I don't know if we have different conceptions of branding, but it seems to me that if one were to eschew any kind of branding whatsoever, that stance would constitute their brand. At the other extreme, if someone produced books, articles, ebooks, mugs, t-shirts etc all with their logo on it, that would be their branding. I wonder if a go…
I don't know if we have different conceptions of branding, but it seems to me that if one were to eschew any kind of branding whatsoever, that stance would constitute their brand. At the other extreme, if someone produced books, articles, ebooks, mugs, t-shirts etc all with their logo on it, that would be their branding. I wonder if a good way of thinking about it is to ask what one would like others to associate them with. But to be honest, I don't know enough about academia in general, or USA academia in particular, to be able to contribute anything useful to this discussion. My edxperience has been in secondary education (mainly) in England.
You're right that branding has become a kind of catch-all that others can say you're doing even if you don't want to be doing it. Rage Against the Machine = the machine in the end. Or, as Dylan says, "You've gotta serve somebody."
This needs to simmer longer, but I think I might be reacting against the ways that branding was used oppressively at my former employer, and the ways that I see universities doing this now, trying to simplify a mission, encourage everyone to hew to the "brand pillars," etc. It can create winners and losers within an academic institution (what if your discipline doesn't fit the brand?) and reckless spending (investing in fancy football stadiums, hoping the boys do the brand proud on Saturdays).
But what I hear people gently suggesting is that I don't have to carry all of that baggage into my writing life and entrepreneurial ventures. I really think Matt, in a different comment, nailed the distinction. If I can recognize branding as a tool to use rather than as a system that uses me, then perhaps there's a path forward.
I don't know if we have different conceptions of branding, but it seems to me that if one were to eschew any kind of branding whatsoever, that stance would constitute their brand. At the other extreme, if someone produced books, articles, ebooks, mugs, t-shirts etc all with their logo on it, that would be their branding. I wonder if a good way of thinking about it is to ask what one would like others to associate them with. But to be honest, I don't know enough about academia in general, or USA academia in particular, to be able to contribute anything useful to this discussion. My edxperience has been in secondary education (mainly) in England.
You're right that branding has become a kind of catch-all that others can say you're doing even if you don't want to be doing it. Rage Against the Machine = the machine in the end. Or, as Dylan says, "You've gotta serve somebody."
This needs to simmer longer, but I think I might be reacting against the ways that branding was used oppressively at my former employer, and the ways that I see universities doing this now, trying to simplify a mission, encourage everyone to hew to the "brand pillars," etc. It can create winners and losers within an academic institution (what if your discipline doesn't fit the brand?) and reckless spending (investing in fancy football stadiums, hoping the boys do the brand proud on Saturdays).
But what I hear people gently suggesting is that I don't have to carry all of that baggage into my writing life and entrepreneurial ventures. I really think Matt, in a different comment, nailed the distinction. If I can recognize branding as a tool to use rather than as a system that uses me, then perhaps there's a path forward.