How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands

85 Responses to “How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands”

This is a great topic Jeremiah. I do not think there is any reason companies should “worry” about someone getting too popular, especially if they are treating that person well.
Smart people are not necessarily motivated by ‘more money’ - perhaps by more freedom. You would probably have lost that person regardless if you try and tell them what they can and can’t do.
Also I’m at a PR agency, and having a personal brand is vital for my success, especially when I spearhead a social media marketing campaign. PR people moving forward that have strong personal brands are the ones with the most connections and the ones who will be most valuable.
If you can successfully market/promote yourself, you will be able to for a brand as well. This is definitely worth some more discussion, I might put my thoughts together for a post on this too.



Posted by Adam Singer on December 9th, 2008 at 7:20 am

Adam
I really hope to hear your response. Most importantly, you could suggest what companies should do.



Posted by jeremiah_owyang on December 9th, 2008 at 7:22 am

Your third reaction is indeed sophisticated and interesting. What happens when a customer leaves? Is it the same as when an employee leaves? Worse?
Visibility in the marketplace is not unlike internal visibility. In some organizations there is implicit power residing in one or two positions, which may walk off when those professionals move on. In the end, it is easier to be loyal to people than it is to faceless entities, however the tension is perceived and handled inside and outside the walls.



Posted by Valeria Maltoni on December 9th, 2008 at 7:23 am

Valeria
That’s interesting, what if the CUSTOMER leaves. It’s quite possible that customers are far more fickle than employees who may stay for 4-5 years of tenure.



Posted by jeremiah_owyang on December 9th, 2008 at 7:26 am

i was me before (http://www.coolwebsites.org/septcool.html), where i work and i will be me long after..
=)



Posted by paisley on December 9th, 2008 at 7:29 am

I think the fourth reaction is the right one. So what if an employee builds a monster personal brand. That is like having Terrell Owens on your football team. You, Josh Bernoff, Charlene Li are examples of monster personal brands - and I would argue that Forrester is much richer for it.
Which of your competitors is even close to Forrester in this space? None.
Risk to company? They will have to pay those with big personal brands more money to keep them around. So what? THEY ARE WORTH MORE.
So, let 1,000 personal brand flourish. This revolution is about relationships and that requires people.
TO’B



Posted by Tom O'Brien on December 9th, 2008 at 7:32 am

@paisley - you have a good point there.



Posted by Valeria Maltoni on December 9th, 2008 at 7:38 am

I think EMC falls into Category 4, as we are each reminded when we start blogging that we are solely responsible for what we say and do in our blogs - even if EMC chooses to spotlight us as members of their “Blogging Community”.
I don’t know if anyone has considered the “gaping hole” potential, though. The risk of any of us departing is probably small, but it surely isn’t zero.
I agree that getting customers to be the product face would major competitive advantage. Unfortunately, at least in my industry, our customers tend to have policies against showing favoritism to any vendor. These policies are sometimes driven by Purchasing, who want to maintain the negotiating leverage of pitting purported equal vs. equal to get the best price (hey, it’s their job). The unfortunate side-effect is that it is almost impossible to get public references from significant influential customers, be they captured in text, audio, video or social media.
Great topic - look forward to the discussion!



Posted by the storage anarchist on December 9th, 2008 at 7:39 am

Great post Jeremiah. I think a number of people, myself included, are very passionate about this issue. As a professional who has built up a brand through social media and done so in a non-traditional market (Cleveland, OH) I know what it looks like inside a company that reacts the right way and the wrong way to this situatuion. I have also successfully ported my brand from one company to another.
I’ve built a personal brand from zero through blogging and used it to move into a better position with better opportunities. I think trying to lock somebody down will either frustrate them to leave or cause them to go rogue. Why not empower them, set clear guidelines to protect yourself, but use them as the marketing asset they are.
When I hire for my team I look at the personal brands of the people who apply. I’m a passionate marketer and I feel that if they don’t have a personal brand (even a fledgling one) I take a pass. It’s never been easier to start and there are no excuses.
Personally, I wouldn’t work for a company that does not see the value in what I am doing and support me in that. It’s my litmus test. This is adding value for their brand at the end of the day. Plus, if I leave then they have a good model for the next talented employee.



Posted by Matt Dickman on December 9th, 2008 at 7:39 am

Jeremiah - As you RT earlier this morning, corporations have indicated through action that we are dispensable, so we are viewing our job options through the same lens.
That point is an important backdrop for this topic. Employees aren’t going to be around for long periods of time (usually). Eventually circumstances changes and they will move on. Companies should make the best of the time they have with employees and maximize their productivity by embracing and supporting an employee’s interest in developing their personal brand.
Critical Mass is a positive example of a company doing this well, with how they support David Armano. He gets the freedom and latitude to do what he feels is important, while the company benefits at the same time. There is a positive halo effect for the company.
I don’t think the argument that this will increase the likelihood that employees will leave holds much credibility. Talented people will always be in demand regardless of whether or not a company is working with that talent on personal branding.
So, if you’re running a company, why not take advantage of what is happening/going to happen anyways?



Posted by Ken Burbary on December 9th, 2008 at 7:40 am

I think nonprofits are way more cautious with personal brands than corporations. Most nonprofits react by keeping the marketing faceless and “institutional voice” which can be stodgy, formal, boring, and cold. If they move past that, they typically have the recipient of their services be the brand or face - or the person’s stories … stories of the impact of the nonprofit’s services on one person or one puppy are more powerful and can inspire donations. So, why change that?
A few nonprofits have staff with personal brands and they allow it - a great example is the American Cancer Society’s fispace blog.
What’s most interesting to me in the nonprofit space about this - is the free agents or personal brands who working outside of the construct or silos of nonprofit firewalls to make social change.
Thanks so much for this insightful post



Posted by Beth Kanter on December 9th, 2008 at 7:44 am

An employee who feels strongly about building a personal brand will do so whether using the company dime or not. (As you said, “The savvy career gypsy will build this up before they need a job.”) And because of the 1st Amendment there is nothing the company can do about that. But, savvy companies can keep and use this brand equity by keeping the employee happy, and as Adam pointed out, it may not take more money. It’s important for companies to stay tuned in to what employees want most — freedom, time off, better benefits, whatever. And of course treat people with respect and trust. Employees who feel that their company doesn’t trust them enough to blog or comment may look for a better relationship elsewhere.
You can also flip this issue: what happens when an employee has built a personal brand tied to a company and then that company lets them down? Responds poorly to a crisis or behaves badly in public, such as breaking trust with customers? What happens to the employee’s personal brand?



Posted by jgraziani on December 9th, 2008 at 7:49 am

I have a rather public personal brand and I know that much of what we all do in this space can be confusing and frightening for organizations built on old control structures.
I have been learning as I go along how to use the me and my personal brand and the eightbar group brand we accidentally turned into a movement too.
It is a new area, there are no social or corporate structures to deal with a sudden rise of a personal branded leader in an area.
Learning to be public, to deal with the extra level of pressure, the new skills one aquires, the potential role model that you can become is not going to be for everyone.
They are also by their nature things that can transcend and out grow a physical organizational structure (e.g. suddenly having a global voice or impact not just local teams).
It often also seems like those people who fear it are those that have more self interest in maintaining their positions, however that does not have to be the case. A senior manager, VP, CEO etc can choose to use their already strong corporate position to get a jump start on engaging with a stronger personal brand.
Any company attempting to squash, control or “deal with” a web 2.0 leader, mover and shaker is missing a huge trick.
Keep those people onside, so they may become a little bit more famous, they may end up with delivering your company brand message for you, but it is usually done out of passion for the business and the company not to crush the company.
Of course until everyone is doing this suggesting that having a strong personal brand assists in being a career gypsy may not be true. Many organizations will still have old fashioned HR policies and ideas. A vibrant seemingly rebellious or process bypassing personal branded web celeb may just be too scary



Posted by epredator on December 9th, 2008 at 7:50 am

Companies have another option - limit access to both internal and external tools, through excessive use of “legal” and “compliance” issues/risks/concerns. Rather than sponsor those people that embrace this new medium - and help build both the company and personal brand - they ultimately just limit access. Why help 1K or 10K people become advocates and social voices of your company, when you can have one or two people and control you’re exposure?
But as we know, limited “authorized” access does not stop the creation of personal branding, it only forces those motivated people to seek out “external” tools to create it. In many cases, the personal brand becomes more about my “experience” than that of my “companies”. If this happens, the company is the loser, not the employee.



Posted by Arnie McKinnis on December 9th, 2008 at 7:50 am

@Matt - “Personally, I wouldn’t work for a company that does not see the value in what I am doing and support me in that.” The support comes from a specific advocate or champion inside the organization - it is just an entity.
@Ken - your comment reminds me of that age old question: what if I teach/train them and then they leave? And answer: what if you don’t and they stay? Except for after years of cut backs professionals now have the tools to train themselves, seek mentors, etc. Those who are hungry to learn and innovate will stay that way, whether you (the employer) will acknowledge it or not.



Posted by Valeria Maltoni on December 9th, 2008 at 7:54 am

Jeremiah,
Great topic! Sadly, I think many of the problems faced by companies today stem from their desire to hold employees back.
While there is a risk of talented well branded employees being lured away by other organizations, I think companies would be better served by taking better care of their well connected superstar employees. These employees are the ones who are usually producing the results.
While money will always be a factor, time and time again studies show that people are also motivated by things such as an interesting job, appreciation, security, loyalty and opportunity for growth.
If companies would start focusing more of their efforts on taking care of their top talent, they’re going to find that they’re in turn taking care of their customers too!



Posted by Kevin Mason on December 9th, 2008 at 7:56 am

Thank you for the mention. It has been a pleasure and amazing to see your personal brand grow over the past few years Jeremiah.
As for this post, I think your message is more about “growing a personal branding using social media as the medium.” In general, personal branding is a much broader concept, as it is the process by which we market ourselves to others. You don’t need social media tools to be recognized as a great contributor to your work group or to be recognized in your company for your efforts.
Social media is just a way to be known by more people, inside and outside of work.
That being said, personal brands are supposed to build more value for their companies and get them more exposure through their efforts.
I agree that millennials will force corporations to open up and allow for social networking at work.



Posted by Dan Schawbel on December 9th, 2008 at 8:01 am

@Dan - I don’t think there will be any difference between the amount of people building a personal brand today and when millennials are in the workforce.
Everyone keeps talking about how the next generation is made up of “digital natives” yet these kids are (on the whole) still at the same level of motivation as any generation - only a small percentage actually care enough to do something like build a personal brand.
Being 25 I have witnessed my own generation enter the workforce, and most are pretty lazy.
I disagree with everyone saying that millennials will change anything, age has nothing to do with it. Exceptional people change things, not demographic groups.
They may force corporations to let them use Facebook/the hot social network of the day because they are used to it (it’s like the phone to them) but from my experience only a small % of people actually want to build a reputation for themselves using it.



Posted by Adam Singer on December 9th, 2008 at 8:07 am

Companies that treat employees well and reward them for their success don’t need to be afraid of letting them be themselves and build their personal brands.



Posted by David B. Thomas on December 9th, 2008 at 8:08 am

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands [...]



Posted by Dessin Technology Insider » Blog Archive » Do you allow your employees to build their own brands? on December 9th, 2008 at 8:09 am

[...] Owyang posted a new article on Personal Brands. In it, he talks about how some companies fear personal brands because the people might get [...]



Posted by Personal Brands benefit companies | Thought Labs Blog on December 9th, 2008 at 8:13 am

The real issue in my mind is whether companies view super stars as an asset or a liability to their corporate brand.
Personal brands, to me, are just a way of highlighting what already exists in any business — some people stand out … some people are super stars.
Some companies view this positively and want to highlight these standouts; others, want to bury them behind a nameless/faceless brand and even defuse their super-stardom.
I think this is short sighted. People build companies; people contribute to brands; let’s make these people and their brands real, rather than creating an artificial/homogenous/lifeless corporate brand.
As a marketing leader, I believe it’s important to channel the resources of super stars and their personal brands to help the company. Spending time worrying about the downside only wastes time and energy and possibly accelerates driving these people away.
COMPANIES decide whether personal brands are an asset or a liability; it’s a self-determined fate.



Posted by Adam Needles on December 9th, 2008 at 8:16 am

thank you @david b. thomas for being the voice of reason
like attracts like and strong brands want to be affiliated with other strong brands



Posted by karina on December 9th, 2008 at 8:18 am

Personal brands are great. They can really benefit a a company, especially one that hasn’t established itself yet. I remember when DDB hired Kevin Flatt (who I worked with at Fallon on BMW), and they referenced him as the guy who created BMW Films. Do you know how many would kill someone to work with the “creator” of BMW Films? How about how many clients?
I think it’s the same on the client side. I left the agenc business and went to work on the client side at a CPG company because who I’d be working for and with. People, if you will, matter.
Let’s examine your risks:
1. Risk 1: The personal brand is a cost to the company: It’s only a cost to the company, if yo beleive in the concept of a 9 - 5 job. I probably put it in 70 hours a week into my “work” and my personal brand. The company I work for now, is making out just fine.
Risk 2: The now popular employee is likely to get poached: Well this would only happen if you weren’t paying this person accordingly or creating a non-desirable work environment. It’s simple really, if you take care of your own employees and your own house things will be ok.
Risk 3: Employee exits leaving a chasm to fill: See point #2. Let’s say the person is a rockstar awesome employee, but the company has a strict no-personal brand policy. That person would leave anyway. So isn’t the company better off embracing things?
Great post as usual. My general takeaway is that personal brands can benefit companies tremendously. Companies that don’t think so are places the cream of the crop probably don’t want to work at anyway.



Posted by Adam Kmiec on December 9th, 2008 at 8:22 am

It seems to me that employees aren’t nearly as likely to be leveraging the company’s brand to improve their own, so much as companies benefit from their employees’ personal brands. Sure it may get to the point where an employee has built up so much value that they’re essentially irreplaceable. But they are bringing that value to the company. If you work to keep their value down, then you’re working to bring your company’s value down. Working to keep a company’s value down doesn’t sound much like good management to me. If you’re afraid you can’t afford to lose an individual and their brand, maybe you should compensate them accordingly so that they don’t want to go.



Posted by Matthew Block on December 9th, 2008 at 8:23 am

Think about the larger phenomenon. If your employees are branding themselves then so are the people at your competitors and so are the people who would be great for your company that you didn’t know exist.
If you are looking, now you do know they exist and you can hire them. You can hire the exact right people for the job. When they leave in a few years, you again have the tools to bring on board the person/people that are just right for what you need then.
The glass is definitely half-full. More information and more liquidity creates a much more efficient market. Embrace it. If you don’t want someone to leave then find out if what motivates them is also good for your company. If it is, do it.



Posted by Swan on December 9th, 2008 at 8:27 am

Great post and good topic. I worked at FM Global for 5 years in RI & MA. FM Global treated their employees very well and infact promoted/empowered employees who became well known in their industry.
Most of the brand employees stayed for a long time-became company ambassadors-had awesome connections with customers/vendors-had the magic to resolve complex customer issues with harmony and ease. When they left the goodwill they generated was priceless.
I think companies should trust their employees - let them grow in the process - even if it means they become brands. Both the company and the employee will benefit.



Posted by Sandeep Arora on December 9th, 2008 at 8:28 am

I disagree that personal brands are inevitable at work. The description personal brands does not exist in marketing theory. A person does not have a brand, they have a reputation.
Intelligent management avoids the Scoble personality dominating social media situation. At the same time companies should allow people to be brilliant.
The second reaction is the one we recommend. Showing a team is what companies are about — more than one. Personal brands come and go, much like stars come and go on casts and sports teams. No one star is responsible for a team winning, nor should they be viewed as such.
Using sports again, even MJ and Kobe could/can not power the Bulls and Lakers to championships without other key players. It’s the same with social media. Highlighting those other players allows a company to maintain its program in the wake of inevitable departures.



Posted by Geoff Livingston on December 9th, 2008 at 8:31 am

Really interesting post and discussion. I teach a grad course on an HR-related topic, and I constantly encourage the students to start building their brands and marketplace identities as soon as possible, for future marketability and leverage. It can be a real difference maker in what is becoming a more competitive job market.



Posted by Steve Boese on December 9th, 2008 at 8:34 am

I was hired as a result of my personal brand, and I was careful to make sure that my brand wouldn’t become the intellectual property of the company, and that I’d be able to continue pursuing personal brand growth while under their umbrella. If they had required any set of terms that would’ve regulated my ability to grow my brand - I would have had to turn down the offer.



Posted by Esther Brady on December 9th, 2008 at 8:38 am

[...] Another fellow blogger placed an observative post today on How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal BrandsHere’s a quick excerptWeb Strategy by Jeremiah Owyang | Social Media, Web Marketing. Jeremiah Owyang discusses how web tools and social media enable companies to connect with customers ….. name (required). email ( will not be shown ) (required). website … [...]



Posted by Email Marketing Systems » Blog Archive » How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands on December 9th, 2008 at 8:39 am

@jgraziani
The 1st Amendment says CONGRESS shall make no laws. Terms of employment are willingly entered into, if you don’t like the restriction on blogging - find a new employer. It is not a 1st Amendment violation to willingly be restricted in what you can/cannot say or to whom you can say it. There is plenty of precedence for this, and it shouldn’t be surprising if you violate that contract or agreed upon policy (that you signed) that you will -and rightfully should- be fired.
Corporations need to address the issue of blogging up front, as part of the employment process to ensure candidates understand the corporate position on blogging in general.
No one is forcing anyone to take a position with a company that does not want its employees blogging.



Posted by Lori MacVittie on December 9th, 2008 at 8:39 am

Geoff, I buy that.
I could have used the term ‘personal reputations’ but it’s not what we’ve come to know. I’ve read your other pieces on this and tend to agree.



Posted by jeremiah_owyang on December 9th, 2008 at 8:40 am

[...] Jeremiah Owyang talks today about how employees are becoming more like migrants and gypsies.  As we evolve, the epithet of  ’worker’ no longer pertains.  None of us is just a cog in the wheel; rather, we are realizing that to develop a personal brand is to live fully, and not to do so is to remain wallowing in ignorance and slavery. [...]



Posted by Web and wheels « Consider This … on December 9th, 2008 at 8:42 am

Great post. Personal brands are essential to the modern company attracting and keeping both customers and talent.
I have a few Fortune 500 clients who block access to FB, YouTube, LinkedIn, FriendFeed, etc. To me, there is nothing worse than having a star employee who does their job well, wants to develop their personal brand online and can’t. They’ll either find a workaround or leave. What a tragic lost opportunity for both sides.



Posted by Greg Swan on December 9th, 2008 at 8:49 am

Funny that companies worry so much about losing the good people. In my experience, if they make it a good place to be, the good people stay. Let them build their personal brand, make them like being there and that personal brand can extend to the company brand.
@Geoff, I’d say that while the rest of the team helped elevate Kobe, MJ, Shaq, etc. Their names are what sold tickets, went on shoes, etc. Ignoring a star to focus on the team, will simply make the star go elsewhere, hurting the team.
Also I’d argue there is personal brand, whether marketing theory can handle it or not. I don’t know a thing about Scoble’s reputation. I don’t care what he thinks about anything, not do I know if I can trust him, or if he punches small children. BUT, I know about him. I know of him through his name/brand.



Posted by John Wilker on December 9th, 2008 at 8:53 am

@Valeria — It’s more than a single champion or an individual. For this to be successful it needs to be a belief that is held in the highest regard and embraced by the organization at all levels.



Posted by Matt Dickman on December 9th, 2008 at 9:02 am

Thanks, Jeremiah. It’s largely semantical, but the phenomena still exists and your piece does a great job of highlighting dangers and resolutions.
Interesting comment from Esther Brady. As a hiring manager, I’d be reticent to hire someone who was solely concerned with their personal brand and not the larger effort. If they will not apply/sacrifice for the larger good, they will not work out in my culture.



Posted by Geoff Livingston on December 9th, 2008 at 9:03 am

When recruiting, many companies tout the fact that they help further the prospective employee’s career development opportunities. Allowing employees to grow their personal brand with the company brand as a sub-brand would be mutually beneficial to both parties.



Posted by Jason Dojc on December 9th, 2008 at 9:04 am

[...] Another fellow blogger added an interesting post on How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal BrandsHere’s a small excerptWeb Strategy by Jeremiah Owyang | Social Media, Web Marketing. Jeremiah Owyang discusses how web tools and social media enable companies to connect with customers ….. name (required). email ( will not be shown ) (required). website … [...]



Posted by Email Marketing Strategy » Blog Archive » How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands on December 9th, 2008 at 9:09 am

Great post Jeremiah, and meaty topic.
Geoff - Scoble did more good for Microsoft than any of their advertising or marketing before or since. And he built his personal brand in the process. I think that was a win/win
I have helped clients to involve many people in and outside their company in social media. Some voices always rise to the top.
I agree that strong brands can attract strong voices, and vice versa. This train has left the station, personal brands aren’t going away.



Posted by B.L Ochman on December 9th, 2008 at 9:23 am

BL
What a hot topic eh? I agree with you Scoble did a great job at bringing the human side of Microsoft forward and increasing trust. He paved the way, he was a benefit more than a menace.



Posted by jeremiah_owyang on December 9th, 2008 at 9:35 am

The professional services business - especially consulting - has the potential to lead to the creation of personal brands more than most. In many situations the client ‘buys’ the person as much, if not more than buying the company. There is a fine line between the development of personal equity (good) and personal promotion to the exclusion of team (bad). Companies should recognize and reward the right behaviors where employees co-brand their efforts with the company and reject those who clearly pursue their own personal endeavors.



Posted by Paul Haskins on December 9th, 2008 at 9:53 am

I think more companies involved in web development recognize the need for their star players to have personal brands.
Tools like Get Satisfaction make it easy for a “lone ranger” in a big company to step up and start listening regardless of whether or not the company is on board.



Posted by Christen Dybenko on December 9th, 2008 at 10:29 am

Personal brands are essentially today rolodex’s, personal brands are just personal networks and they have always been important in getting work done, and getting business done. Personal networks are valuable in not only getting work done, but also in education. My personal network is my main source of learning right now, learning how to leverage it.



Posted by Karl Long on December 9th, 2008 at 10:35 am

I think this situation is similar to what the film studios have been deliberating with for years. Do you hire an individual, a popular/social actor who can take the lead role (but who re-writes the script or at least puts their own accent or personality into it) or do you hire a nobody who just reads from the script? (In this case, hopefully your social media guidelines).
Individuals like to engage with others. But for most companies, this sort of activity is risky business!



Posted by Hayden Sutherland on December 9th, 2008 at 10:47 am

[...] to have one, an equally large percentage has no idea its happening. Jeremiah Owyang (of Forrester) started a thread over on his blog that I recommend you all dive in on if you have particular feelings about your personal brand, how [...]



Posted by eightbar » Blog Archive » Personal Branding and Corporate Life, quite a challenge on December 9th, 2008 at 11:01 am

I also think that Social Media will become in 2009 what SEO was in 2007/2008, the straw to which people will cling.
In a downturn economy, differentiation, especially at the personal level becomes even more important. More and more SM second stringers will appear both as individuals and as individual brands within larger organizations as an adjunct exit strategy or as a means to ensure longer tenure when the axe starts swinging.



Posted by Simon Salt on December 9th, 2008 at 11:06 am

Great discussion by everyone involved, and there’s many items I would love to discuss, but focusing on one. –>Has anyone looked at the agency Dentsu when it comes to this issue/concept?
Someone in this thread brought up, “what if a company provides a brand that people WANT to use as their personal brand?” I think Dentsu does a great job of this, and it is re-inenforced by their entrepreneurial type of business model. However, the whole branding of the company is interesting. Employees can choose their own “color,” almost like a personality, so that the company becomes them and they become the comapny, yet Dentsu itself still maintains the umbrella brand.
i.e. Employees can choose the color of their business card, and other company-wide promotional items. It’d be an interesting case study nonetheless re: personal branding.



Posted by Alex, aka SocialButterfly on December 9th, 2008 at 11:50 am

I’ve just realized after reading Seth Godin’s post on the internet being full that the other advantage of a personal network, is that it is acting as an filter for things I’m not interested in and an amplifier for the things I am. I am connected to and listen to people who I can learn from, and they keep sharing the people that they are learning from. Personal brand is how you build a personal network, but it’s the network of people that you really listen to that’s really valuable. The day of the super star auteur on the internet is over, the people with the most ‘useful’ networks win.



Posted by Karl Long on December 9th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

I’m working on this right now at my Company (note the capital C). My response to this was so vigorous that I’m linking to the post here, rather than re-creating it. Because I am working on it professionally, I welcome any contacts from those with useful points of view.
Thanks,
Here’s the direct link to the relevant post: http://rhetoricia.blogspot.com/2008/12/personal-brand-and-company-property.html



Posted by Abby Shaw on December 9th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Sorry, I misspelled the Abby Shaw link — use this one.



Posted by Abby Shaw on December 9th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

I work at Schipul - The Web Marketing Company in Houston, TX, and our CEO encourages - as does our “corporate culture” - the proliferation of our personal brands.
My boss recognizes the risks you mention above. Sure, some succumb to them. He has hired smart people, and intelligent people are always looking to grow and develop themselves professionally. He even acknowledges that sooner or later, this grouping of intelligent people will probably fly out of his nest. So he invests in us as people, and tries to make us the best we can be, as individuals.
As a result, and speaking from my own observations, we are incredibly loyal to our boss and this company - and each other. He doesn’t try to stifle us; he wants us to reach our maximum potentials at his company and beyond. We know he cares about our personal growth - how many employees can say that about their bosses? We are lucky that he takes the time to invest in us as much as he does the company. We know we are his most valuable resources.
And when it’s time for me to leave - which is probably inevitable, considering the trends of my generation - I’ll know that I grew as a professional as a result of a boss that truly cared about me as a person. The tighter you try to suppress something, the worse it’s going to want to get away from you. So why cling? Perhaps it’s a bit of reverse psychology, but hey, it’s working for us!



Posted by Fayza on December 9th, 2008 at 3:31 pm

BL: What has Scoble’s work led to for MS in social media? What are they doing now? What happened after he left. A big fail. That is not a good legacy for their corporate social media effort.



Posted by Geoff Livingston on December 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm

Geoff- whose fault is that? Microsoft’s, not Scoble’s.



Posted by B.L Ochman on December 9th, 2008 at 5:41 pm

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands - The article examines 3 risks and 4 possible reactions. [...]



Posted by Widgets and Social Advertising, Risks of Personal Brands and More | Top SEO Writing Services on December 9th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

Great post, Jeremiah.
I find this quote:
[Despite that social technologies can improve customer relationships, the risks may be too great for some companies to bear, as a result, some corporations will shy away from allowing employees to have personal brands]
Absurd. Arrogant. Naive.
Prediction: In 2009, brilliant companies will encourage their employees to unleash personality, passion and creative energy into the world in ways we have yet to see. The great ones will subsidize the employee’s side projects.
Meanwhile, industrial age companies will continue to waste $ talking about the ‘risks’ of such behavior, developing policies that get hacked. As Paul Graham eloquently noted in this essay http://www.paulgraham.com/artistsship.html , there are ‘costs’ involved with designing against personal expression, too.



Posted by billy bicket on December 9th, 2008 at 6:57 pm

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal BrandsIntressant och jodå - inte helt främmande… [...]



Posted by Niclas Strandh » Strandh delar med sig - 2008 12 10 on December 9th, 2008 at 7:04 pm

Geoff
What makes your think Microsoft’s social media program has failed? Channel 8, 9, and 10 are still around.



Posted by jeremiah_owyang on December 9th, 2008 at 7:26 pm

Hi Jeremiah,
I run into the personal brand “dilemna” all the time. Mostly because I’m both an editor at mediabistro.com for their PRNewser blog and a PR practitioner at the Horn Group.
Given the blog, I’ve definitely developed what some may call a personal brand, although I like sticking with good old fashioned “reputation” as per Geoff Livingston’s comment.
To your above points, I believe most forward thinking companies will go with “option four” let personal brands proliferate. However, especially at large companies, you’ll often see these voices “aggregated” on a newsroom page. (http://www.communities.hp.com/online/)
What better way to show the collective voices of your employees? On my agency’s blog, we do the same, aggregating blogs of employees, our clients, and of course our blog roll.
Anyone who claims to have this all “figured out” is just not living in reality. It’s a case by case basis kind of thing, but I think you provided a good lay of the land in this post.



Posted by Joe Ciarallo on December 9th, 2008 at 7:29 pm

[...] the only person thinking about the subject. This morning, Forrester analyst Jeremiah Owyang posted How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands, in which he points out that companies have to manage certain risks when they allow their employees [...]



Posted by To speak to an operator, press 0 - Glen Turpin: The Identity Question on December 9th, 2008 at 7:58 pm

[...] Analyst at Forrester Research on Social Computing, has a very interesting post titled, “How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands.” As a corporate practitioner with a public blog and a decent enough following to claim a [...]



Posted by Todd Biske: Outside the Box » Blog Archive » Personal Brands and Corporate Blogging on December 9th, 2008 at 8:18 pm

Jeremiah-
I posted my thoughts on this at my own blog: http://www.biske.com/blog/?p=567



Posted by Todd Biske on December 9th, 2008 at 8:19 pm

People need and want to feel valued – period. Companies that actually get (and foster) this most basic human need keep their star employees for much longer periods of time. It’s companies who don’t get this who are paranoid about losing talent – and they absolutely should be.



Posted by Mike Proulx on December 9th, 2008 at 10:26 pm

[...] personal branding Oddaję głos specjaliście w tej dziedzinie: Jeremiah Owyang o tym, jak duże korporacje reagują na personal pranding swoich pracowników. Kluczowy [...]



Posted by Kilka powodów, dla których pracodawcy nie lubią personal brandingu « Wiktor Cegła on December 10th, 2008 at 3:23 am

[...] at Forrester Research: Social Computing recently brought up the topic again in a fantastic post:  How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands.  Go read it if you haven’t - both the post and ensuing discussion offer good insight from [...]



Posted by Personal Branding And Companies: A Symbiotic Relationship on December 10th, 2008 at 7:25 am

[...] Personal Brand & First Amendment Blogging Jump to Comments Jeremiah Owyang, Forrester’s social media analyst, posed a question this week on how corporations respond to personal brands. [...]



Posted by Personal Brand & First Amendment Blogging « marketing bean blog on December 10th, 2008 at 7:29 am

Jeremiah,
An excellent post a usual. One example of the 3rd Reaction is running right now on our blog http://blog.ripple6.com where we are running a series of videos of our clients talking about how they have used our products and the challenges have they faced in implementing social media.
Thanks,
Chris



Posted by Chris Kieff on December 10th, 2008 at 9:15 am

I think it’s great that people can put a face to the organization by employees building their own personal brands within a company. We encourage it because we all benefit from it.
The worry that companies have about their people being poached due to their personal brand should make businesses more accountable for creating a great work environment and giving them fair compensation and perks.
In my own experience, the reason for wanting to leave prior jobs is because I was unhappy due to being mistreated and undervalued and not afforded the flexibility. The minute you start valuing your employees, letting them spread their wings, and setting up a plan for them to be rewarded, results come and businesses flourish.
Now, I do base that on my own experience with one PR firm and then leaving with one of the co-founder to start my current firm. We have profit sharing and some other perks like genuine flexibility that keeps morale high and motivated because if a client is happy the whole team will be rewarded due to our business model.



Posted by Clay on December 10th, 2008 at 10:36 am

Jeremiah
If Forrester was paying you well, letting you have ample room to grow the company as well as your personal brand, and in general treating you as the reputable adult you are… why would you ever leave?
Employees, personal brand or not, leave because employers fail them…fail to allow them to reach what the employee feels is his or her future.
Companies need to stop playing defense and play offense. If you have a franchise player (with a powerful personal brand) then feed them. If they want to be a rockstar, and they can be a rockstar, let them. Otherwise, someone else will. And then you as the company create the self fulfilling prophecy — the departure of your personal brand employee.



Posted by Tom Martin on December 10th, 2008 at 11:50 am

[...] of Social Media participants who are conducting self branding campaigns. Jeremiah Owyang posted an article about how corporations respond to employees who develop personal brands. Given that there are over [...]



Posted by Is Social Media the latest lifeline in a downturn economy? « the IncSlinger on December 10th, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Wow - amazing conversation here. I work for a nonprofit and as Beth Kanter pointed out, we tend to gravitate towards the faceless option, but I’m intrigued by your mention of the second reaction and the Dell and Oracle approach of fusing employee and company. I think Jonathan Colman did that well for the Nature Conservancy.
I feel a bit schizophrenic after building my own network of nonprofit movers and shakers who are on social media and now having to build it all over again with separate accounts that represent my organization. However, as Karl Long pointed out in a great comment above, it really is all about the networks. That is especially true in the nonprofit sector.



Posted by Laura Norvig on December 11th, 2008 at 12:06 am

[...] brand kan door werkgevers als bedreigend worden gezien. Althans, dat is de boodschap die uit een recente posting van Jeremiah Owyang [...]



Posted by Heb jij een personal brand? Dan neem ik jou niet aan! | Personal branding | Recruitment Matters - Alles over online recruitment on December 11th, 2008 at 8:03 am

[...] post was inspired by Jeremiah Owyang on the topic of personal brands within a corporate community. In some ways this is more an issue of individual popularity rather than a personal brand, but [...]



Posted by Marketing Edge on December 11th, 2008 at 11:38 am

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands [...]



Posted by StepFree » Blog Archive » StepFree Bookmarks week 50 on December 12th, 2008 at 9:12 am

Got some personal branding I could borrow?
http://is.gd/OLH



Posted by Todd Defren on December 13th, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Actually I am asking our senior management team to start thinking the unthinkable - in the future, should we only consider candidates for jobs with respectable social media footprints? If so, what is respectable?



Posted by John Welsh on December 16th, 2008 at 6:53 am

You obviously touched a nerve with the tremendous response and your great post. I think many companies still have one foot planted in 1950s when the organization ruled and employees were simply cogs in a wheel. As the responses indicate, change is coming from the bottom up and companies won’t be able to get younger employees unless they change their tactics.
And, as many folks indicated, personal brands can only make a company stronger. As has been said before, “Who wants to communicate with a Coke bottle?” People want real people behind a company.



Posted by Wendy Marx on December 19th, 2008 at 10:11 am

[...] That said, Jeremiah Owyang tells us some companies can see a personal brand as a risk, and try to respond to them. [...]



Posted by Unique-Frequency.com » Blog Archive » Links For The Week: 21st December on December 21st, 2008 at 8:55 pm

[...] Owyang has an overview of the different ways in which companies can respond to the personal brands of their employees in the social media [...]



Posted by Links - 22nd December 2008 « Curiously Persistent on December 21st, 2008 at 10:07 pm

[...] This trend is one I’ve had a lot of fun mocking this past year. However, it’s a trend that will only accelerate as the social web becomes more common and corporations become more savvy in their adoption of corporation social media and their ability to affiliate themselves with disparate personalities and brands. [...]



Posted by Brandjacking » The Buzz Bin on January 6th, 2009 at 9:08 pm

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands [...]



Posted by Breaking Into the Minds of the Gen Y via Automobiles | Kyle Lacy, Social Media - Indianapolis on January 12th, 2009 at 5:23 am

[...] Owyang blogged about how some companies react badly to their employees developing their personal brands. Fortunately, Weber Shandwick has no problem with people having their own blogs, Twitter, etc.; [...]



Posted by digital ecologist » Blog Archive » Blending personal and professional brands on January 14th, 2009 at 9:53 pm

[...] of these pitfalls have already been fleshed out by Jeremiah Owyang: Risk 1: The personal brand is a cost to the company: Why let employees build their own brand on [...]



Posted by Team Social Media » The Buzz Bin on February 2nd, 2009 at 11:12 pm

[...] How Companies Respond to the Risks of Personal Brands דרג את התוכן:0מומלץלא מומלץהוספת תגובה [...]



Posted by מיתוג אישי - גם לשכירים - TheMarker Cafe on February 6th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

• Home
• Popular Posts
• About
• Contact