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.)

Cracks Within

Jun 15
2 min read

Political parties can survive scandals and electoral setbacks. What they often struggle to survive is the loss of purpose that follows a crushing defeat. The decision by 20 rebel Trinamool Congress MPs to merge with the Nationalist Citizens Party of India and extend support to the NDA is best understood through that lens. Much commentary has focused on the arithmetic of Parliament and the legal intricacies of anti-defection laws. Yet the deeper story is about what happens to a political movement when it ceases to be the principal vehicle of power.


Only weeks ago, the Trinamool Congress suffered the most devastating setback in its history. After fifteen years in office, it was swept from power by the BJP, which now governs West Bengal under Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari. Instead of triggering any introspection, it has triggered a complete disintegration.


That should not come as a surprise. The Trinamool had largely held together by Mamata Banerjee’s cult of personality and electoral success. Once that success disappeared, latent tensions within the party began surfacing with remarkable speed.


The scale of the rebellion within TMC makes clear that many senior leaders had concluded that the Trinamool, in its current form, offered little prospect of revival.


Rather than immediately joining the BJP, the rebels have chosen a more circuitous route apparently designed to navigate the legal constraints imposed by anti-defection laws. Whether that strategy withstands judicial scrutiny remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the rebels are seeking not merely survival but leverage. Their support strengthens the NDA’s position in Parliament at a moment when important legislative battles loom ahead.


For the BJP, the development presents both opportunities and risks. Additional parliamentary numbers are always welcome. Yet the party must also guard against becoming a refuge for every politician seeking shelter after electoral defeat. Bengal voters endorsed change partly because they were weary of the political culture associated with the previous regime. They may not look kindly upon its wholesale importation into the new order.


For the Trinamool, the crisis is existential. Legal challenges may slow the rebels’ advance, but courtrooms cannot substitute for political renewal. The party’s leadership confronts the uncomfortable possibility that the rebellion is not the cause of its troubles but a consequence of them.


History suggests that opposition parties can recover from even the most severe setbacks. But recovery requires adaptation, new leadership and a compelling vision.


The question is no longer whether it can return to power. It is whether it can remain a credible political force long enough to attempt a comeback. Their loss of power has exposed how much of the organisation’s cohesion depended on access to office rather than adherence to a common political project.

Comments


bottom of page