Volume 28...Wherein Grumpy & Grouchy Ponder Whether Or Not The Personal Brand Is Really A Thing
This is the 28th edition of a conversation column Phil Friedman and I started 2 years agove over in the Lumpy Kingdom of the Not Yet Microsoft Hamsters. The main purpose of our mutual efforts is not unlike that of our individual efforts. The ask some questions and use out experience to provide some answer to the issues we think are worth discussing. We have build a pretty solid following with this, and for that we are grateful guys.
JIM: As you know, I am a big fan of contrarian and real world marketing icon, Bob Hoffman. Every Sunday I get his email newsletter where he debunks various myths about digital marketing and social media, mostly having to do with national or multinational brands
I found this week’s piece particularly interesting and worth a discussion in our little forum here.
This is the piece verbatim: (with Bob’s kind permission)
**********************
“One of the primary justifications for marketers' continued obsession with social media is the belief that online "conversations" about a brand are an indication of real-world consumer interest in the brand.
"Extensive new research" from a firm called EngagementLabs throws about an ocean of cold water on this belief.
Here's what they did. Over the course of a year, they did a week-by-week study comparing online chatter with real talk - "the conversations people have in person with family, friends, colleagues at work" - for 500 brands.
They measured four parameters: Volume (the amount of talk); Net sentiment (positive talk minus negative talk; Sharing of content, and Influence (do the people who chatter matter?
Here's what they found.
For volume "the findings were mixed... But for all practical purposes, the association was not sufficient that a brand marketer could reasonably assume that one is a mirror to the other."
For sentiment, "no meaningful correlation at all."
For sharing "...the correlation for brand sharing was essentially zero...it is fair to conclude that consumer engagement with brands’ marketing content works entirely independently offline and online."
And finally, the effect on more influential consumers? "On this metric there is a slightly negative correlation." In other words, the more online, the less real-world.
While positive word-of-mouth is a valuable asset to marketers, this study is pretty damaging to the theory that social media is related to real-world word-of-mouth.
Like so many other social media fantasies, the idea that social media chatter is the "tip of the iceberg" of consumer interest is turning out to be another marketing delusion.”
***********************
I found this to be quite revealing and more or less a confirmation of a position I have already taken on digital marketing in general.
What I am wondering, oh great and powerful swami Phil, is if there is a correlation between the result of this ‘brand’ research, and the kind of personal brand building that gets promoted on sites like LinkedIn and beBee.
PHIL: Wow, Jimbo, you really are a bull chip disturber. What with taking a swing at the sacred cow of “professional” social media.
But okay, for what it’s worth, here’s what I’d say is today’s Swami Salami Blue Plate Special.
When I first started on LinkedIn in 2006, I just could not get my mind around the concept of a “personal brand”.
I understood ― or thought I did ― what a “brand” was as it related to a producer or purveyor of goods and services. And I understood how the terms “profile” and “reputation” applied to individuals, as well as to companies. But I simply could not see how there could be personal brands.
After a while, I did begin to see that some ― emphasize some ― people on social media actually did, in a very real sense, have their own personal brand.
That brand was a cluster of images, concepts and expectations concerning how they would present, what positions they would likely take, whether it was worthwhile to read what they might say about a topic, and whether you would ultimately be pleased you took the time to interact with them and ponder and reflect on what they had to say.
Now, after more than a decade of being active on social media, I’ve concluded it’s not that personal brands don’t exist ― for clearly some do ― but that very few who speak endlessly about them have the slightest clue as to what they really are.
No doubt, that’s partly because those who speak the most about “personal” brands and branding don’t appear to understand what a brand is in the first place.
Witness all the posts and articles concerning how to “create” your personal brand or how to “improve” your personal brand, most of which treat branding as though it’s akin to applying make-up.
Do you want to brand yourself as an expert? Add “guru” or “ninja” to your profile or CV. Do you want to brand yourself as creative? Call yourself a “disruptive thought leader”.
On social media, you can be what you choose to be. Just type it into your profile. Then fake it until you make it.
However, I submit that brands are not created, but grow organically.
You can cultivate a brand, once it has taken root. But you cannot create it out of nothing. And it matters not, in this respect, whether you’re talking about a company or a personal brand.
If you want to brand yourself as an expert in some area, you have to first become an expert in that area. If you want to be branded as creative, you have actually to be creative. You can’t just run around saying you are.
And to my mind, Bob Hoffman is right on point, when he talks about “social media fantasies” and implies that nobody ― at least nobody with money to spend ― is buying much, if any part of those fantasies.
JIM: Whoa…now that is some genuine food for thought, or at least it will be for some people.
It’s hard thing to nail down just what a strong ‘personal brand’ really is. Lord knows I have tried to do this in literally dozens of different posts.
If you define a ‘personal brand’ in terms of the hard benefits that accrue from it, i.e. business, a job or product sales of one kind or another, then I would submit that you are very much in Bob Hoffman territory. And probably pissing in the wind.
If, however, you define a personal brand as being a person of influence or someone who is capable of generating the soft benefit of substantial and consistent of engagement (I know a few people like that), then I would argue that their ‘personal brand’ is strong and will ultimately solder connections that can lead to who knows what.
My personal example is that I recently moved into a new market and began to look for effective ways to connect with the businesses in that market.
Rather quickly, I found a business newspaper called Business Link Niagara that is a controlled circulation pub that reaches 4500 businesses in my region. So I sent the editor an email along with links to three of my beBee business-related articles.
The next day he emailed me back and asked me if I wanted to sell him these pieces. I said no, but I would like to be able to write regularly for the publication, no charge.
His response was short and sweet. “Looks like we have a win-win.”
And therein lies the difference. He looked at the posts, saw the respectable numbers I was pulling, read the comments and saw that I was engaging people. And that was all he needed.
So you might say that I was leveraging my personal brand to create a solid business opportunity or potential.
Now I’m not saying that everybody can do that. Because you know as well as I do that a very small percentage of people on social media are actually card carrying members of the tribe they claim to be part of.
But what I am saying is that for those who know how to leverage such a thing, a strong ‘personal brand’ can be a real advantage.
What I don’t know is what happens to all those people who are working to build a strong personal brand, but don’t have the horses to do it or are simply listening to the wrong people.
PHIL: I think we need to focus on the word “brand” in the phrase “personal brand”.
A brand is not the same as the person, company, product, or service represented by the brand. The brand is a somewhat amorphous cluster of concepts, images, impressions, expectations and the like, which reaches out ahead of what the brand represents. And in the same way, your personal brand is not you, although it triggers thoughts of you in the market.
For example, there are some authors of popular fiction who have very strong personal brands. One which comes to mind in John Sandford, whose Lucas Davenport and Virgil Flowers characters are among my favorites.
When I see a new John Sandford novel come out, I immediately buy it or borrow it from the library because Sandford’s brand is so strongly imprinted in my mind.
I expect a certain complexity of plot, particularly interesting and realistic dialogue, and so on. And that is basis on which I buy or borrow the new book. So entrenched is Sandford’s brand in my psyche. I don’t even bother to sample the book first or look at its reviews or even read the dust jacket note.
In the example you give, I agree that it is the observable nature and quality of your writing, and the demonstrated strength of your ability to create a following, which led the Editor at Business Link Niagara to hire you as a regular contributor. But I am not sure whether there is any indication your “personal brand” had anything to do with it.
As you yourself say, you sent the editor an email with three links to some of your recent work published on beBee. That is not relying on your “personal brand” to make the sale. Certainly not in the same way John Sandford’s or Tom Clancy’s or James Patterson’s respective publishers rely on those authors’ personal brands to sell their novels.
JIM: I think we may actually be agreeing with each other. But at the same time, I could argue that, in my personal example, it could very well have been a couple characteristics of my brand ie writing style, consistency and quality of content that convinced him.
I suppose it’s all in how you interpret just what a personal brand might be and I further suppose that we could debate that ad infinitum and eventually put all of our loyal readers into a comatose state.
BTW: I think your John Sandford example is right on the money. I also feel the same way about authors like Alex Berenson, Lee Child and Michael Connelly.
You could say their reputation precedes them. But at some point it didn’t and that’s where they had to start building their own brand.
So maybe there is no such thing as a personal brand. Maybe it’s just another one of those bullshit digital marketing terms and really what we’re talking about is simply building a recognizable persona or even an relatable identity.
Semantics is a funny thing, don’t you think?
PHIL: Of course, that could be the case. Perhaps, we should be talking about a personal brand as being simply a sub-case of brands in general.
Indeed, that might be the core insight here, if there is one. Namely, that a personal brand is one that accrues to a real individual, while a general brand is one that accrues to either a company or a line of products or services.
However, let’s not write it off so quickly to being “just semantics”.
Instead, consider that a brand, in general, or a personal brand, in particular, is like a bright, flashing neon business sign or a huge, well-placed billboard along the side of a major thoroughfare that carries some bit of highly recognizable imagery, such as a distinctive logo.
When you see such a sign or billboard, your mind is immediately driven to thinking of other related images or qualities or experiences or expectations.
For example, when I see the “Mur”, along with a Panama hat and a single toothpick, I immediately think of badass rants that make for good reading and even a few laughs, as well as a warm undercurrent of caring and much hard-won, practical wisdom.
That, my friend, is a personal brand.
Post Script: As you can see, pinning down the concept of a personal brand is a bit of a chore even for the intellectually inclined like Grumpy and me. I’m personally always amazed at how many people talk about a personal brand and yet can’t or don’t really define it.
Maybe it’s just one of those things we just have to take on faith. Like religion, reincarnation or a quart of milk that’s right on its best before date. But however it’s ultimately defined, making the most of your personal brand is always going to be hard work.
Keep the faith my peeps. Phil and I wish you well as always.
If your business has reached the point where talking to an experienced communication professional would be the preferred option to banging your head against the wall or whatever, lets talk.
Download my free ebook Small Business Communication For The Real World here:
https://onwordsandupwords.wordpress.com/2013/11/24/small-business-communications-for-the-real-world/
All my profile and contact information can be accessed here:
https://www.bebee.com/producer/@jim-murray/this-post-is-my-about-page
All content Copyright 2017 Jim Murray & Phil Friedman. All rights reserved.
""""""""
Articles from Jim Murray
View blogIf you fancy yourself a writer and cruise around on social media for any length of time, you will in ...
I · can’t speak for all writers, because I’m only this one and that’s really all the opinion I am en ...
Two years ago I returned home from a four month ordeal that included major spinal surgery, that took ...
Related professionals
You may be interested in these jobs
-
mécanicien d'équipements lourds
Found in: Jobillico Premium CA C2 - 1 week ago
Groupe Pro Mécano Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Canada Full timeVous êtes à la recherche d'un nouveau défi et avez de l'expérience en tant que mécanicien d'équipements lourds? Nous avons des postes disponibles pour vous avec de nombreux avantages · Nos avantages sociaux : · Dépôt direct à chaque semaine · Salaire compétitif · Assurance colle ...
-
shift supervisor
Found in: Talent CA C2 - 1 week ago
Starbucks Montreal, CanadaAs a Starbucks Shift Supervisor, you will assist the store manager in executing store operations during scheduled shifts. As a team lead, you will deploy partners and delegate tasks to create the Starbucks Experience for our customers by providing legendary customer service with ...
-
pizza cook
Found in: Talent CA 2 C2 - 5 days ago
J B'S DRIVE-IN RESTAURANT LTD. Boston Bar, CanadaEducation: Secondary (high) school graduation certificate · Experience: 1 year to less than 2 years · Work setting · Café · Tasks · Prepare and cook complete meals or individual dishes and foods · Prepare dishes for customers with food allergies or intolerances · Prepare and cook ...
Comments
Javier Cámara-Rica 🐝🇪🇸
5 years ago #55
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #54
Of course Jim Murray. "You're Closer Than You Think" says LI...We are closer than they think... The "Grumpster" is also included :)
Jim Murray
6 years ago #53
Bill Stankiewicz
6 years ago #52
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #51
Hmmm, Lada, there might be a lesson in that for others who are concerned with "personal branding" ...
Lada 🏡 Prkic
6 years ago #50
My billboard lights began to blink because I am flattered by your words, Phil. :-) I've obviously built my 'personal brand' on social media unintentionally, by just being me. Thank you! 😊
Lada 🏡 Prkic
6 years ago #49
My "billboard" lights began to blink because I am flattered by your words, Phil. :-) I've obviously built my 'personal brand' on social media unintentionally, by just being me. Thank you! 😊
Jim Murray
6 years ago #48
Honestly Phil Friedmant made a reference to that. A brand is not what you call yourself, but what other people recognize you as. (pardon the dangling participle). A real guru/expert/genius/whatever never calls him or herself that. Other people do. So yes, your point is well taken but I honestly thought everybody got that.
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #47
#65 #66 Yes Deborah Levine, I respect both approaches. The essence is in balance, and that is a personal decision. My observation is that women are generally a bit more subtle in approach and also in their perception of someone else approach. I agree this is a big challenge. Leadership is about social influence, mutual support and organizing of people in order to achieve a common goal. Yet, common goals can be very different: correct or incorrect, very material and social, but also immaterial (spiritual). The only thing I do not like too much is the term: "Leader". This is one of the most misused terms and not only in social media. It is generally associated with the power and corporate resources. Employees (human capital) of the company is the most valuable capital. Leaders are commonly associated with their strong personal brand. The human interaction, which is a synonym for leadership, means to learn from someone and to educate someone. Future leadership is about social complexity with a growing trend of social encounters and exchanges, also including this type of inspired discussions. Thank you.
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #46
I suggest to all, including Jim Murray, that the discussion thus far has failed to highlight what I believe is a crucial point. Namely that there are NO UNSUCCESSFUL brands, whether company or personal. If a would-be brand does not function as it should, then it is not a brand. Nabisco is a brand. BMW is a brand. Papa Phil's Potty Pizza is NOT a brand, never mind how I might write or rewrite it's or my profile. Why? Because it has not taken root in the market. If a profile or persona has not yet achieved market recognition, it remains simply that, a profile or a persona. It has not achieved status as a brand. Lada \ud83c\udfe1 Prkic has, I think, a personal brand on social media, because when I see her name and image, I immediately know that what she is sharing will be interesting and the discussions that she fosters interesting and polite. Cheers!
Jim Murray
6 years ago #45
Just want you to know that if you start harassing Phil again, as has been your pattern for the past two years, I will report you and use all the clout I have built up here to get you permanently kicked off this site. Not a warning but a promise. Play nice or go away.
Jim Murray
6 years ago #44
Lada 🏡 Prkic
6 years ago #43
Deborah, I’m glad you tagged me. Regarding my professional life, I never felt a need to advertise and glorify myself because my work speaks for itself. Instead of pursuing personal brand (whatever it means) I’ve chosen to pursue excellence in what I'm doing at work. Such approach led to recognition and a good position in the management hierarchy. I did all that without knowing what a ‘personal brand’ is. My brand is by definition a perception or emotion, maintained by somebody other than me, that describes the total experience of having a relationship with me. Or in the Phil Friedman's words, my brand is like a billboard with the sign “Lada Prkic” that immediately evokes certain images of me, my qualities or experiences, or what would be expected of me at work. I’d like to be recognized by my authenticity, and don't want to make the endless adjustment of myself in order to be acceptable to others, as Milos beautifully said in his comment.
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #42
Wow Professor Gerald Hecht :) "Milos and his fractal troll personal brand". #58 Personal brand - A sophisticated word that means something defies the laws of complexity. It is also an introduction to the endless agony. Endless adjusting of yourself in order to be acceptable to others. This is the perfect personal brand. For whom are these lessons? If I follow my intuition in social media circus and writing I will not be better to everyone, but certainly to myself and also to some precious self-similar people. If I manage to stay true to myself in writing, I will become a bit clearer and much closer to some people, while simultaneously I will dissociate from some people. And then, there is serenity. So called "powerful personal brand" in SM will never empower anyone to steer clear of the abyss of ignorance. But this is only one step to irrelevance. The pervasive commercialization of everything that is human, such as furiously branding, personal branding, and pompous self-aggrandizement represent the current trend, particularly in social media. I'm not sure that it brings good to each individual. This new trend in a way represents a generalization and somehow discrediting the human need for creative self expression, including chaos theory. Sometimes, "the end justifies the means", fortunately relatively rare. Putting the individual in place of product and aggressive personal branding brings with it a number of shortcomings and pushing us away from the essence. Long live our authenticity through diversity.
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #41
Peter, I understand what you're saying and agree that a brand can be a pretty big basket of various components, some conceptual, some emotional, and some actually tangible (like a logo). However, if I choose to follow you down the Brandsman's path, I'd prefer to fly... for if I chose to walk, I'd have to don hip-high rubber BS boots. The fact is that Wally Wilkins Commando Condoms can choose whatever they "want" their brand to be, but that doesn't mean squat in terms of market recognition. Which is, I submit, what branding is all about. Cheers!
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #40
Thank you, Peter, for reading and commenting. I am not sure how what you say is sufficient to admonish us to "restart our engines", though. "It's time to examine the three Rs of personal branding: Representation, Reputation, Relationship. They're correlatives to the three essential components of general branding: Promise, Position, and Personality. You can guide those elements but, ultimately, it's your market that decides what they are. If you don't like the results, then you can work on refining them (and see how the market responds)." (Peter Altschuler) From the piece: "I submit that brands are not created, but grow organically ... You can cultivate a brand, once it has taken root. But you cannot create it out of nothing. And it matters not, in this respect, whether you’re talking about a company or a personal brand." (Phil Friedman)
Jim Murray
6 years ago #39
Ok Deborah Levine. So now you're broadening out into areas where sexism, I believe, really comes into play. I personally believe that this is one of those carryovers from generations back...you know 'A woman's place is in the home'. And all that other anachronistic crap. Trouble is that men are simply not as evolved as women. I believe women should run everything. They are smarter, more thoughtful and patient than men and always have been. But I have to reiterate that my personal preferences in the 'thriller' reading I do are based solely on the style of the writer and the characters that are created. This is not to say that women are inferior writers or their characters are less appealing. Personal preference doesn't have to include rejection. There's a lot of stuff out there. It just so happens the the stuff on top of that particular list is men. If you asked me about singers. I would answer. Barbara Streisand, Linda Ronstadt and Patty Loveless. Does that mean I have a bias towards women singers?. No...it's just what Iike to hear. There are some men further down the list like Levon Helm, Van Morrison, Bono and Alan Jackson. So there you go...a lot of answers these days start with the phrase, "It all depends."
Jerry Fletcher
6 years ago #38
Jim, that pretty much describes my definition of Marketing: 1. Go wher the money is. 2 Offer what they want to buy. 3. Do it again.
Jim Murray
6 years ago #37
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #36
Gerald Hecht, I agree with you. "People are not products. People are much deeper than stereotypes." - from "The Agony and Ecstasy of Social Media Writing", published on September 16, 2014
Jim Murray
6 years ago #35
Thanks Gert Scholtz. We'll probably end up with an encyclopedia if we last that long. Right now, I'm not sure we have even hit our stride.
Jim Murray
6 years ago #34
Thanks Jerry Fletcher taught me that people they like to do business with people they like and trust. Using that as a benchmark you can see that having a strong personal brand, as you pointed out, is the mechanism you employ to build that liking and trust. Then of course, there is targeting. because as we all know it's critically important to fish where the fish are, and the only way you figure that out is by driving your boat to a certain pond and throwing in your line.
Jim Murray
6 years ago #33
Franci\ud83d\udc1dEugenia Hoffman. You can';t go wrong being yourself. In fact I think I will make that my mantra. Thanks.
Jim Murray
6 years ago #32
Lada 🏡 Prkic
6 years ago #31
Jim Murray
6 years ago #30
@ Deborah Levine: The fact that the authors mentioned are all male has nothing to do with anything other than that they happen to be my preferred authors. I don't go out of my way to avoid female authors, I have read just about everything Margaret Atwood, Lisa Gardiner, Faye Kellerman, Ayn Rand and many other women have ever written, but in my mind they are not as prominent as the other authors mentioned. It's purely subjective and has nothing to do with gender.
don kerr
6 years ago #29
Then just consider my comment reinforcement of your brilliant insight!
Jerry Fletcher
6 years ago #28
Wayne Yoshida
6 years ago #27
Yes - a tool it is.
Wayne Yoshida
6 years ago #26
Thanks Javier \ud83d\udc1d beBee. I am not sure why I missed that one.
Javier Cámara-Rica 🐝🇪🇸
6 years ago #25
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #24
Wayne, I'd have to say that branding cannot replace marketing and sales. As I see it a brand is a marketing tool, not marketing itself. Something that too many on social media seem to misunderstand. Cheers!
Javier Cámara-Rica 🐝🇪🇸
6 years ago #23
Ian Weinberg
6 years ago #22
Phil, I guess the full spectrum prevails - those branding as a means to an end and others without an end-point driven strategy. The latter results in a diffuse, undefined image which at best, maintains only a recognizable presence. And agreed, this 'unbranded' branding will not go very far in regard to business promotion. Regarding the question of personal branding as an end in itself, here the key element would be authenticity - authentically representing personal beliefs, interests, perceptions, aspirations as well as items reflecting genuine expertise.
Gert Scholtz
6 years ago #21
Wayne Yoshida
6 years ago #20
Gert Scholtz
6 years ago #19
Wayne Yoshida
6 years ago #18
Send Phil the tab from any of the beverages consumed....
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #17
Ian> "... despite what I believe (very subjectively) is a pretty well recognizable personal brand, it has not led to significant online sales ...." Ian, your comment raises several important questions in my mind, the most prominent of which is: Do people seek to develop "personal brands" on social media as a means to an end (sales, professional advancement?), or simply as an end in itself? If "branding" activity on social media is intended to lead to real-world business, then a lot of things that people publish don't make a commensurate amount of sense -- at least, not to me. Cheers!
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #16
Thank you, Melissa, for the kind words. Would love to meet "at the bar" with you and many others I've met online at beBee. Cheers!
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #15
Harvey Lloyd
6 years ago #14
Milos Djukic
6 years ago #13
Ian Weinberg
6 years ago #12
Ian Weinberg
6 years ago #11
Jim Murray
6 years ago #10
Yeah, I thought I covered that Don \ud83d\udc1d Kerr
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #9
Don Kerr > "Brands and their relevant points of differentiation are most critical in highly commoditized markets." Truly excellent point, Don. And no doubt why some of us have this nagging discomfort with the term "Personal Brand". One way to look at it, I suppose, is that branding involves putting a consistent face on a company or line of products or services -- in the service of differentiation and personalization. Like anthropomorphizing the inanimate. But people -- other than those who are brain dead -- are already differentiated (not commoditized) and so don't need "branding". Just thinking out loud. Thanks and cheers!
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #8
Agreed again, Don. See my reply #7 below. Cheers!
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #7
I agree, Don. I see a brand (whether general or personal) like a basket filled with various items. The inventory of items contained is not always the same from basket (brand) to basket. Which is one reason it's important not to confuse the basket with the group of items it contains.
don kerr
6 years ago #6
Pascal Derrien
6 years ago #5
don kerr
6 years ago #4
don kerr
6 years ago #3
Jim Murray
6 years ago #2
Good Idea.
Phil Friedman
6 years ago #1