Most people assume I'm working twice as hard by maintaining both roles. The reality is more nuanced: I'm working strategically by refusing to choose between two things that make me better at both.

Let me break down why this model works—and why I have no plans to change it.

The Economics: Why Teaching Creates Freedom

Here's the part most agency owners won't admit: the early years of building an agency are financially unstable. You're chasing projects, taking work you're not excited about to cover expenses, and making decisions based on cash flow rather than strategic fit.

I watched this happen to colleagues. Talented marketers who started agencies with great intentions, then gradually took on any client who could pay, regardless of alignment with their values. Not because they wanted to, but because they had to make payroll, cover office rent, and maintain consistent revenue.

My CIAT salary eliminates that pressure.

I'm not building Kern & Turn to be my sole source of income. I'm building it to do excellent work with mission-driven organizations—without the financial desperation that forces compromise. When a potential client approaches with a solid budget but misaligned values, I can say no without worrying about making rent.

This fundamentally changes the agency business model. I'm not trying to maximize billable hours or take on as many clients as possible. I'm trying to do exceptional work with organizations I genuinely believe in. The teaching income makes that possible.

Think of it this way: most agencies need to say yes to stay afloat. Teaching gives me the freedom to say no strategically.

How Teaching Makes Me a Better Marketer

But the value isn't just financial. Teaching computer fundamentals to students who range from tech-savvy to technophobic has made me better at my actual job.

Here's what I mean:

Explaining complex ideas simply. When you're teaching someone who's never used Excel to create a pivot table, you learn to break down concepts into their most fundamental components. No jargon. No assumptions about prior knowledge. Just clear, logical progression from point A to point B.

This skill translates directly to client work. When a foundation director asks me to explain why their current website isn't converting, I can't hide behind marketing buzzwords. I need to explain user experience, conversion psychology, and technical SEO in terms they can understand and act on. Teaching has made me exponentially better at this.

Meeting people where they are. My students come from different backgrounds, with different learning styles and different levels of comfort with technology. Some pick up concepts immediately. Others need three different explanations before something clicks.

The same is true with clients. Some foundation directors are digitally sophisticated and just need strategic guidance. Others need more hand-holding through the process. Teaching has taught me patience and adaptability in how I communicate complex ideas.

Testing messaging in real-time. I have a built-in focus group every semester. When I'm working on client messaging and want to test whether it's actually clear, I run it by my students. If a room full of diverse adults with varying technical backgrounds can't understand the message, it's not clear enough for the general public.

This has saved multiple client campaigns from launching with messaging that seemed clear to me but would have confused actual audiences.

Staying current without trying. My students are digital natives. They're on platforms I've never heard of, using tools I didn't know existed, and consuming content in ways that surprise me. By staying engaged with their world, I stay current on digital trends without having to force it.

When a nonprofit client asks about TikTok strategy, I don't have to pretend to understand youth culture—I can draw from actual conversations with people who live in that space.

How Clients Benefit From This Model

The obvious concern: if I'm teaching full-time, am I really available for client work?

The answer is yes, but in a different way than a traditional agency.

I'm not available for 9-to-5 hand-holding. I'm not the person to call if you need immediate answers to minor questions throughout the day. If you need constant access and real-time responsiveness, you probably need an in-house marketing person, not an agency partner.

But here's what clients do get:

Strategic thinking without the billable-hour pressure. Because I'm not trying to maximize hours billed, I can focus on what actually works rather than what takes the longest. I've had conversations with clients where the best advice was "don't do a rebrand right now—fix your internal strategy first." That's not billable, but it's honest. Teaching income gives me the freedom to prioritize their success over my revenue.

Focused project-based work. I structure everything around deliverables, not ongoing retainers. We agree on what needs to be done, I do it exceptionally well, and we deliver results. This actually works better for most mission-driven organizations who don't need constant marketing support—they need strategic bursts of excellent work.

Access to academic rigor. I'm constantly researching, staying current with best practices, and thinking critically about what actually works in digital communication. Teaching requires that. Clients benefit from it.

Realistic timelines that protect quality. Because I'm not trying to cram as many projects as possible into every week, I can give each client the time their work deserves. I'd rather do five exceptional projects a year than fifteen rushed ones.

The Practical Reality: How I Actually Manage Both

Here's the honest breakdown of how this works logistically:

My teaching schedule is consistent. I know exactly when I'm in the classroom and when I'm available for agency work. This consistency makes it easier to plan client projects than if I had a variable schedule.

I batch agency work strategically. Client calls happen on specific days. Deep strategy work happens when I can dedicate uninterrupted time. I don't try to multitask between roles—I give each my full attention when I'm doing it.

I'm selective about project scope. I take on projects I can execute excellently within my available time. If something requires more bandwidth than I have, I'm honest about that upfront. Sometimes that means saying no. Sometimes it means bringing in collaborators (Cristina handles video production and social strategy). Sometimes it means extending timelines.

I use teaching breaks strategically. Winter and summer breaks give me extended periods for intensive client work. I can take on larger projects or tighter timelines during these windows.

I've built systems that work. My teaching has made me better at creating processes, documenting procedures, and building frameworks that make agency work more efficient. The same organizational skills that help me manage 50 students help me manage client projects.

What I've Learned About Professional Identity

When I left my previous position, I struggled with professional identity. Was I a marketer? An educator? A project manager? It felt like I needed to choose.

The dual role has taught me that I don't have to choose. I'm both. And being both makes me better at each.

Teaching keeps me grounded. It reminds me that not everyone thinks about marketing the way I do. It forces me to explain, clarify, and simplify. It connects me to real people with real questions about technology and communication.

Agency work keeps me practical. It ensures that what I'm teaching isn't just theoretical—it's what actually works in professional contexts. My students benefit from case studies drawn from current client work. My clients benefit from critical thinking informed by academic research.

The two roles create a feedback loop that makes both stronger.

Why I'll Never Give Up Either Role

People sometimes ask if I plan to go "full-time" with the agency eventually. The assumption is that running an agency is the "real" career and teaching is temporary or supplemental.

I don't see it that way.

Teaching gives me financial stability, intellectual stimulation, and connection to people outside the marketing bubble. It makes me a better human and a better marketer.

The agency gives me the opportunity to do meaningful work with organizations I believe in, without the pressure to compromise my values for financial survival.

Together, they create a sustainable career model that I genuinely enjoy. I'm not working twice as hard—I'm working twice as strategically.

The Hidden Advantage: Selectivity as Strategy

Here's what this model has taught me: constraint creates quality.

Because I have limited time for agency work, I have to be selective. I can't take every project that comes along. This forces me to focus on work that's genuinely meaningful and clients who are genuinely aligned with my values.

Most agencies scale by adding staff and taking on more clients. I'm scaling by doing fewer, better projects with deeper impact. That only works because I'm not dependent on agency revenue to survive.

This isn't the right model for everyone. If you want to build a large agency with multiple employees and broad service offerings, you probably need to commit fully to that path.

But if you want to do excellent strategic work with clients you genuinely care about, while maintaining other professional interests and avoiding the feast-or-famine cycle of agency life, this model has a lot to offer.

Who This Model Works For

I'm not suggesting everyone should go get a teaching job. But I do think there's value in the broader principle: having a stable income source that funds your ability to be selective about your primary passion.

This could look like:

• Consulting part-time while maintaining a stable job

• Building a business while your partner provides household income

• Developing passive revenue streams that create space for selective client work

• Maintaining a portfolio career across complementary fields

The key is finding a model where financial stability enables strategic selectivity rather than forcing constant compromise.

Moving Forward: What This Means for Clients

If you're considering working with Kern & Turn, understanding this dual-role model helps set realistic expectations:

I'm not available 24/7. But when we're working together, you have my full strategic attention.

I take on fewer projects than a traditional agency. But the projects I take on get exceptional care and attention.

I can't accommodate every timeline. But the timelines we agree to are realistic and protect quality.

I'm selective about fit. But if we're aligned, I'm fully committed to your success.

This model isn't for organizations that need a traditional agency relationship. It's for mission-driven organizations that value strategic partnership, quality over quantity, and honest communication about what's actually possible.

If that sounds like your organization, let's talk. Not because I need your business to survive, but because your mission might be exactly the kind of work I want to invest my limited agency time in.