« Dating for the frugal | Home | My favorite discount store »
“Personality Not Included” Book Launch Interview
By Meg | April 1, 2008
Perhaps the best thing about attending the SXSW Interactive Media Festival was that I got to meet a lot of really interesting and knowledgeable people. One of them was Rohit Bhargava the senior vice president of Digital Strategy & Marketing at Ogilvy Public Relations and writer of Influential Marketing Blog, which I’ve started reading for his great insight on the topic. He also is the author of a new book, Personality Not Included: Why Companies Lose Their Authenticity And How Great Brands Get it Back
As part of the book launch, he offered to answer questions from bloggers about his book and its subject. So without further ado, here is my short interview of Rohit. (Though if you like my questions, there is a bit of a contest going on here and I would appreciate it if you wrote my name in before Friday since I would love a free copy of the book.)
1. At SXSW, “social networking” was the buzzword, but most people I
listened to didn’t seem to have concrete examples on how to use it.
What are some real ways it can be used to build a brand image, and how
much is the topic addressed in your book?
I think the strongest example I can offer is how I have been using my Facebook group for the book to build a community around it. I have given the people in that group consistent updates, shared exclusive content and essentially made it worthwhile for them to be a part of the group. The best way to use social networks is to be sure they add value.
2. Do you have any advice for those who want to show more personality
but are still worried about how to project a professional image?
I think the first thing is to understand that they don’t need to seem like opposites. Showing a personality doesn’t mean uploading shots of you on vacation on the beach to your professional website. It just means sharing your real voice so people know that it’s actually you and not just a front that you are putting up. The most relatable professionals are the ones that you know something more personal about.
3. I loved your post on the big bag swag. As you know, I’m not a big
fan of buttons — even from Google. Do you have any ideas for what
sort of things make good swag — or is swag even a good use of
marketing resources?
I think there is definitely stuff that makes good swag - simply because people love to get great stuff. The general rule of thumb is that you have to be funny, useful or expensive in order to stand out. I kept a folding keyboard I got because it was useful and expensive. I kept a yahoo glow in the dark ice cube because it was funny and useful (I have a three year old, remember?) The point is, there are good ways to use swag, you just need to be more creative.
4. At one SXSW panel on blogging, I asked if the speakers had any
ideas on how to make money from blogs other than using banner ads like
Adsense. You’d have thought that I was speaking sacrilege! For those
cases where banner ads aren’t in line with the values of a specific
blog, do you have any advice on how to still use the blog to make
money?
Absolutely, I actually like the sponsorship model. Think in terms of events. At an event, you don’t buy a spot on a banner, you buy something more holistic. So when you get that banner, what you are essentially saying is that you believe that event is worth attending and that the people there are important. Why shouldn’t blog advertising be the same way? I wouldn’t run banner ads for Moleskine notebooks on my blog - but if they wanted to sponsor my site for six months with a persistent sponsorship logo - I might consider it. Not click related, not impression related, but audience related. If they think I have an audience, why shouldn’t they be able to reach it? I wrote about this idea in a piece called “Microsponsorships” some time ago which you can probably find by Googling it.
5. The toy chickens on the cover of the book are great. Any story
behind them?
The main reason was to find something that stood out, which I think it does. The secondary meaning was something deeper about wind up chickens not having personality - so it’s probably a little of both.
Tags: Books, Impressions, Language & Writing, Writing
Related Posts:
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:56 am
[…] Reyes-Chow | Interview Link (shortlisted) 20. Katarzyna Dziedzic | Interview Link 21. Meg Taylor | Interview Link 22. Klaus Holzapfel | Interview Link 23. Xander Becket | Interview Link 24. Paul Peters | Interview […]