Relatability Part 2

Relatability Part 1 from yesterday is here.

This is long and kinda rambly, intentionally not cut short because it's thinking in progress, and you're invited to openly and loudly poke holes all through it.

Disclaimer #1: Typically, I don't think a one-person business has a brand to manage in the same way that an agency, or a product or even a charity does… but the conversation I mentioned from yesterday brought up topics where I spotted a potential connection to this thing we call "branding", and running a one-person business - so I'm exploring that, and it might go no further than this.

Disclaimer #2: This is not a "personal branding" piece, I don't love that term - but I do believe in the context of branding, every person, product and business has a brand of sorts, whether they deliberately cultivate it or not.

In general, the 3 parts I clumsily suggested might form part of a "brand" were:

Observable bits: Objective traits everyone would agree on - logos, colours, sounds, smells, fonts, etc.

'Feely' stuff: Subjective or personal things about how the brand makes us feel, and the opinions we form of it.

Relatability: How much we might, or might not, personally relate to the brand.

Let's assume that when we encounter a brand, we're subconsciously building a mental list of the things we believe to be true about it, both objective and subjective.

Two examples - one where the brand is a business, and for the sake of a more abstract example, one where it's just a person (not a one-person business, just a person).

Business version first.

I like Ducati motorcycles but let's pretend I'd never seen one before. If someone started up their Ducati as I walked past, my subconscious list might look something like this.

Objectively, I can see this motorcycle is a Ducati because:

• There's the vintage logo right there on the tank: "DUCATI".
• I guess that yellow and black is a colour scheme they offer… noted.
• That growling sound the engine makes doesn't sound like other bikes I've heard, so unless this one has been modified, it might be a distinctly "Ducati" sound.
• My brain (which already likes motorbikes) has built a tiny shortcut, so the next time I see a yellow and black motorcycle with a similar profile and I hear that growling sound, I might assume it's a Ducati, and seeing the logo on the tank will confirm it. That's the objective part.

Subjectively, I've also started forming an opinion:

• I like the sound.
• I like the colours.
• I like the shape.
• I like the vintage look.
• I'm envious of the person that got to ride it home.
• (After looking it up) it's priced higher than other similar shaped bikes, but something irrational still makes me like this one anyway, so I now know the minimum cost to own one.
• Turns out they're also quite pricey to own - servicing and parts are far higher than other brands, at least in Australia.
• I find a few stories of controversy, recalls, and defects, which I might weigh against other brands if I decide to start shopping around.

As I go on with my life, I start noticing "Ducati" everywhere. I'm reading reviews of different bikes; I'm noticing the types of people that ride them; I'm on the website tinkering with the builder to build my own bike and observe how it makes me feel.

Through all of this, I'm also starting to sense whether I relate to this brand at all:

• Do I see myself as someone who could be an owner and rider, like the people I've observed who own and ride them?
• Could I "settle" for a lesser bike, or do I need that rumbling Ducati engine and that vintage look and that distinct colour scheme?
• Does everything the reviews say about superior handling, superior power, and all the advanced features really apply to me as a far simpler rider with far simpler needs and no "need for speed"?
• Let's pause there for now and switch to the person example.

About 5 years ago, I played in a low-level basketball league through a group who would put random guys together into a team, and find a league for the team to play in. My teammates and I had never met until our first game, but we ended up playing together for a few years. At one point, one of our guys moved overseas so we asked for another guy, and they sent Pierre.

We met him about 5 minutes before his first game with us - we all introduced ourselves, shook hands, exchanged jokes about being rusty and slow, and built the most basic of rapport before the whistle blew.

At that point, my objective list of Pierre might have looked something like this:

• British
• About our age
• Good sense of humour, can poke fun at himself like we do
• Friendly and personable

Once we hit the court, we got more data. My subjective list (probably similar to the other guys) started looking like this:

• Not afraid to use his elbows
• Seriously high energy, never stops running
• Encouraging, coaches as we play
• Good communicator, we always know where he is
• Not the most skilled player but a sharp shooter
• Easily frustrated
• Has a lot of "advice" for the referee
• Got a bit too rough and fouled out of the game

We'd usually go for a drink afterwards but he didn't join us that first night, so naturally a part of our conversation went to the topic of Pierre.

It wasn't a negative spray, we noted his strengths but we also couldn't avoid talking about how rough he played, and that he fouled out, which is not super common at our level. Some of the guys dismissed him on that first night based on his rough performance, despite him playing with us for a long time after that.

I noted that he had a lot to say to the referee…

…speaking of relatability…

…I'm also someone who offers helpful advice for referees 🙋🏼‍♂️ which I'm sure they appreciate. I'd hate for them to neglect their eyesight, so regular reminders to have it tested are helpful, right?

So unlike the other guys, I actually found a sliver of something in common with Pierre. Until he came along, I was the only one who really did that on the court, and I completely believe it comes from an insecurity in my own abilities… so I could relate somewhat to where it likely came from.

He played with us for a long time, and while I was friends with all of the guys, Pierre and I became quite good mates. I don't think branding was at play necessarily, but like I said, the conversation yesterday drifted here - what makes us connect or relate to one company or product or even person, over another.

Not in a shallow way - companies and products are always burning to know why we chose their shampoo over other brands, and the answer might be as dull as it was on sale. I'm not talking about that… I mean those brands where there might be 4 or 5 of them in your life, that you're irresistibly drawn to.

If so, what's the draw? Is it:

• That they promise a feeling you've never encountered before (the Ducati growl)?
• A connection you haven't had with anyone or anything else before (Pierre and my insecurity that came out on the court).

And if THAT's so…

Can a one-person business cultivate that to a point, where they're not just another option in a sea of lookalike options… but they become the must-have option.

Poke, question, challenge, ridicule, point, laugh… there might be nothing here, but if there's anything for you I'd love to hear about it.