Good Branding Gone Bad

The title of the article in the February 2008 issue of Psychology Today caught my eye. “Becoming Your Own Brand” spoke directly to the advice I give many of my management consulting clients. As I read further I was enchanted by the words of Judith Sills, the author and PhD. “Your brand” she states “is the professional identity you create in the minds of others”. Perfect. An article I can forward to my clients.

But wait. There’s a hitch. A bit of sidebar advice has derailed her argument.

“Don’t make your niche of expertise too narrow” she suggests. As an example she suggests that describing your expertise as “business practices” leaves a lot of industries open while describing your expertise as “international shoe industry business practices” limits your options.

It certainly does limit your options. And that’s a good thing.

What she fails to recognize is the advantage that limiting your options offers the professional. By focussing on narrow areas of expertise and well-defined markets, it allows professionals to allocate their scarce marketing efforts in the most efficient manner possible. And more importantly, narrowly focussed experts are very attractive to clients who see that expertise as relevant and valuable to their firm.

This is why true, narrowly focussed experts, attract clients from around the world and command premium fees while generic business practice “experts” grind out reports for low margins and long nights, always struggling to chase the next client, rallying around their marketing mantra of “broad expertise”.

There is no such thing as “broad expertise” and the author makes the common undergrad mistake of attempting to position a generic skill set as a “distinctive and desirable” market position.

This critical flaw in an otherwise commendable article makes for another good start, and predictable bad finish, in the race to advise professionals on branding and market positioning.