The brand as individual

By Molly Flatt

Publicly accessible figureheads are increasingly important for brands. People build relationships with individuals not corporations, and word of mouth thrives on opinion and character rather than bland generalisation, so brands are trying to personalise their social media presences and give them a single, relatable, human focus for engagement. At last week’s Social Media Influence conference in London, our new business don Tim got stuck into an interesting debate about whether CEOs will increasingly come from PR backgrounds rather than industrial or financial specialities, as they will be cannier at embodying and expressing the company voice.

So you might think that it would be easier to promote good word of mouth when you ARE the service provider or product - except that this means that professional and personal sentiments blur even more easily. Doctors have apparently been asking patients to sign gag orders banning them from posting reviews at sites such as RateMDs.com or an upcoming NHS hub, fearing that “sniping comments can unfairly ruin a doctor’s reputation” (just in from Yahoo! Tech) . It’s a pretty dim move - how comfortable would you feel on the operating table after that? - but when you consider new US site Person Ratings, where you can publicly and anonymously rate anyone you like on categories such as intelligence, sex appeal and class, you start to realise just how hungrily people want to commodify and judge each other for less than altruistic reasons (more at El Reg).

But it is possible to get it right. Chris Rock is a great example of how to develop positive word of mouth around yourself as an individual professional, by building a great tribe of evangelists, engaging with them using a range of social platforms, and getting them involved in your success by being bold and experimental. It helps if you’re a comedy genius, of course. Read how he does it here.

  • That's the first time someone has accused me of being uncynical:). I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that a profile like this http://www.personratings.com/name/Oneal/Benavides/19683 would at least motivate the viewer to do a bit more investigation into the profile subject. In the olden days, one's community would consist of a tight knit group of individuals in a town or neighborhood, bonded through family ties and longstanding friendships. One's behavior would have been constrained partly by the fact that these people all knew each other and there was a social policing effect(I hate that phrase). One of the dreaded consequences of taboo behaviour historically has been social exclusion. Exile. The red scarlet letter. However, in our age of global nomadism and throwaway identidies, the traditional checks and balances on individual behavior have weakened. Its up to the internet to fill the vacuum. On the other hand, maybe not.
  • Molly Flatt
    Jeremy - I think you're blessed with a less cynical view of humankind than myself ;)

    However, I think suggesting that PersonRatings might have some kind of community policing or abuse prevention role is a very bold, one might say dangerous, claim...
  • Less than altruistic reasons? Actually, athough the site has yet to launch officially, the initial comments on people's profiles have been largely positive. Even negative comments cannot always be dismissed as "less than altruistic". Consider the PersonRatings profile that warns others about repeated bad behavior. How many victims of domestic abuse might have been spared if they could have benefited from the collective experience of the abuser's past victims?
blog comments powered by Disqus