top of page

By:

Divyaa Advaani 

2 November 2024 at 8:58:38 am

Being Liked Is Not Branding

AI Generated Image Think of someone specific you met in the last six months who seemed genuinely interested in connecting further. The conversation was warm. There was energy in it. They said all the right things — let us stay in touch, I would love to explore this further, I will reach out next week. And then they did not. Not because they were rude or dismissive. Not because something went wrong. But because by the time next week arrived, you had simply faded. This is one of the most...

Being Liked Is Not Branding

AI Generated Image Think of someone specific you met in the last six months who seemed genuinely interested in connecting further. The conversation was warm. There was energy in it. They said all the right things — let us stay in touch, I would love to explore this further, I will reach out next week. And then they did not. Not because they were rude or dismissive. Not because something went wrong. But because by the time next week arrived, you had simply faded. This is one of the most quietly expensive things that happens to accomplished founders — and almost none of them know it is happening. Being liked is not the same as being remembered. Being remembered is not the same as being recalled at the right moment. And being recalled at the right moment is the only version of any of this that actually creates business. The gap between a pleasant first impression and a phone call that begins with "I immediately thought of you" is not filled by warmth or competence or even a genuinely great conversation. It is filled by a personal brand strong enough to occupy a specific, distinct place in someone's mind long after the meeting has ended. Here is what most founders are not told. When someone leaves a conversation thinking "what a lovely person" they have given you a compliment. When they leave thinking "she is exactly the person I would call if I ever needed to solve this specific problem for someone I care about" they have given you a business. The difference between those two outcomes is not how much they liked you. It is how clearly they understood what you stand for and who you are for. Most accomplished founders are genuinely likeable. Many are impressive. Very few are specific enough to be recalled at the moment an opportunity arises. They exist in the minds of their network as pleasant, capable, talented — and entirely interchangeable with the other pleasant, capable, talented people those same contacts met last month. That interchangeability is costing you more than you realise. Every time someone in your network encounters an opportunity that should be yours and instead recommends someone else — not because they like that person more, but because that person's name surfaced first and most clearly — your brand has failed at its most fundamental job. The founders who get called first are not always the most qualified. They are the most memorable. Not memorable in the sense of flashy or loud or relentlessly present online. Memorable in the sense that when a specific need arises, a specific face and a specific name and a specific value proposition surface together, clearly and immediately, without the contact having to work to reconstruct who you are and what you do. That kind of memorability is not an accident of personality. It is the result of a personal brand built with enough clarity, consistency and intention that it leaves a distinct impression rather than a pleasant but general one. It is the difference between being someone people enjoyed meeting and being someone people think of when it counts. Think about your own network right now. When an opportunity arises that is perfect for you — do the right people think of you immediately? Or do they think of you eventually, after they have already recommended someone else, and feel a pang of recognition that they should have called you first? If it is the second — your brand is not broken. It is just not specific enough yet. And that is entirely fixable. I work with founders on exactly this — building a personal brand clear and consistent enough that the right people think of them first, not eventually. If you are ready to stop being the person people liked and start being the person they call, book your consultation call with me on this link: https://www.calendly.com/divyaaadvaani/founder-brand-audit — Divyaa Advaani, Personal Branding Strategist (The author is a personal branding expert. She has clients from 14+ countries. Views personal.)

Beyond Cricket: India’s Sporting Colours Multiply

Writer: Bhalchandra Chorghade
Bhalchandra Chorghade
4 hours ago
3 min read

India’s sporting landscape is expanding, creating new opportunities for disciplines beyond the traditional favourites.

For decades, cricket and hockey occupied prominent places in India’s sporting imagination. Cricket grew into a national obsession, while hockey became closely associated with the country’s Olympic legacy. Other disciplines produced accomplished athletes and international champions but rarely enjoyed comparable public attention. The recently concluded 2026 Asian Games in Aichi-Nagoya, Japan, offered an opportunity to examine how far that sporting landscape has evolved.


India finished fourth with 85 medals — 21 gold, 27 silver and 37 bronze. More importantly, these medals came from 21 different sports, highlighting the breadth of India’s sporting talent. This diversity reflects the potential of disciplines beyond the country’s traditional sporting favourites and the opportunities they offer athletes to compete at the international level. The challenge will be to sustain these gains through consistent performances and a steady pipeline of athletes capable of competing at the highest level.


Cricket delivered gold in both the men’s and women’s events. Hockey retained its men’s crown, while the women’s team also won gold. Kabaddi, too, remained a dependable medal contributor, with both Indian teams claiming the top prize.


But the real story lies beyond these familiar names.


Athletics was India’s largest medal contributor, with 24 medals, including gold in the women’s 4x400m relay. Archery, shooting, boxing and wrestling also made significant contributions. Archery led India’s gold-medal tally with five titles, finishing with nine medals overall. Shooting added 15 medals, including three golds, while boxing secured three golds and three bronzes. Wrestling contributed six medals, including two golds. These results underline the importance of disciplines in which technical precision, specialised coaching and sustained athlete development play a central role. Maintaining this momentum will require access to quality training facilities, experienced coaches and regular high-level competition, allowing promising performances to develop into consistent international success.


Then came the sports that rarely dominate everyday sporting conversations in India.


Golf created history when Pranavi Urs won India’s first-ever Asian Games gold in the women’s individual event, while the women’s team added a silver. Sailing produced three medals. Weightlifting saw Mirabai Chanu return to the Asian Games podium with silver. Wushu added a silver, while squash contributed five medals. These performances highlight the potential of disciplines that often receive less visibility than more established sports.


And there were names that may still sound unfamiliar to the average Indian sports fan: sepak takraw, soft tennis, kurash and mixed martial arts. India won bronze in each of these disciplines. The men’s sepak takraw quadrant team’s achievement was particularly noteworthy, bringing recognition to a sport that rarely features prominently in Indian sporting coverage. Rowing, badminton and table tennis also contributed bronze medals.


For these sports, the challenge is to translate international recognition into sustained participation at home. More domestic competitions and greater exposure to these disciplines could help young athletes see them as viable sporting pursuits.


This is an important cultural shift. Young Indians need opportunities to explore sporting possibilities beyond cricket. Archery ranges, shooting academies, wrestling centres, boxing gyms, golf courses and athletics tracks can provide pathways to sporting careers. Government programmes, private academies, corporate sponsorship and greater international exposure can help widen those pathways, provided athletes have access to sustained training and competition.


The Asian Games have therefore become more than a medal count. They offer a glimpse into the changing aspirations of Indian sport and the range of disciplines in which the country can develop international competitors.


The next challenge is to ensure that these successes do not remain isolated Asian Games moments. A medal in golf, archery, shooting or even sepak takraw should generate greater curiosity and recognition. Regular competition, media coverage and opportunities for young athletes to take up these disciplines can help turn individual achievements into sustained interest.


Cricket and hockey will continue to occupy important places in India’s sporting culture. The objective need not be to diminish their popularity but to create space for other disciplines to develop their own audiences and traditions. From the golf course and archery range to the wrestling mat and sepak takraw court, India’s sporting future will depend on how effectively it converts individual achievements into lasting opportunities.

Comments

bottom of page