Luxury fashion houses are swapping creative directors more frequently than ever, raising questions about the necessity and consequences of such frequent changes. Gucci’s recent announcement of Sabato De Sarno’s departure, less than two years after his appointment, is the latest example of how fast creative leadership turnovers have become. Luxury houses that were once characterized by their stability in the aim of preserving their heritage are now changing dynamics by swapping their creative leads at a higher pace in pursuit of innovation and a fresh vision. This comes with consequences, and this trend may have deeper and more complex impacts on brand identity and market performance than we think.
The Upside: Instant revenue growth and market impact
One of the biggest advantages of changing creative directors is the almost immediate financial boost it can bring. A new designer generates excitement, media buzz, and anticipation, often leading to a surge in sales. For example, Burberry saw its revenue jump by 286.75% following a creative shift that blended heritage with a youthful edge, while Saint Laurent more than doubled its earnings with a 106.38% increase after a bold rebranding and rock-and-roll-inspired aesthetic attracted a new generation of luxury consumers. As the fashion industry thrives on novelty, the introduction of a fresh creative lead creates a moment of cultural relevance that can translate into tangible success with consumers rushing to buy into the “new era” of a brand. This influx of attention may seem particularly valuable for brands that have lost momentum or need a reinvention to stay relevant in an increasingly saturated market.
Beyond the initial sales boost, a new creative director can also help a brand find its way through a shifting market. If a house has drifted too far into mass appeal and lost its luxurious image, fresh leadership can refocus attention on craftsmanship and exclusivity. On the other side, if a brand feels too outdated or out of touch, a new creative vision can make it more aligned with current consumer tastes. This kind of strategic change not only keeps the brand relevant but also reassures investors, signaling that the company is actively working toward growth which is crucial for corporate giants like LVMH or Kering, where financial performance is a priority.
The Downside: Diluting the brand’s DNA
Despite the instant financial boost that can frequently be observed, constant creative director changes can have damaging long-term effects. Today, there is a non-stop search for fast commercial success, and when a brand underperforms even slightly, management often points fingers at the creative director, rather than evaluating the broader picture, including marketing, communication, and leadership strategy. As a result, designers are rarely given enough time to truly establish their creative vision before being replaced. Instead of building something lasting, they are expected to deliver immediate results, making it truly difficult to craft strong and innovative collections that still keep the recognizability and core elements of the brand.
This issue is further amplified when creative directors want to bring in their own aesthetic, which can dilute a brand’s DNA and confuse consumers. When a house keeps changing its look every few years, it loses cohesiveness, making it difficult for customers to form strong emotional attachments. Additionally, with the role becoming more seasonal and unstable, creative directors may start treating these positions as just stepping stones in their careers rather than long-term commitments, focusing on what would enrich their portfolios before moving on to the next opportunity.
Thus, not every brand needs constant reinvention. Some houses are deeply rooted in history and heritage, where consistency is more valuable than radical change. In such cases, bringing in a new creative director just for the sake of innovation can do more harm than good. To succeed, brands must understand their positioning, whether they thrive on reinvention or if their strength lies in continuity, before making drastic leadership changes.
Gucci’s 2025 creative director change
Gucci, once a powerhouse in Kering’s brand portfolio, has faced a challenging year. The brand’s 26% sales decline in Q3 2024 has had a profound impact on Kering. Even though this downturn is linked to struggles in the overall luxury market, Gucci has been greatly affected. The situation has been worsened by the brand’s numerous changes in leadership as Gucci’s attempts to reinvent itself have left profound marks. Under Sabato De Sarno, who took over as creative director in 2023, the brand moved away from Alessandro Michele’s bold, maximalist style and embraced a more understated, sartorial aesthetic, returning to more essential silhouettes and wardrobe basics. This shift aimed to appeal to a broader luxury audience but has not yet produced the excitement needed to drive strong sales.
And now, with De Sarno’s departure confirmed just two weeks and a half before the show, Gucci faces yet another transition. With this, the luxury house risks falling into a cycle where no single vision is given enough time to establish itself, leading to brand instability and consumer confusion. The design studio will take the reins for the upcoming collection, leaving the brand at a critical juncture: how will Gucci balance commercial appeal with staying true to its identity in a rapidly shifting market?
