Wear all white clothes with some black lettering, and you won’t be a brand, you’ll be a generic.
Never heard this buzzword, but I can kind of see it. Brands are associated with characteristics. Good brands can demand a premium in the market, even if not all that much better. So, the next time your manager tells you you are a brand, ask her if you are a high quality brand. If she says yes, ask for a 10% raise.
show your manager that you’re not a brand. show up for work without pants.
Buy a Branding Iron. You can get one for about $20.
Next time she says that, pull it out of your desk drawer, look at it, look at her, and say “Really?”
I’m on board with this piiii… ointless stuff you have shared. I find the “brand” bullshit to be highly obnoxious.
I don’t need a logo, jingle, slogan or catchphrase, thanks. You can be a brand if you want; I’m satisfied eking out my existence as a plain-old human being.
…And that’s the VT promise!™*
Believe it or not, I was thinking that as I posted my smartass response…
GREAT article! Thanks for posting the link.
“You need a nice, meaty sizzle.” 
Well, except perhaps for Harlan Ellison[sup]TM[/sup] who had his own name trademarked.
And Billy Joel.
The first myth of modern management is that it exists. In some obscure region of their brains they begin to realize they’re neither necessary, competent, useful or even particularly bright. Rather than take the painful step of admitting to themselves they have no idea what to do, how to do it, or any authority to accomplish it, they turn to their remaining option of a giant game of make-believe. Like 12 yr old children they follow meaningless fads, make up new words (or pretend that existing one’s have some deep meaning when used incorrectly).
In short, as blueslipper said, it’s another failed attempt by useless employees to add significance to their job, and try to get noticed after they realize all the others have learned to spell “synergy” too.
FTR: I understand that some level of supervision and guidance is necessary. But I’m fairly certain we can make do without 12 levels of preening wannabes who are little more than information filters. JMO.
Personal branding is not stereotyping or dehumanizing. On the contrary, it’s a golden opportunity to be seen as the person you are. If you’re not your own brand, then you’re someone else’s product. Do they care what they produced? Probably not.
If you ask me, the dehumanizing experience is selling yourself as a random pile of qualifications and experience for an HR drone to run through a ranking algorithm. Which also looks sloppy… “I don’t care enough to tell you who I am… just sort through all these buzzwords and figure it out for yourself.”
Of course, that being said, people with no qualifications at all are unfortunately making great gains with personal branding strategies.
Yeah, I’m really not getting the hate for this idea. I mean, you don’t have to think of yourself as having a brand, but I see nothing repugnant in the idea. A brand is, basically, an attempt to let people know what you are about, through coordinated messaging. Isn’t it trivially true that everyone does this?
Jesus Christ. Where do you work?
We are all being encouraged and manipulated to think of ourselves within a marketing paradigm. The more we think of ourselves as commodities to be sold to others, the more we lose our own integrity, individuality, and honesty.
Certainly there is a benefit and a time/place for ‘selling oneself.’ But spending the whole work day (or more) doing so is an inherently de-humanizing endeavor.
I don’t see why the idea of a personal brand, aka, reputation means that you are constantly affirmatively selling yourself all day, everyday. However, everything you do at the office goes into the pile of what others think of you as a professional. If you think that’s not true… You’re wrong.
But a brand isn’t a commodity. It’s something you can use to sell a commodity if you want. But there are entities that don’t sell any commodity at all (in the everyday sense) which nonetheless have brands. For example, charities.
Anyway I’m in a weird position here because I don’t really care whether you have a brand or not, I just don’t see the idea as viscerally repugnant like others do and I’m interested in exploring that.
To me, “You are a brand” is basically just a way to say “You have an identity” while at the same time inviting you to notice that the methods corporations use to maintain identity don’t have to be reserved to corporations.
Without devolving into saying that “corporations are EEEEVVVVIIILLLLL” (which, despite having a somewhat anti-capitalist perspective on the world, I do not believe), I just think that using business/marketing terms to define ourselves ultimately harms us. The words and semantics we use can govern our thoughts and conversations in invisible yet powerful ways. “You are a brand” and “you have an identity” can in fact mean vastly different things; by equating them, you manipulate the meaning of one or both of those statements.
To quote Orwell, “if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
Frankly, Orwell was a bit of a dipshit. As a general rule, the ability of words to affect our perceptions is extremely limited to non-existent.
Because they said you are a brand. This is the message that this terminology is pushing. Otherwise there’s no point in using it. Everyone knows they have a reputation. What they are now saying is that you are your reputation, which is offensive.
Furthermore, this type of thinking is backwards. Your reputation is what people think of you. If people think badly of you, it’s not because your reputation is bad. It’s because you have done some bad things. You shouldn’t be trying to change your brand, but instead be trying to change yourself. Caring about your reputation more than who you are as a person makes you a very superficial person. And people don’t like superficial people.
That’s a horribly offensive way to look at people! It means that all you do is look at things superficially. You don’t try to get to know people–if they don’t lie to you in order to get you to think well of them, you just assume they belong to someone else.
And don’t act like you don’t know that marketing is just a fancy term for lying. Even if all you do is emphasizing true things about yourself, you’re lying about how big those things are in your life. You clearly aren’t doing charity because you are a charitable person. You’re doing it to get ahead in your job. You’re lying.