Kevin Courtright on Led Zeppelin

This is an excerpt from an interview I conducted with Kevin Courtright, author of Back to Schoolin': What Led Zeppelin Taught Me About Music.

http://backtoschoolin.blogspot.com/

Stephen Mitchell Challenges Executives To Build Their Own 'Personal Brand' as an Alternative to Working for a Corporation

Los Angeles, November 2010

Stephen Mitchell, author of the Executive Management Consulting protocol, has issued today a challenge to CEOs and top level executives to build their 'personal brand' so as to generate alternate and supplemental sources of revenues as an alternative to work-for-hire with a corporation. The protocol contemplates the aggrandizement of a personal brand for men and women in a variety of industries.

In 1980, Stephen founded an entertainment industry think tank labeled The New Hollywood Studio System where he authored a number of intellectual properties including the Action/ReAction technique for actors and curricula for writer/directors; all bearing directly on advertising and marketing concerns.

In 1985, Stephen pioneered a unique application of product integration in branded entertainment with his cable TV series (Interview). "I wanted to sell a product that nobody wanted to a public that had an aversion to buying." The series was lauded by critics and attracted a cult following that included Oscar, Emmy, Peabody and Grammy winners (http://sminterviewseries.blogspot.com/).

Stephen is offering the EMC protocol to selected executives for the strategic management and marketing of their personal brands, applying the same strategies used in the entertainment business for the commercial development of Hollywood actors, writers and directors. "The goal is to maximize the yield from the client's personal brand."

"The progression," says Mitchell "is to secure an enhanced W-2 situation and then proliferate income sources for the executive so the brand is working to his or her benefit."

Having discreetly piloted the program, Mitchell is now extending the challenge to a wider number of candidates.

END

How many people know about you?

Most executives with whom I've spoken have a network of about 200 people. This is a good number when it comes to getting things done. It is not a good number for expanding the horizons of a career and ensuring a future. The optimum number for that agenda would be closer to 200,000. It isn't likely that one will ever have this many contacts on the Rolodex and it isn't important that one actually knows that many people. It is only important that they know you and, of course, your signature skills.

One can work very hard for decades to build a personal network of one to two hundred peers. On the other hand, one can build a constituency of two hundred thousand overnight by appearing in the media--print or television--and expressing your particular observations and solutions. This kind of visibility and positioning drives offers to you and increases the value of your services.

How many people know about you?

Career advancement as psychological warfare

The U.S. Department of Defense defines psychological warfare (PSYWAR) as: "The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives."

Career advancement is psychological warfare, in my view. The 'hostile foreign groups' may consist of employers or corporations who might opt to hire or contract with others. They may be consumers opting for products other than the ones we are selling or services offered by others. In any event, we want to attract potential employers or clients to engage us rather than someone else.

Psychological warfare can be waged in any number of ways. It is a conceptual activity with an infinite number of possibilities. One simply must know what one wants--and from whom one wants it. Once these factors are established, the work can begin.

A well conducted media campaign creates new networks--not of peers, but of qualified motivated buyers for what you have to offer.

Retailers report soft May sales figures

In the Los Angeles Times, Andrea Chang writes, "The nation’s consumer spending recovery hit a snag in May as retailers reported soft results that hinted at what could be a tough summer for spending."

One might ask if this is a consequence of massive job losses or if this will this stimulate further job lay-offs.

In any event, those who rely on keeping or finding a job should take note and act to increase the value of their personal brand.

The three kinds of actors

In response to the "How to Start a Hollywood Career Without Having to Go There" entry, someone asked: "Since there are no more than 3 kinds of actors, I want to know what are the 3?"

In order to answer this precisely rather than in general terms, I had to check with Kathi who had a copy of the book handy. The three kinds of actors, therefore, are:

1) The lead, whose job is to secure funding for the producer and excite box office results owing to his/her popularity with the public;

2) The antagonist, whose job is to upstage the lead so as to make him/her seem more heroic when he/she wins at the end of the story (remember how well Anthony Hopkins did this for Jodi Foster?);

3) And everyone else, whose job is to be credible without distracting from the interaction between the lead and the antagonist.

This differentiation is meant for strategic purposes to help an actor kick-start a career (bear in mind the title of the book). One can see that, normally, it takes some exposure to be a lead though there are exceptions that become more frequent as the budget gets lower. So, it makes sense to analyze the qualities of an antagonist and incorporate them into one's signature as an actor--or brand, if you will. Making a mark as a good antagonist is also a great way to move into the lead category with the benefits that go along with that status.

Now, imagine how this applies to businessmen and women in the business world.

Have you been on television yet?

In speaking with a gentleman the other day, he told me that he has been with a marketing company for two or three months and felt as though his bases were covered in navigating his search for a new job. One question changed his perception. I asked if they (the marketing company he had engaged) had gotten him on television yet. I was met with silence followed by, "No".

I went on to tell him what his 'marketing' company was doing for him: After spending some considerable time consulting with him, they rewrote his resume into narrative form and spammed it out to as many email accounts as they could.

If one wants to ensure a successful result rather than follow the herd and hope for better, would spamming out the best resume that was ever written trump a personal appearance on television and related media? Would receiving spam from you provide better positioning for you in the business sector than a focused presentation of your perspective and wisdom in a national forum? Which approach gives you marquee value? In my view, one approach makes it look like you need a job. The other makes you look like a voice of authority at the national level.

I'm interested in engaging with management level executives who want to ensure the expansion of their horizons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvWWoYK9hXw