That weird Brand
What is the difference between being considered weird and being authentic.
Is there a difference?
People love to label other people – and brands for that matter – especially those who draw outside the lines or break social norms. Some of them are called weird, some innovative, some crazy, some authentic. Where is the line drawn? What is their common denominator and what is their differentiating factor?
A common denominator could be that in both cases you are essentially being yourself. So if you behave as you truly are, unapologetically and genuinely, it would inevitably lead to you drawing outside the lines and breaking social norms; simply because it is impossible to implement a one size fits all approach when each individual is unique and different.
So if the common denominator is being genuine about who you really are, what is the differentiating factor? That would depend on each person’s perception, how relatable someone is to them and how resilient they are to conformity.
Conformity sells, for a while
Surely, conformity will get you a wider audience, but for how long?
Trying to please everyone inevitably means you have to sacrifice your authenticity. While it is in our nature to seek acceptance, conforming to social norms deprives a person and brands of their uniqueness, limiting sustainability, imagination and innovation.
Risk becoming “Weird”
Being true to yourself requires courage and self-acceptance.
This applies both to people and brands. Certainly not everyone will relate to you or accept you, but the prize of being authentic is so much more valuable. As those that do relate to you will not only accept you, they will admire your courage of daring to be yourself, they will be inspired, and if you act with kindness and selflessness, they will ultimately love and become loyal to you.
You must log in to post a comment.