Comments

Excellent. I equate "Personal Brand" with a reputation that is earned. You cannot create your reputation, the "market" will take care of that. You may try and create a "Personal Brand" but if it does not comport with your earned reputation it is worse than meaningless.

Posted by Jim Outland at January 16, 2009 3:01 PM

Great entry. As our friend Tom would remind us,

1) "People can smell emotional commitment (and the absence thereof) from a mile away" and my all time favorite...
2) "People tend to develop pretty reliable bullshit detectors by age 14."

If what you say does not match what you do, your market will figure it out for themselves.

Posted by Kate at January 16, 2009 4:40 PM

This post is excellent! I think everyone in marketing or interested in marketing themselves should read this.

My favorite part is "Your personal brand is an assessment the marketplace makes about who you are and what you bring to the marketplace." We all need to remember that it is not a popularity contest.

Posted by CharityHisle at January 16, 2009 4:58 PM

Great stuff Raj. Dare I suggest a 'personal brand' is in fact an honour best bestowed by others?

PS Kate - in my experience it doesn't take 14 years :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at January 16, 2009 5:32 PM

"Personal brands" are so history Raj!

People must be a whole rainbow of honest, transparent opportunity on every transaction to make profits/benefits & not tied to the limits of a "personal brand" & the corruptness of all things old line TP brand capitalism!

The NOT part of you rant also: people's minds read it, dismiss it & embed "... personal brands are ... what you say about yourself, your presence in social media, something you can ask for, permanent ...".

Kind of like the infamous "speech" of Churchill: "Never give up!" "Give up!" is what registers. Branding only a simpleton would praise! Maybe next Tuesday Barack should say: "Just do it" - then sit down as a giant "Nike the USA Brand" flag appears?

Winston should have said "I am old, tired, smoke & drink too much & today must rest: Please keep at it while I take a nap!"

"You have to work hard to get a powerful personal brand. But that's only the first step. You have to continue to work hard to keep that powerful personal brand and grow it."

Please mon fraire - one must 10,000 hour "flow" to establish themselves as an optimal professional = flow passion & not hard. Flow makes 10,000 hours seem like a walk in the park. "Hard" is 20th century - flow is the way of the Universe - the universe rewards elegance & ease. :>)

Posted by Contraire at January 16, 2009 6:25 PM

Thank you Jim, Kate, Trevor and Contraire for pitching in with your thoughts.

Have a great weekend all of you.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 16, 2009 10:39 PM

In 2009 I want to become a nobody among nobodies rather than a simple nobody. Sounds dull doesn't it! Actually it is the most exciting marketing strategy going around today. While most everyone is trying hard to become, be, or maintain themselves as an influential who people like to quote and look up to - I will be trying harder this year to boost my "nobody" status. Nobodies talk to nobodies about nobodies and in the process they market "you" if you are one of them.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at January 16, 2009 11:23 PM

LOL Richard :)

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 16, 2009 11:40 PM

Interesting post.

We especially like point three about social media.

Also, while we agree on point two, we'd like to add that personal brands can be so powerful that it can enhance or tarnish an employer's brand. Employers would of course hope for the former.

Posted by A Friend at January 17, 2009 8:08 AM

Don't laugh too hard at Richard's very insightful comment. The U.S. is swearing in a new President next week who was a nobody until a little over a year ago when all of the other nobodies made him a somebody. :)

Raj, the persistence of one misconception of conventional branding wisdom continues to truly puzzle me. You wrote, "A personal brand is your promise to the marketplace and the world." But your first point is that a personal brand in NOT what you say about yourself. Isn't a promise what you say about yourself to yourself and to others? IMHO, this is the most dangerous misconception going; for all brands, personal or otherwise.

Posted by Tom Asacker at January 17, 2009 11:23 AM

We are all being brands. The incoming president is such as are the many people who voted or did not vote for him.

The motivating factor here is that we are all somebody. But who are we?

Corporate brands evolve out of a vision that personal brands actualize, often both inside and outside of the corporate vision.

(People when allowed and encouraged will always find creative means. This includes TP's message of allowing fast failures.)

Being brands are all we have, the visionaries, implementers, and customers.

Timberland boots embraced a broader customer base once the Hip Hop culture adopted the brand. Sales shot up!

We are all being brands. I continuously ask myself, "Who are you?" within various environments and when alone.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 17, 2009 12:24 PM

Tom,

Thanks for the comment. I was not laughing at Richard's point but the way it was written. I had to read it twice to finally "get" it.

Also, my point was that - "a personal brand is your promise to the world and the marketplace." It should not be assumed that you can make an announcement about your promise and that would do it. The world and the marketplace has to believe in that brand promise. For that to happen, there has to be a proof of accomplishment.

My $.02 of course.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 17, 2009 1:49 PM

Judith,

Thanks for the note. I agree and I don't think we have a choice but to "continue being brands" - whether we like it or not.

In other words - we cannot NOT be a brand. The question is whether it's powerful enough to reach our ambition, whether it's powerful enough to make a difference and whether it's powerful enough to make a meaningful contribution.

Have a great weekend.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 17, 2009 1:51 PM

Thanks, Raj. I appreciate your post and comments.

I wonder if as we continue to consider ourselves and others in various environments, and are thoughtful and persistent, if power evolves best in creativity and innovation. This seems like meaningful change, as opposed to the search of power or the search of meaning. There is also the necessity for leaders, for example, to forever foster an environment of trust, equity, and the necessity of failing fast for the sake of innovation and creativity.

There are responsibilities on all sides when dealing with corporate and personal brands which have to do with honor and humility, pushing forward and stepping aside; we can all get besides ourselves whether our ideas and work are excellent or not, whether on the frontline or the front office. This is the measuring of ego. Being the best brand is being forever conscious of ourselves and others in making things happen.

Super weekend to all. It's freezing here in Michigan and the snow is really coming down. Brrr...

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 17, 2009 2:32 PM

someone has some splainin' to do.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01_49/b3760040.htm

Posted by rickyRicardo at January 17, 2009 3:55 PM

Tom Asacker, thanks for your compliment and the fact that you totally got what I was on about. I had the journey of Barack Obama in mind when I wrote it. For others who might be interested in the Barack Obama "nobodies" approach to the C21st here is some more food for thought.

Yesterday I switched to Linux Mint - thanks to the good services of my wife and partner who loaded it onto my computer and then resolved the discords. For over 12 mths I have been a Linux convert. Why? Linux is free. Linux is open source. Linux works the way digital networks are suppose to work. Linux brings transparency, freedom, and elegance.

Linux Mint is the product of a set of "nobodies"... These "nobodies" have produced a great product. These "nobodies" were able to do this because we live in a digital networked world. Digital networks favour "nobodies" because "nobodies" actually provide the least friction to their rapid expansion. Digital networks become more efficient and effective as they expand - if they do not expand they deflate or implode. Digital networks expand because they appeal to cluster upon cluster of "nobodies" who are eager to become linked. Linux Mint is a group of "nobodies" who are extraordinarily talented as individuals and even more so as a collective.

Linux is a cooperative. Digital networks are cooperatives. If you 'get' how Linux works you also get how digital networks work. Cooperatives are in. Sharing is in. Barter is in. Providing intellectual Property free is in. If you form solid links that create cooperative effort then in 2009 and beyond your opportunities are huge. Bigger than you can imagine. Bigger than you can envision. Bigger than you could have accessed at any previous time in history.

Cheers, Richard.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at January 17, 2009 3:57 PM

Quality is job one...

Now give me 50 billion bucks to stay in business...

Which one has become our mantra, our brand statement?

I find the "earning" references kinda funny. Who's earning anything in today's marketplace? When the US has become a game of give and take, your brand is really defined more by savy lobbyists in Washington.

How about Madoff's brand?:

"I Made Off with your money"

How about AIG?:

"We promise and INSURE that we'll spend every penny of the taxpayers' dollars at resorts and spas until we need sum more"

The funny thing is, and I may be speaking out of turn, one of the most successful companies I know of, Wal-Mart, doesn't force its brand on you. You know they're a low price leader (that may be their brand), or the little roll back pricing smiley face could be their brand, and how 'bout that ubiquitous greeter that struggles to separate mashed together carts? Well, that could be their brand too.

The reality to me is this...you're only as good as your last sale, bid, or phone call. The angry counterperson at the auto parts' store becomes the brand for that location. The window washer that opens the door for clients becomes the brand for the building. Brand has very little to do with what we say...even though everyone works endlessly to make sure the verbiage is spot on...brand has everything to do with action, and sometimes what's not said.

Posted by Candy Man at January 17, 2009 5:17 PM

Raj prompted him and now Richard has unwittingly become a Somebody brand. He used to be a nobody, a n'er do well, a commoner, a drifter, a brandless type trying to stay out of trouble - now he is a cult hero, a savant, a mystic!

I am a Barack fan for now but the Dem's could have run a scarecrow Brand & still got 53% of the vote. It was all about the radically tanking economy & the Dem's look like the better bet to provide for the masses as the Great Recession deepens - 24 more months per Robert Johnson. Republican seniors next to me in $1M homes confided their vote for Barack - 401k recession seniors!

Barack is making too many Brand mistakes for me - the Richardson vetting fiasco, Leon @ CIA named & Feinstein not consulted (head of intelligence committee) Rahm-Lesko-Wright-Ayers-Blago & Geithner as lead @ Treasury/IRS but he doesn't pay his taxes!

Barack caught on camera dropping his Blackberry! Barack out negotiated by Hillary & Bill regarding Bill's activities ($.5B raised to date - much from the middle east) while Hill is lead @ State!

Barack said he'd spot Bill O'Reilly (Bill is 6' 5" tall) 10 points in 1 on 1 basketball in a game to 11. Inside sources tell me he is too cocky Brand & certainly mistake prone as the record shows - God help us - next thing we know there will be new Russian missiles in the London financial district - whoops!

Posted by Contraire at January 17, 2009 5:18 PM

Contraire... You nailed me! I will now crawl back into my "nobody" persona - in that guise I have no further comment to make here... Thanks for the "wake up" call! Cheers, Richard.

Posted by Richard Lipscombe at January 17, 2009 6:17 PM

Love your last point, that you must work hard to get it and continue to work to keep it

Posted by Susan/Second Income Business at January 17, 2009 7:03 PM

Brands are all about standing out from the crowd. Obama stands out from the crowd, but he is not a brand. He stands out from the crowd because he is truly exceptional.
He should stand out in the crowd. There will be exceptional people. This whole brand thing reminds me a bit of the practice of giving everyone a kid a trophy in a compettitve sporting event. It is completely impossible for everyone to stand out in a crowd. It is like the city of lake Wobegone where all of the children are exceptional. This is a STUPID idea. We need a society where average people do just fine. We need to quit rationalizing the sending of jobs off to other countries where they can be done cheaper by saying everyone needs to be thier own brand. This is just doubletalk and does not take into account the value of just being as human being.

Posted by zed at January 17, 2009 7:52 PM

To sum up what I said in my previous comment,
as a civiliztion progresses, life should get easier for the average person, not harder. This whole brand thing leads to the exact opposite and
rationalizes it.

Posted by zed at January 17, 2009 7:59 PM

"In books, the proportion of exceptional to commonplace people is very high; in reality, very low."

--Aldous Huxley

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 17, 2009 8:22 PM

The subtext of brand you is just a disguised form of social darwinism.
I took a history course a few years ago and we went over the famous Scopes Trial. In that class I learned that William Jenning Brian, the prosecuting attorny in the case was a Progessive. That seemed strange to be, because today people who would consider themselves to be Progreesive would tend to believe in evolution. The reason Brian chose to take the side against evolution was because at time the buisness comunity was for evolution becuase Darwinism (survival of the fittest) could be used to justtify the existance of poor people. Brian would not accept that and so he (along with the Porgessive Party at the time) stood against evolution. To me, the whole Brand You thing is a modern 'logical' justifcation for making economic judgements. For example, we can justify the dumping of maunufacturing jobs offshore because 'people need to take responsibility of thier own lives and become thier own brand - and if they don't - tough luck' Thats the subtext as I see it.
Bill Clinton was a Brand - I'm sure he got married and had a kid because without a wife and a kid, he could never become President. He needed it for his 'Brand'
Obama is not a Brand - he actually loves his wife and his children because of his humanity - the humanity that flows from the Obamas is almost overwhelming to me - my hope is that thier humanity makes us all more human and we can drop all this brand crap - to paraphase the famous line from the movie the Elephant Man - 'We are not Brands, we are human beings.'
(by the way, I believe in evolution - I have to, I'm a aspiring scientist)

Posted by zed at January 17, 2009 8:56 PM

Richard,

Thanks again. You have a great point about Linux Mint. Unfortunately (and respectfully) I have to disagree with your point about Linux being created by nobodies. I founded and lead an Open Source company for five years successfully. I met a lot of wonderful people in the Open Source community. There are powerful brands in the Open Source communities and they are definitely not "nobodies." They may be "nobodies" for people outside the community but definitely not for people within the community. Happy to talk more (at length) whenever you want me to elaborate on that.

Other than that, thanks for the commments.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 17, 2009 9:58 PM

Zed,

Thanks for your comments. Lake Wobegon is a fictional city. In reality nobody expects everybody to be exceptional.

You are welcome to think that a "personal brand" is a stupid idea. From what I have seen, people who have powerful personal brands get a premium. There are people who are interested in building personal brands and some are not.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 17, 2009 10:06 PM

the origination of the idea of 'brand you' was the acceptance that people need to be uniquely great at someting because globalization sends
'average' jobs offshore. I see no reason why we should accept this.
I agree that it is not a bad idea to have a personal brand.
I just believe the idea cannot work for the majority of people - and the people who propose these types of ideas originally tend to be well paid and probably independently wealthy - these people have no buiness deciding how the masses should live - Its a bit like saying 'let them eat cake' - especially if what they propose is basically an impossibility - I'm not talking about getting a premium - I talking about an average life and it seems like that gets harder all the time (by the way,I'm not talking about myself)- like I said, as a civilization progresses, it should not get harder for average people to live well. But that seems to be what is happening - I know Lake Wobegon is fictional city - that was my point - It is impossible for everyone to be great -

Posted by zed at January 17, 2009 10:24 PM

Zed,

Thank you.

My belief is that marketplace is always fair. You bring a certain "value" to the marketplace and the marketplace rewards you for that value. If someone does not bring a lot of value, ideally they won't get a lot back from the marketplace. Of course, there are exceptions like in anything else.

Offshoring is a sensitive topic so I am avoiding that in this discussion - probably will post on the blog soon. It is an important topic and being from India, I see both sides of the coin.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 17, 2009 10:38 PM

Zed makes some good points. There is also the notion of what Darwin actually meant as opposed to the proselytizing that followed. Darwin wrote, "It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change." Sounds like a Brand You that thrives on chaos to me. In Zed's comment there is also the notion of what is real and what isn’t. There is this sense that we can feel honesty and dishonesty and can distinguish between the two. Perhaps—perhaps not.

The Elephant Man is one of my favorite movies, but if he had not been so physically deformed we may not have even acknowledged his being or his rather normal abilities, his love of music, drama and reading. It's what we didn't expect because of his appearance, sort of like powerful technology inside a sleek beautiful design. Powerful brands. Who we are matters and this is forever changing. There is the sense of the authenticity of Brand Yous distinguished by being and the innovation created.

Innovation is acknowledged amid normalcy. But we can all be innovative. What is the mother of invention? Average enough?

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 17, 2009 11:37 PM

Rajesh, thanks. I read your piece with a mix of firm agreement and some disagreement. Given that by your definition a personal brand "is an assessment the marketplace makes about who you are" (1) I suggest that it must be possible for a brand to exist wholly defined by social media (3) - if that is where your market/audience is. Contributors to this forum (wittingly or not) generate some fairly emphatic personal brand statements in the minds of this particular maketplace, for example.

Missing elements (numbers 10 and 11, perhaps) seem to me to be, first: It's probably NOT what you think it is, or even what/where you would like it to be. Maybe more positive, maybe not. So invest time in discovering, listening, practising some self-awareness.

And second: It is NOT some sort of deceitful middle-class artifice. Considering yourself as a brand rather than as a service (or even a commodity) is rather empowering, whoever is doing it.

Posted by Rob at January 18, 2009 6:54 AM

Breaking a firm New Year's resolution, I feel obliged to challenge Contraire's NLP-based review of Churchill's choice of phrase. "Give up" was already well in the minds of his audience at that time. The whole country was wondering if we would, if we would have to. So when Churchill said "we will never surrender", the emphasis in his words (listen to it if possible) was firmly on "never". That was the word that registered and that people had been waiting to hear. Churchill's oratory probably did as much to steel Britain's resolve when it was fighting alone in WW2 as anything else. I would suggest that he knew what he was doing.

Posted by Rob at January 18, 2009 7:11 AM

Raj - I saw Slumdog Millionaire this weekend and loved it! (The end was a bit too romantic for my taste, but, hey, the pitch was nearly perfect.) I so loved the kid and his determination and quest for love and truth (a forever search) amid squalor, both physical and mental.

viagra 100mg pfizer I look forward to reading your piece on offshoring. It appears that it is not only such things that have built up any nation. I guess no one thing ever has. What many have primarily thought India to be is changing before our very eyes through technology, cinema and other innovative means. Hats off! Nations too are brands.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 18, 2009 7:24 AM

Rob,

Thank you for your comments. Your point that a brand can exist just within the Social Media is very valid. There are exceptions and this is one of them. I have many friends who have built powerful brands JUST on social media and that's because that is their business - helping other people make the most out of social media. So it makes sense for them to build brands surrounding social media.

There is one problem though. The people to whom they are teaching how to leverage social media don't have to have "big social media brands" as that is not their business. But they still try to emulate the social media gurus and end up neither here nor there and suffer.

Thanks again.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 18, 2009 1:09 PM

Judith,

I am glad to hear that you enjoyed "Slumdog Millionaire." I loved it. Coming from India, I can say that the romance part at the end was tuned nicely to cater to the large audience there.

On offshoring - here is a sneak preview.

viagra discount As we all know, it is the "average jobs" that gets offshored. While it may seem like we are exporting jobs from here, the recipient country should not be rejoicing as the jobs they are importing are "average jobs."

I have personally seen (in India) what the ill-effects of this are. People get over-compensated for mediocre work and while everyone benefits in the short-term, everyone suffers in the long-term. The people who suffer most are the ones that were over-compensated for mediocrity. It's almost like they are sacrificing their career for a short-term boost in the pay.

Have a great week ahead.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 18, 2009 1:14 PM

Thanks, Raj. Would you say that manufacturing jobs are "average jobs?" Your distinction above appears to be between a job and a career. Both are laudable. Both assist in survival. Both elevate families. Two of the men that I admire most, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Pope John Paul, both write about the intrinsic value of work -- Period. I appreciate this.

Everybody in India or America will not be professionals in the traditional sense of the word--not all will be well educated. These too need employment and a means to support their families, elevating them financially and spiritually. (Struggle without these is dismal. The former affects the latter. "Slumdog Millionaire" makes this point beautifully. The lead's brother was such a tragic figure in this regard.) I suppose the difference may be not understanding that there is indeed a difference between the two with regards to advancing.

From the above standpoint, I better understand your comment. I must also admit to be in a bit of a quandary when it comes to offshoring that assists in the building of another country and the demise of work in another for the sake of profit. Business is profit, but responsibility too. From another viewpoint it may require the country who engages in offshoring to be more innovative. This seems to be where the US is now and government stimulus alone will not improve the long-term problem, though I believe it will help.

Perhaps it is the period in between that is particularly rough, though I am most certainly for products and not mainly paper in a country the size of the US. There is also a global interdependence that may be good. Yes, I realize that we are talking a lot about energy independence here, but on some level our interdependence forces dialogue and perhaps strengthens brands. America's brand is one of ingenuity and industrialism. The brand, which includes our intrinsic values, is now being re-assessed. Brands are not only about who we are but how others see us.

Regarding markets being right, can they not be manipulated? Can they not be superficial? Can they not be utterly misleading? Apple stock, for example, seems to rely on the health of Mr. Jobs (God-speed to him), one man, and not necessarily the products themselves. If markets include the buying power of people, this can be considered, which often seems to rest on the shoulders of one or the marketing of others. If markets include solely quants and investors they can be deadly farcical, as we have seen.

Thanks for the preview, Raj. My brother, Haywood, is in India now. I await his thoughts.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 18, 2009 2:46 PM

Thank you Judith.

No, I was not referring to the manufacturing jobs. I don't have a lot of knowledge in that area to comment on. My comments referred to offhshoring in the context of "call centers," "software development" and "maintenance of these systems."

I agree with all of your comments related to "what is right" for a society but as you rightly pointed out - business is about profit and enterprises will do what is right for them.

For example: Imagine you are managing an enterprise and one of your close competitors embarks on an offshoring strategy that will save them a few hundred million dollars a year. You don't believe that the offshoring is right but you need to come up with an alternative that will provide that kind of savings. It is not easy to come up with one - at least in the short-term. So, unless you have that alternative, you might follow suit and start your own offhsoring initiative.

My fundamental belief is that markets are always right. Yes, one may be able to manipulate them in the short-term (or sometimes in the long-term Bernie Madoff, Satyam, Lloyds TSB etc.) but it's hard to sustain that.

Good wishes to Haywood. I am sure he will have a great time there.

viagra pfizer from canada

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 18, 2009 3:28 PM

Thanks, Raj-- much appreciated. Loved your example.

Maybe I will share Haywood's impressions of India. It's his first trip there.

The food has long been a family favorite. Love it!

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 18, 2009 3:58 PM

Intriguing how often personal branding ties into networking theory. Like effective branding, effective networking is far more about giving than getting. That's so counter-intuitive it gets in the way for so many. Still, it's a fundamental truth.

It's also similar to the real truth about organizational promotion. My mentor used to remind his people that he didn't promote them--even though he was the VP--their colleagues and their subordinates promoted them.

Buddy, if you ain't giving, for sure you ain't going to get.

Posted by Dan Erwin at January 18, 2009 4:38 PM

Thanks Judith - would love to hear more about Haywood's experience in India.

Dan, thanks for pitching in. Good point there.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 18, 2009 4:49 PM

Dan – great comment. The boss might sign the promotion ticket but in reality I am with you - the best judges of effectiveness are peers, subordinate and I would say customers. BS does not work with those folks.

Posted by Trevor Gay at January 18, 2009 4:58 PM

PS - Tony Benn says "If you are looking for a leader don’t look up to a platform – look next door"

Posted by Trevor Gay at January 18, 2009 5:51 PM generic viagra 25 mg

It's no different from any other kind of brand; corporate, city or country and you have to earn it in your marketplace.

Posted by Joe Buhler at January 18, 2009 6:34 PM

Dan - I too appreciate your comment. Thank you.

"Give and it shall be given unto you
pressed down, shaken together, running
over shall men give unto you."

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 18, 2009 7:31 PM

Trevor, thanks for your comment.

Joe, well said. It is true. There is no entitlement when it comes to your brand - be it your personal brand or a corporate brand.

Judith, thanks (as always)

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 18, 2009 9:47 PM

One level I get and use the Brand you concept - I think it is a useful model. But even after all these years it still troubles me. free viagra online without prescription

Because the branding definition has been broadened to encompass everything you do and are - it effectively ceases to have any meaning.

To be honest I would be a lot more comfortable with this idea if it moved away from the big statements and became a little more tactical and practical (i.e. 10 tips for improving how people percieve your work or heres a way to get accurate feedback from your peers.).

I think part of the problem for branding being accepted by some as an idea is that the word has become, to many, linked to the negative brute force branding approach. Now we all know on this board that this is not the case anymore but I sometimes wonder if we have to move away from the B word to make progress.

Posted by PaulH at January 19, 2009 7:07 AM

Progress is being made daily. There are words that cannot be rehabilitated, but there are definitely words that throughout history have taken on new meaning and catapulted ingenuity and innovation.

I guess the C word, CHANGE, was pretty worn out and tired too because of overuse and inactivity. But we now see that through discussion and millions of people acting the word has taken on a powerful new meaning.

Words are what we do with them.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 19, 2009 8:12 AM

I think the most important point Raj made is that branding yourself is not voluntary or conscious. Every time you meet a deadline or not, you add to your brand. If you miss the deadline, do you communicate tirelessly about why you missed it, or do you call in sick and cower at home hoping no one will call and ask why the task's not done? Every time you react to criticism, you add to your brand. Do you get defensive, or do you say "How do we fix this" and move on? If you're a manager, how you give direction adds to your brand. Do you show respect for the employee in the way you tell him to do something? If you're a janitor, how you clean the floors adds to your brand. Do you clean them smiling 'til they shine, or groaning 'til they're clean enough?

Every action adds to your personal brand. Your personal brand is what people have come to expect from you. And they find you out whether you try to be known or try to hide, because eventually you have to DO something, and the work tells the story. Personal brand is not your planned appearance to the world, consisting of images on Facebook, hair and wardrobe, classy office space, etc. Negative impressions in any of those areas CAN be detrimental, especially at first, but positive impressions in any of those areas can quickly be wiped out by poor performance. And the poorest performance of all is to demonstrate that you don't care enough to do quality work.

generic viagra prescription online

Posted by cathy mosca at January 19, 2009 12:25 PM

Paul, Judith - thank you.

Cathy, thank you for pitching in. Yes, that was really the point. You really "live" your brand. In that, we don't have a choice really. And, if you are conscious about it, you might get a lot out of it.

Have a great week ahead all of you.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 19, 2009 1:01 PM

Cathy - I fully support your entry in that your brand is more than marketing it's everything you say, do etc. In that sense I get it and it's powerful.

Where I struggle is what is different in the concept from branding from simply saying everything you say and do defines you?

This is my problem with this type of branding - it becomes so all encompassing that it becomes meaningless.

Your personal brand is you - in that case what are we actually trying to say?

Posted by PaulH at January 19, 2009 1:54 PM

PaulH, good question. If we can't work to establish our personal brand, as I said, then why even discuss it? I think the answer is that we must be mindful. Avoid negative influences on our brand. Weigh the projects/clients we accept (if we are in a position to have a choice). Add a bit of value-added to every task we complete, so that we become known for taking tasks to completion and beyond. Stay away from jobs we couldn't care less about (if we have a choice), so that an attitude of not caring doesn't come to exemplify our work. If survival demands our taking a job we don't have much passion for, put passion into the small part of it that is ours alone.

Posted by cathy mosca at January 19, 2009 3:15 PM

This is great stuff Raj - I've read a lot of advice on personal branding (and even offered my own from time to time), but have yet to see a post like this!

You're dead on - a personal brand is something you have to make for yourself!

Be well!

Posted by Chris Young at January 19, 2009 3:24 PM

Cathy! Wow! Thou speaketh? Speaketh more! What beauty! We are all being brands. Thank you--much appreciated.

It is not only through our mere existence brands are created, negatively or positively, by our words and actions, but they develop or become stagnant within corporations, increasing or decreasing innovation.

The essential element of the being brand is the continuum of action, the personal brand that immeasurably influences the corporate brand without which the latter could not be. The emphasis is people.

Both brands are interdependently linked, creating the being brand, the animate and inanimate.

Thank you, Cathy.

Posted by Judith Ellis at January 19, 2009 3:25 PM

Paul, Cathy, Chris and Judith:

I am totally enjoying the conversation here. Thanks to all of you for pitching in.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 19, 2009 11:25 PM

Hello All:

I wrote another short piece about why Personal Branding is all the more important today? This is focused o people who are working for a company and not as Independent Consultants

http://www.lifebeyondcode.com/2009/01/20/one-more-reason-why-a-personal-brand-is-all-the-more-important-now/

Have a great Tuesday.

Best,
Raj

Posted by Rajesh Setty at January 20, 2009 10:34 AM