Think through the past winners. I admit, I didn’t follow the show too much in its earlier seasons, only starting watching it proper towards the end of Season 6. But since then, the winners have been Jordin Sparks, David Cook and Kris Allen, with Blake Lewis, David Archuleta and Adam Lambert as the runner ups. What about the likes of Nick Mitchel aka Norman Gentle? Or Katrina Darrell, the bikini girl? Nowhere near the top.

What’s my point in this? Every year we see loads of people trying out various gimmicks in an attempt to “stand out” and make an impact on the judges. But invariably, the ones who really go on to win the competition have not been these people. The winners have been the ones who have focused on their singing, just went in, did what they do, with no extra fuss. They let their ability speak for itself, and didn’t require the extra gimmicks to make an impact.

There are always going to be gimmicks available, that seem to promise an instant impact. But gimmicks can only get you so far. If you’re really good at what you do, you will be noticed, even without the gimmicks. If you aren’t good enough, then no amount of gimmicks in the world can help you.

I finally got around to watching Avatar today, the 3-D, IMAX version of it. It was an interesting show, the plot definitely has a bit too many similarities to Pocohantas for my liking (as many have pointed out). I liked the mini-satirical messages in it, though.

That’s not what I want to write about, though. What struck me the most about Avatar was the 3-D. And it struck me the most actually because it didn’t stand out. In most 3-D movies, the fact that it’s 3-D is extremely noticeable. In most 3-D movies, the 3-D doesn’t really seem natural or real, to the point of even causing giddiness at times. Or maybe the giddiness is just me. Either way, the 3-D is normally too noticeable, in a bad way.

Avatar was different, though. The 3-D effects were natural. It almost didn’t feel like I was watching a 3-D movie, until I specifically paid attention to the depth and all. It was done so well, it seemed completely natural, and it just immersed you into the world.

I think this is important. That the effects (and at the end of the day, 3-D is just an effect) don’t take away from the movie. The effects have to blend in, seem natural, and enhance the movie, not stand out so much that it detracts from the overall experience.

And I think it’s true for any product we build as well. It’s easy to get distracted by features and enhancements. It’s easy to think add more an more things, in an attempt to make the product more impressive. But we have to remember that, at the end of the day, it’s about the overall experience, not about features.

It’s also something we need to consider when building our personal brands. We need to remember the main overall message we want to send out. It’s easy to get distracted by other things. I know I’ve suffered from this. For this blog, for example. It’s so easy, and I’ve done this too, to come across a new plugin and think “I need to have that”. But I think we need to really consider how each additional “feature” we add will affect the overall experience, and as such our overall brands.

We need to stay focused, and remember that it’s about the whole experience, not about special effects. Special effects should only be there to enhance the experience.

I know this is going to spark some huge disagreement, but I can’t say I completely disagree with him. But that’s besides the point. What I want to bring attention to is how everyone seems to be protesting vehemently and insisting on their privacy.

Yes, I do understand where they are coming from, but the fact of the matter is this. Privacy as we know it is a thing of the past, and that trend is not likely to stop. These people insisting on their privacy sound very much to me like Tiger Woods’ request last month for “some privacy” after his accident.

It may seem like a reasonable request, but like it or not, it was never going to happen. We all know how that turned out for him, and how he’s suffering from it now. The basic fact is, as a celebrity, people are always going to be “intrusive”, and having privacy is almost impossible. He can’t have it both ways – he can’t be in the limelight and make millions while he’s doing well, and ask to slink into the shadows when things don’t go his way.

And neither can we. We can’t say we want the benefits of micro-celebrity and the value of social interactions that come with the web, but refuse the intrusion of privacy that comes with it. It’s tough, but that’s the way it is.

So what can you do? You are left with one of two choices, in my opinion.

1. Refuse anything that comes with branding yourself/getting known on the web, and get your privacy with it. This means minimal or no Facebook or social networking, no blogs, etc. You lose the huge opportunity the web gives you to stand out, but you gain your privacy. Some people are perfectly happy with this option, like my mother, and manage it quite well.
2. Embrace the social web, and everything that comes with it. Make use of it to develop your personal brand and build connections. Try to be as authentic as you can, and with nothing to hide, of course. But be prepared that if you have secrets (and face it, we all do), they might easily come back to haunt you. And learn to manage that scenario accordingly.

I think it’s obvious that I’m in camp number 2. What about you? Are you ready to accept that you have little (or no) privacy, as a trade-off to the benefits of the social web? Or do you think there’s a middle ground?

Photo by stevendepolo

What struck me the most about that list? Every item was about leaving out something. The most obvious allusion to that is when she says “the reality is that when the graduation date is missing, you are actually calling more attention to the very thing you are trying to hide.”

I think that’s a very important thing to remember. What we leave out, more often than not, is just as, if not more, important than what we put in. And people notice that. To be real, you have to take the risk of putting everything on the line – even things which may be potentially embarrassing.

Yes, there’s a fine line between managing your personal brand well, and covering up things which you don’t want people to know. The best solution? Neither, in my opinion. If you live your brand, if you live by your beliefs consistently and are who you say you are, you should have nothing to hide.

And that’s what we should all strive for, I think. Being completely authentic that we have nothing to hide.

Now, ask yourself – what are you hiding?

When I first started blogging, I reached out to Chris Brogan, asking him for advice and suggestions on how to improve my blog. He not only replied and gave me good advice, he even made a post about my blog, giving me my first boost of subscribers. Since then, he’s continued to be really helpful in everything.

Just last week, I finally got a hold of Trey Lockerbie‘s EP. How did I get it? I emailed him asking him for it, basically saying that I wanted his EP, but it’s only available on the iTunes music store which is inaccessible from Singapore. Long story short, he left a copy of the CD at the hotel’s front desk last week when he stopped by Singapore for a show. I’ve always really loved Trey’s music since I first heard him a couple of years ago, but this brought my appreciation  (and fanhood) of him to a whole new level.

What am I getting at? Firstly, from an individual’s perspective. Don’t be afraid to ask for what you want. Your heroes are not always really that out of reach. More often than not, they’re happy to hear from you. Even business owners have said that what matters most to them is “customers who appreciate what we do.” Reach out, ask for what you need, and you never know, you might just get it.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, for brands (both personal and corporate). How open are you to your customers? How approachable are you? Do you communicate with your customers, are you willing to help them when they reach out to you? Because you should. That little bit of approachability goes a long way.

Yes, I’ll admit, it feels really good to get featured. It’s a huge step forward for my personal brand, that’s for sure. But more than anything, it’s great to be able to share my thoughts, and get my message out to a whole new audience.

To those of you who have been reading my blog for a while now, thank you, you are why I love blogging, and why I keep doing this. And for those of you who are new here (maybe you came here because of the article), thanks for dropping by, and I hope you’ll find value here.

Oh, and one final thing. If I can do this, so can you. I’m nothing that special, I’m just a kid from Singapore.

It’s easier than ever to build your personal brand. What’s stopping you?

“You need both volume and quality. You cannot substitute one for the other. To win the personal eBranding game, you must be hyper-connected, yet maintain relationships with 20% of your network that will provide you with 80% of the value you need (80/20 rule of networking).”

Personally, though, I’m on the fence about this. Yes, I do see where he’s coming from. There’s definitely value in having volume. I don’t think anyone can argue against that.

But there is one factor that I want to bring up, that I think is more important than both the quality of the relationships and the number of friends. I think what is most important is who your friends are, as Seth Godin has touched on before.

In his video podcast, Dan mentioned the example that if you were looking to hire someone, you are more likely to hire someone with 500 connections on LinkedIn than someone with just 5 connections. The number of connections give credibility to your personal brand.

While that is true, to an extent, I would say that who is in your network lends even more credibility. Would you rather hire someone with recognized thought leaders in their network or someone who’s netwrk consists of just their high school classmates?

I believe you’ll gain more – in terms of the credibility it gives to your personal brand, the opportunities that will arise, etc – from having recognized thought leaders in your network. You might have more high school classmates, and you might have a closer relationship with your high school classmates, but I think that the network of your high school classmates might not be as valuable (unless your high school classmates are recognized experts in their field, of course).

As Dan mentioned, “the more connected you are, the better the chance that an opportunity will arise.” But even more so, if you are connected to the right people, there’s an even better chance that an opportunity will arise.

So, yes, you should continue to try and “become more social online and offline in order to maximize those numbers and befriend more individuals in the process”, as Dan suggested. But that should be done one at a time, and with a focus on who you are befriending.

What do you think is the most important part of your personal network? How do you build your network so that it provides the most value for you?

There’s really nothing much I can add to what he says. If you haven’t already, you really should watch it – it’s more than worth the 15 minutes.

One of the things I like about Ary is that she has a very distinctive personality, and a very distinctive style that goes along with it. And it’s very recognizable.

I remember one morning, I was having breakfast and I noticed someone walk into the cafeteria. I was eating my food, so I was kind of looking downwards, and just saw the person enter my field of vision slightly. The only thing I saw was the person’s socks. And straight away, I knew it was Ary.

Even more significantly, as much as I can remember, I don’t think I had seen her wear that pair of socks before. It just seemed to suit her so much, that even though I had not seen it before, I knew it was her. That’s how recognizable and distinctive her style was.

It goes beyond just clothes, though. It’s her whole personality. And it’s something that I think we can all learn from.

I think there’s huge value in being that distinctive and recognizable. Take ,a href=”http://www.hellomynameisscott.com/landing.aspx”>Scott Ginsberg, for example. He’s known as “the name tag guy”, and everything that goes along with that – approachability, etc.

Corporate brands always aim to be simple, distinct, recognizable – connoting strong and clear emotions all the time – so that you know what the brand stands for.

Your personal brand should be the same way, I think.

How recognizable is your brand?

It’s a small image, just 16×16. But the change did cause a bit of a stir online, with a lot of blogs running the story and a couple of forum threads being started. It’s even spurred questions about whether Google was going to undergo a rebranding process.

I’m not going to speculate about any of this, but what I do want to point out is this. Even such a small scale change caused such a stir. Why? Yes, part of the reason is because of the size of Google. But I think it’s also because Google’s brand had been associated with the old icon (the capital ‘G’). People were used to that. And when it changed, people noticed – some praised and supported it, others criticized it.

Once you’re associated with something – a word, an image, an icon, even an attribute – no matter how small that “something” is, people will notice when you change it. It’s up to you to ensure that the change is met well.