of hard work and integrity. So, unless a new partner is fully aligned with our culture and values, it risks becoming a wasted effort. Most times, people aren’t willing to adapt or change their style. That’s why we’ve chosen to remain independent.
You’ve had a remarkable journey—starting out as an employee, then building your own agency, and now shaping the industry from a leadership level. Looking back with all the lessons you’ve gathered, if you were to meet yourself in 2007, when you were just starting Maad, or even advise someone launching an agency today, especially in a partnership, what would you tell them to look out for? What key lessons—like money management—would you emphasise as critical for survival and growth in this industry?
Looking back, one of the things I would emphasise for anyone starting out is the importance of having the right accountant. For us, we were fortunate to have George Wasswa, a man who not only understood the numbers but also shared our vision. Many times, when I was too emotional to explain a financial decision, George would step in with calm authority. His presence grounded us, and it showed me how critical it is to have a finance person you can trust.
If I were to do things differently, I would also have brought in outside voices much earlier. In the beginning, all decisions were confined to the founders and shareholders. While this gave us unity of direction, it also limited our growth. A board with people from different industries would have challenged us, broadened our thinking, and helped us avoid the tunnel vision of only seeing advertising the way we knew it.
Another lesson was around human resources. People are the lifeblood of any agency. Our biggest failure was not holding onto talent long enough. Yes, there was a silver lining—we trained and released many brilliant creatives into the industry—but with hindsight, retaining more of them could have given us stability and continuity. I always encouraged the team to look for fresh talent outside the usual circles, and that kept us innovative, but we still underestimated how costly attrition could be.
Culturally, we also managed the agency in a very top-down way at the start. Decision-making was largely the preserve of the MD and the shareholders, with little involvement from heads of department. It worked for a while, but it wasn’t democratic, and it left gaps in buy-in. Over time, we’ve changed that—today, departmental heads are much more engaged in management decisions, and it has made the agency stronger.
We were also slow to catch on to digital. Back then, we were too comfortable with the traditional way of doing things, and while we prided ourselves on hard work, we didn’t stop to learn or adapt as fast as the industry was changing. It took us longer than it should have to integrate digital thinking into our work. That was a risk, because we could easily have become obsolete. Fortunately, we eventually turned it around.
Another weakness was the absence of a proper business plan in the beginning. Everything was in our heads, and while we occasionally revisited our initial SME-focused strategy, we often got carried away by the demands of big wins like Warid. Without a written plan, accountability was weak. We should have had a living document to guide us, measure progress, and hold ourselves to account. For startups, I cannot emphasise this enough—put your vision on paper, update it, and use it to assess where you are and where you’re going.
For me, these are some of the hard-won lessons: secure a trustworthy finance partner, bring in external guidance early, value and retain your people, stay adaptable to new trends, and never run a business without a plan you can measure against.
As we close, let’s talk about media investment management. In your view, how has this practice evolved over the years, and what role has it played in shaping and supporting the growth of the advertising industry? Looking at today’s landscape, do you feel media investment management gets the level of attention it deserves from brands and brand managers? And finally, what would you tell someone who doesn’t fully understand or appreciate why media investment management is such a critical part of the marketing mix?
When I look at the growth of media and its impact on the advertising industry, I would say media proliferation—especially the explosion of radio and television—was a real wake-up call for clients. Many of them quickly realised that if you wanted to sell, you had to be out there where people were consuming content. I remember during my time at Saatchi, MTN was heavily focused on Kampala stations, under the assumption that these were the only ones that mattered. But I had travelled enough to know that people in other regions were listening to their local radios, not Capital Radio or Radio One. So, part of my role in media practice became visiting those areas, experiencing how people lived and consumed content, and making the case that we had to include regional stations.
The moment you added a local station to the mix, it expanded budgets. And it worked—MTN’s subscriptions shot up as soon as we began making noise across the country. Later, when Celtel became Zain, they adopted a similar strategy of being everywhere. We had already seen this model succeed with Coca-Cola and Uganda Breweries, who understood that consumers often buy based on recency—that is, the brand they heard from most recently. So, being present in consumers’ daily spaces was critical.
This proliferation of channels, especially the boom in radio during the 2000s and then TV in the early 2010s, fueled industry growth by forcing brands to expand their budgets and strategies. Digital has added yet another layer, further growing budgets and creating new opportunities. But at the same time, it has brought complexity. Today, clients face the difficult question of: “With my limited resources, which platforms will give me the biggest impact?” That’s where effective media management becomes essential.
Unfortunately, media investment management has not always been fully appreciated. As far back as 1998, some clients felt agencies were spending too much of their money with little visible return, so they tried to go direct. In nearly every case, those efforts backfired. The reality is that success stories like Uganda Breweries, Coca-Cola, and MTN are not accidents. They are the result of systematic, professional media management. A marketing manager’s role should be to plan for the brand and oversee strategy, but the execution—deciding where, when, and how to place media—should be left to specialists.
That’s what a media agency brings to the table: research, insights, and the ability to stretch budgets to achieve the best possible return on investment. We’ve seen not only big players but also small brands benefit when they trusted the process and followed best practices. My message to brand managers is clear: let the specialists do their job. Work with your agency, challenge them on results, and if they aren’t delivering, change the agency—but don’t fall into the trap of trying to handle media directly.
Without expertise, you’ll often end up with poor deals. For example, radio stations run 24 hours, but I’ve seen cases where clients who went direct ended up with one ad in prime time and the rest buried at night when no one was listening. On paper, it looked like a bargain; in reality, it was a waste. Plus, who is going to monitor those placements on your behalf if you bypass the agency? That’s part of the auxiliary value media agencies provide—ensuring accountability, effectiveness, and real impact.
In summary, media proliferation has been both a catalyst for growth and a source of complexity in the industry. And while not always fully appreciated, media investment management remains one of the most critical pillars of brand success. The brands that thrive are those that recognise the value of professional expertise and partner with their media agencies to get it right.
As we wrap up, is there anything important that we may not have touched on—any final reflections, highlights, or key lessons you would like to leave us with?
I would like to emphasise that every business, especially in this industry, must begin with a clear vision of where it wants to go. That vision must be shared and lived by the partners, who in turn must trust one another and extend that same respect to their staff. At Maad, we always believed that if you chose to work with us—even as a shareholder—at that point you were subject to the same terms and discipline as any other employee. You could be hired, you could be fired. That kind of humility and mutual respect is what kept the culture intact.
Communication, too, is critical. Communication among partners and between leadership and staff ensures that everyone feels in control and aligned with the vision. It prevents conflicts from spilling over because issues are confronted, discussed, and resolved amicably. Of course, disagreements are inevitable, but financial discipline and transparency, coupled with open communication, are what keep a team together and a business moving forward.
I should also mention that beyond Maad, MCL played a significant role in shaping Uganda’s advertising industry. Many of the talents who passed through its doors went on to strengthen other agencies and even client organisations. Scanad, Saatchi, Ogilvy, Moringa, and several clients all benefited from people who began their journeys at MCL. In that sense, MCL was not just an agency, but also a training ground and incubator that helped feed the growth and professionalisation of the wider industry.
Would you say MCL’s founder, Mike Daugherty, could rightly be considered the grandfather of advertising agencies in Uganda, given his role and influence?”
From my perspective, no doubt about that. We should give him the credit. Because again, what I was explained to about the industry back then was that when a property like the World Cup came up, UTV staff would form small commission agencies that ran around the different companies soliciting for adverts to be advertised around the event.. Mike Daugherty turned that around.
He also helped professionalise monitoring before Steadman (now Ipsos) entered the market—ensuring clients knew their ads actually ran.
Beyond media, he played a pioneering role in PR, long before firms like Mediage PR came in. And he built strong teams—many people who passed through MCL, his agency, went on to shape both the agency and client sides of the industry.
The founders of QG Saatchi & Saatchi, Patrick Quarcoo and David Galukande, also played a big role in further invigorating the industry and turning it around again. They came in at a time when client budgets were starting to grow, and they pushed the boundaries on what agencies could do. Their influence, alongside bigger spenders like MTN, really changed the pace and direction of the business, moving it towards more creativity, innovation, and professionalism.
