#Personal Brand and the Stupidity of Stereotypes

I understand sociologists. In fact, in me "Bug resume"I would not have opted for sociology as a university career, especially knowing that I would devote more than 20 years to advertising.

One of the favorite obsessions of this collective of sociologists is to classify ourselves into groups of similar behaviors or behavior patterns. It turns out that as I was born in the 62 I 'm Baby Bommer, But my sister, which is from the 64 it's already Generation X, and supposedly between her and me there should be differences in lading. My daughter is Generation Z, and in between are the Millennials o Generation Y that are now on everyone's lips because by age they are about to run the destinies of humanity. Contradictory? No, it's the stupidity of stereotypes.

Tribes, Groups, Stereotypes

The idea behind qualifying is that, indeed, common patterns are observed between different groups. And there are. For the purposes of advertising segmentation, an announcement of a Apple Watch addresses early adopters, to individuals who want to be up to date with everything and who have also turned some brands into fetish. While an ad for a fixed income investment fund targets more conservative profiles.

Mistakes not taking personality into account

I realize that many of the tests or Quizz who try to classify you in a tribe start by asking you the age. Trap. The good thing would be to know what kind of stereotype your thinking and acting approaches, not to your mere and simple demographic classification.

They also ask you about your digital skills, which greatly facilitates segmentation, but that can give mistakes: Oh my God, With 76 and the Silent generation, doesn't let go of the Ipad And thanks to Facebook keeps up to date with everything, but I know managers 45 who refuse to have a profile in Linkedin or use Whatsapp.

A common mistake is also to consider that everyone is employed in a solid and stable company. Gentlemen! We live in a liquid economy, almost gaseous, where I'm now here and tomorrow there, where we can work on several projects at once for several companies without belonging to their workforce (knowmads).

Another mistake is that they give it as normal that a person has written a Ebook. I agree, new technologies make it easy for all of us. But how many people dare to write something that goes beyond its name, an email or an email Whastapp?

Poor quality tests that only serve to catch the naive

One of the problems that the digital revolution brings is the imperative need for the big headlines, easy solutions and the need to please everyone with very viral elements that are shared on all social networks. And there we often find tests that have not been properly tested and that would only deserve to appear in the yellow press (rose in Spain) because of the banality of their results.

Yes, the stereotype kills me

The advertising friend and storyteller Richard Wakefield couldn't have chosen a better name for his blog: "the stereotype kills me", A site recommended subscription to improve our communication and that of our brands. Stereotypes were necessary and remain so in many cases, but they don't take into account something that we defend to mortal death personal branders (another tribe): the uniqueness of each person, your -allow me anglicanism- uniqueness.

The six types of personal brand

A reputable author, Speaker, and tertullian named Bryan Kramer proposes a test (A Quizz) to know which of the six types of personal brand we belong to. As your website is unlicensed Creative Commons (he misses it) I can't play any image. I'm not even going to put a link.

Kramer ranks us into six types of subjects according to our personal brand:

Altruist

Altruistic. Altruists are individuals recognized for their commitment to helping others. They are people who work not only for their own well-being but for their community.

Careerist

Trepas. The climbers or arribistas are people focus on their professional advancement above all else.

Early adopter

Those who are up to date. It refers to a recognized subculture of progressive individuals who embrace individuality above all else. They are often the first to try new things and share them with others.

Boomerang

Controversial. Refers to people whose brand is closely identified with the controversy.

Connector

Connectors. They are people who take pride in their ability to bring people together. They are often well connected and use their networks for networking. They usually have a creative profile, and get validation and satisfaction through others.

Selective

Selective. He's a person who shares information with specific people. It usually carefully curates information based on the needs and interests of the target audience. They value exclusivity and are seen as an informant and generous person.

Turns out I'm altruistic.

I have taken the test they propose and it turns out that I am classified as altruistic. But I don't agree.. Not because it's not., but because my DNA is made up of small parts of each of these six personal brand typologies.

In the same way, I'm a late baby boomer, but I have behaviors closer to a Millennial in the use of the media and to a Generation X in the structure of my messages or in the way I feed myself and relate to my loved ones.

We're more than a stereotype

People don't run away from stereotypes, but we belong to several.

Our mind is very complex, and depending on the moment, the mood and the person or group in front of us act and behave in different ways. By this I'm not saying there's no quality test, like a good 360, a DISC... but in most cases we answer more thinking about what we believe will give us a better rating than what we really are.

Because we are based on a thousand different circumstances. I remember when I was working at JWT, an advertising agency, I was asked if I would be willing to work abroad. It's a question that can never be dichotomous (yes or no), because I might have moved smoothly to New York, Rome or San Francisco but not Azerbaijan.

Neither everyone who votes right-wing parties is conservative nor everyone who votes left-wing parties is progressive, and I'm sure you know more than one person who wants to change the world but votes for right-wing options.

Demoscopy needs to fit a more complex social profile, Extraordinary, Changing, Liquid, Capricious. You don't belong to a "personal Brand" you belong to everyone according to the context. Let's become obsessed with working our uniqueness thoroughly, let's keep an eye on the stupidity of stereotypes.

Groups image by shutterstock.com

Suscríbete al blog

In addition to receiving the news in your email, Take the ebook:
HOW TO WORK PERSONAL DAFO

Book with VOLUME SSDFO 2

About me Guillem Recolons

Convinced that everything leaves a mark, I help companies better connect with their stakeholders through personal branding programs (personal brand management) and employee advocacy (programs of branded internal ambassadors).

Soymimarca Partner, Integrates Personal Branding and The Human Branding, I also collaborate with Ponte en Valor, Brandergizers, MoreThanLaw, Noema Consulting, AdQualis and QUIFER Consultants.

I participate in various programs at IESE, ISDI and EAE, UPF's Social Media Graduate and UVIC, among others. Collegiate advertising, Master in Marketing. Humanities Degree Student.

My advertising DNA comes from 20 years in agencies: Time/BBDO, J.W.T., Bassat Ogilvy, Saatchi & Saatchi, Altraforma and TVLowCost among others.

Want to see my TEDx talk?

Visit my Website
View all my posts

15 thoughts on "#Personal Brand and the Stupidity of Stereotypes”

  1. Very well explained Guillem. Human beings are more characterized by our own personality than by some external ad hoc classification. That's not to say that we're not influenced by our socio-cultural context., but within the framework of our own personality, that filters out what we get from that context. I also identify with several of those personal brand profiles. Without taking the test. A test to be reliable has to have a very well done validation.

    Hug!

    Reply
    • Mertxe, it seems that today it's too easy to classify, Label, Group. Anyone with an Excel can create a questionnaire-garbage that generates stereotypes based on patterns of behavior that are also not exclusive. Thank you for your comment, expands and clarifies the idea of the post. A hug. See you in a few days!

      Reply
  2. True Guillem, stereotypes in the liquid age don't make sense. I would save Jung's archetypes, help us identify ourselves and come up with strategies, although they are more storytelling tools than mirrors. Today your mirror is yourself, although this already rings a thing to me sometimes to something hollow and unconventional…. Best regards !

    Reply
    • Certain Paul, and Jung differentiated very well between archetype (born of the subconscious) stereotype (created by collectives). Are, As you say, mirrors of ourselves, and very rich in interpretations. A hug and thank you for writing!

      Reply
  3. Very much in agreement with you Guillem, in my opinion it seems that today if you vote “White”, they already label you as “White” To 100% without being able to have any nuances, more now that elections are coming.
    Every person is a world, sort by a label is like sorting products by barcodes.
    In theory I belong to millennials, am I just supposed to have the features that are associated with this generation?

    No doubt, the stereotype kills me, just like the black sheep.

    Reply
  4. Guillem. I've been following him recently., just a few months. I write to you, because I really feel identified with what it says, in most of his publications (I still couldn't read them all). It is true that our stereotypes vary according to circumstances and are part of our social adaptability. And much more if we want to belong to a specific group. I also identify with a pinch of each of those six Kramer ratings. And that I just started sowing seed in my personal brand. The only thing I hesitate, are those things I don't control (like many). And that's when a HeadHunter, Recruiter or HR chief, typecast you into a group, tribe or stereotype, without taking an interest in personality, (I've found many and many do it by the variable age) or think that what we didn't like yesterday, today we like. Or that our adaptability and learning with technology and RRSS is much more than to expand our sense of belonging. And for them to see it as a desperate act, to continue on the market. Few see or measure our attitudes, and I'm one of those who think they're the basis of our skills learning. Everybody hates being typecast, But in short, what we're always looking for is to improve what we do to change the position we were typecast. And today the demand will be with a more altruistic profile in the era of business sustainability and tomorrow will be the selective in a world much more 1×1. It doesn't matter,… but the attitude is under-measured today, changes and a lot of who we are. Or as Galeano would say: After all, we are what we do to change who we are
    A greeting and I want to keep wanting to follow him.

    Reply
      • I think that's where you gave him, although there is also a hint of 'dark in our destiny' to be in the right place and time. But as we are responsible for our actions, ergo of its consequences. In short, it all comes down to good food our personal brand (even if it takes time whatever it takes) , to attract customers and headhunters. Greetings and thanks for your advice.

        Reply

Leave a Comment

  I agree with the privacy policy

Basic information on data protection

Responsible » Guillem Recolons Argenter

Purpose » Management of doubts and customer services

Legitimation » Consent of the interested party

Rights » You have the right to access, rectify and delete data, as well as other rights, as explained in the additional information

Additional information » You can consult additional and detailed information on Personal Data Protection on my website guillemrecolons.com