Personal Branding

Personal Branding

Reviewed by Faisal Zaidi

Personal branding is the pattern of signals through which other people come to know what a professional is like to work with. The research behind it comes from the study of impression formation: what observers ask first about a person, how quickly a first view forms and how signals are read in different settings.

What it is

The term is a practitioner's label and not a research construct with a single originator, so this page uses it in a plain sense. A professional sends signals all the time: how they introduce themselves, what they deliver, how they treat colleagues, and what mutual contacts say about them. Taken together, those signals are what others learn from. A logo or a tagline sits at the surface of that pattern.

Psychology has studied the deeper layer from two sides. Impression management is the effort to present a favourable image so that others form positive judgements, and impression formation is the process on the observer's side. The article Personal Branding in Dubai: A Practical Guide draws on the second to say what the first can usefully aim at.

Will Storr's The Status Game gives the practical rule in its own setting. The book ends with rules for playing well, and the first asks the player to present themselves so that others grant them prestige freely. Storr builds the rule on the psychologist Susan Fiske's account of two questions people ask of anyone they meet, what the person intends and whether they can act on it, and he adds sincerity to the pair. In his account, warmth shows that you are not trying to dominate, sincerity that you play fair and competence that you are useful.

In effect

Several strands of research bear on the idea. A 2017 chapter by Cydney Dupree and colleagues describes friendliness and capability as the two judgements people must make quickly about a stranger, and it reviews laboratory, cross-cultural and survey research supporting warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social cognition. A 2007 paper by Andrea Abele and Bogdan Wojciszke approached the same territory from trait vocabulary and proposed that trait words fall into agency and communion, with communion accounting for most of the variance in their first study and with agency valued more from the self's point of view and communion more from the other person's.

On speed, Janine Willis and Alex Todorov reported in 2006 that judgements of unfamiliar faces made after 100 milliseconds closely matched judgements made with no time limit, on traits that included competence and trustworthiness. Longer viewing did not change how well the ratings agreed. It raised confidence and, as the authors suggest, produced more differentiated impressions of each person.

On signals, Silvia Bellezza and colleagues reported in 2014 that people who deliberately broke an expected norm, such as wearing red sneakers at a professional event, were credited with higher status and competence than people who conformed. The inference ran through perceived autonomy. The effect disappeared when the observer was unfamiliar with the setting, when the behaviour looked unintentional and when there were no shared standards of formal conduct.

The article's own reading goes one step further. If a first view forms quickly and is refined by later evidence, personal branding is mostly the work of making the later evidence agree with the first, and plain signals that are repeated in meetings, at events and in writing are the ones most likely to be read as intended in a room of mixed backgrounds. The article labels that as a practical inference from the studies and not as a finding of its own.

What it does not say

None of the studies cited here followed a professional across months of meetings, so the consistency rule is reasoning from the studies and not a tested result. The face study used photographs of faces, so it describes how fast a first view starts and says nothing about how long it lasts. The red sneakers studies concern visible departures from a norm and the conditions under which they are read, and they do not say that departing from a norm is the better strategy.

No study cited here was run in Dubai. The cross-cultural review supports warmth and competence as widely shared dimensions of judgement, and the application to Dubai is the article's own practical reading. The page makes no claim about careers or outcomes, and it says nothing about the profile pages of any particular platform.


Sources

  1. Storr, W. The Status Game.
  2. Dupree, C. H., and colleagues (2017). Universal dimensions of social signals: Warmth and competence. In Social Signal Processing. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316676202.003
  3. Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751
  4. Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x
  5. Bellezza, S., Gino, F., & Keinan, A. (2014). The red sneakers effect: Inferring status and competence from signals of nonconformity. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.1086/674870
  6. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005