Personal branding: A systematic literature review of academic literature

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 3 Personal branding: A systematic review of the research and design strategies used when investigating personal branding

The aim of this chapter was to identify the research and design strategies and, specifically, the scientific procedures used in research articles about personal branding, to build on best practices, and to avoid the pitfalls identified by previous researchers. The chapter will commence with a short introduction to the topic.

Introduction

One may ask what the following people have in common: Nelson Mandela, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, Donald Trump, Richard Branson, Philip Knight, Henry Ford, Walt Disney, JK Rowling, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Teresa, the late Princess Diana, Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. The answer is that these individuals, amongst others, used their journey towards success within different areas of life as a basis to build, implement, maintain and cultivate an authentic, distinctive and memorable personal brand. It could be relevant to ask which personal and professional lessons could be learned from the way these prominent individuals built their brand and also what the true meaning of personal brand is.
Kheder (2014:33) refers to personal branding as the “process of establishing a unique personal identity, developing an active communication approach of one’s brand identity to a specific target market and evaluating its impact on one’s image and reputation, to fulfil personal and professional objectives”. Furthermore, “personal branding is defined as a personal perception or emotion about a person. It is a reflection of who we are, what we believe, what we do, and how we do it. It is authentic and natural and therefore it avoids one from competition but establish a sincere focus on the value of uniqueness” (Karsudjono et al., 2013:628). Thomas (2011:142-143) suggests:
four critical building blocks are needed to support personal brand and to develop it into a credible, recognisable, representation of a person and their work. The four essential building blocks for personal branding are: name of the brand, message: what the brand stands for, definite understanding of value, purpose and uniqueness, channel: multiple information streams to develop a value adding presence that builds value adding bridges, development of relationships of value, connection, partnerships and growth.
Personal branding as a topic of particular interest is evident from the large number of popular entries found on Google, namely at least 1 820 000 results, while Google Scholar shows at least 249 000 results. Amazon Books lists 2 110 books when personal branding is entered into the search field. Personal branding is thus definitely a topic of interest within the public domain.
Surprisingly, when a search for published journal articles with regard to personal branding was done, only 56 articles could be found of which 36 articles met the inclusion criteria for analysis. It is evident that a definite limitation exists with regard to research concerning personal branding. This is further confirmed by the fact that of the 36 articles, only five articles represented a qualitative research approach, and another six a quantitative approach, whereas the rest (25) were position papers.
This chapter reports on an investigation into the current research and design strategies related to personal branding by means of a systematic literature review. A methodological framework was developed to analyse the 36 identified articles, which was used to synthesise the data. The framework is inclusive of traditional research elements such as, the research paradigm, research design, sampling, measurements, validity, reliability, data collection, data analysis and interpretation, limitations and ethical considerations. The findings may provide practitioners and academics with insight into the limited research available and indicate the status of the research approach towards personal branding.
Although personal branding has not yet been developed as an academic discipline, it is possible to report on some methodologies that have been used, and to indicate future research opportunities. A detailed explanation follows in the next paragraphs.

Literature review

According to Wetch (2012), development of a personal brand begins by creating a ‘positioning pitch’ that includes all information a person knows, understands and accepts, which then becomes the foundation of his/her personal brand, and demonstrates an understanding of his/her real image and identity. Personal branding requires clear understanding of one’s own profile including personality, strengths, weaknesses, achievements, passions and how one is perceived by others. Personal branding can only be successfully achieved if aligned with a specific life or career plan followed with a well-executed plan.
The literature review reflected in this chapter focused specifically on the elements which should be discussed in the methodology section of an empirical report. The subheadings which follow represent common elements included in textbooks on business research, and guidelines to authors, as presented in esteemed journals (Babbie, & Mouton, 2001; Bryman, & Bell, 2014; Creswell, 2013; Neuman, 1997). Apart from providing these elements (research paradigm, research design, sampling, measurements, validity, reliability, measurement scales, data analysis and interpretation, limitations and ethical considerations), each element is discussed with reference to the general concept, as well as to specific ways in which it can be presented in an article. The latter was done in order to guide the researcher to identify common and less common ways by which the phenomenon (personal branding) is researched as suggested by Leedy and Ormrod (2013). The elements discussed below were utilised as a framework to analyse the research and design strategies used by researchers in the area of personal branding.

Research methodology

The research methodology is the scientific approach the researcher follows to pursue the research project. Below is a description of the elements that were an integral part of the framework used to analyse the research and design methodologies of the articles related to personal branding. It includes research paradigm, research design, sampling, measurements, validity and reliability, data collection, data analysis and interpretation, limitation and ethical considerations (Babbie, & Mouton, 2001; Bryman, & Bell, 2014; Creswell, 2013; Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014; Neuman, 1997).

Research paradigm

Paradigms play a fundamental role in science. A paradigm is a set of laws, theories, methods, applications and a whole system of thinking that form a scientific research tradition. It includes basic assumptions, questions to be answered, and problems to be solved or research techniques to be used (Gringery, Barusch, & Cambron, 2013; Mc Burney, 1994; Neuman, 1997).
Within the business environment, paradigms may either objectively view the organisational processes and structures, or see the organisation subjectively, as constructed by individuals. Four possible paradigms for the study of business or an organisation are suggested by Bryman and Bell (2014). The authors refer to a functionalist approach as problem solving, which leads to rational explanation as a dominant approach within an organisation. Using the interpretative approach, the researcher questions whether the organisation exists beyond the social domain based on the experience of those working there. Then again, the radical humanist approach looks at the organisation as a social set-up where research is seen as the initiation of change. Lastly, the radical structuralist assumes that the organisation is a result of structural power where relationships could end in conflict.
The four paradigms are not aligned with one another as they are based on fundamentally opposing views. According to Bryman and Bell (2014), a paradigm influences the choice of research design and data collection as either qualitative or quantitative or a multiple approach. Choice of a paradigm is thus used as a starting point in research, which leads to the research design as indicated by Mouton (1996) discussed in the next paragraph.

Research design

Research design is the approach followed to investigate the problem at hand, inclusive of a structure to collect and analyse data. This research strategy could be qualitative or quantitative research or in some cases a combination, as indicated by Leedy and Ormrod (2014). Quantitative research focuses on theoretical explanations, concepts, variables and the interrelationship based on the testing of formulated hypotheses in an empirical manner. To ensure future replication, measures and intended procedures are pre-developed and standard. Analysis normally takes place by using statistics, tables and charts (Neuman, 1997). On the other hand, qualitative research captures and discovers meaning. Measures are setting-specific. Data may be obtained from documents, observations and transcripts. Research procedures are specific, and replication is normally rare. Analysis proceeds by extracting themes or generalisations from evidence and organising data to present a coherent and consistent picture (Neuman, 1997).
It is very unusual for a researcher to study the entire population, therefore a procedure referred to as ‘sampling’ is utilised. Sampling refers to the process where a researcher will select a subset or sample of the population so that the results could be used to provide general results relating to the entire population. Two major categories of sampling exist, namely probability sampling and non-probability sampling, and the type most appropriate to the research aims and methods, as well as other characteristics, such as the time and resources available, will be chosen. Probability sampling allows each person an equal possibility to be chosen. It uses random selection, which allows for minimum error. Types of probability sampling are simple random sampling, stratified random sampling, proportional stratified sampling, cluster sampling as well as systematic sampling (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014; Bryman, & Bell, 2014). However, with non-probability sampling it is not possible to predict or guarantee that elements within a particular population will be represented, which means that some members have little to no opportunity to be sampled for a specific study. Convenience sampling, quota sampling and purposive sampling are all non-probability sampling types (Neuman, 1997).
Measurement is needed to limit the data of any topic to ensure that the data can be interpreted and compared to a specific qualitative or quantitative standard. The following paragraph explains the measurement scales used to order data during a research project.

Measurements

Measurement is the assignment of numbers to events or objects according to rules that permit important properties of the objects or events to be represented by properties of the number system. Four types of measurement scales are common: nominal scale, ordinal scale, interval scale and ratio scale (McBurney, 1994). A nominal scale is a simple approach that limits data to a specific name assigned and restricts it then to the meaning by dividing it into categories that can be compared with each other. With an ordinal scale, “symbols become relevant which refers to > (greater than) and < (less than). The scale allows the researcher to rank-order data”. An example could be classification of education, income or levels of performance. Furthermore, an interval scale is characterised by its equal units of measurement and by its zero point, which has been established arbitrarily. A good example is the Fahrenheit (F) and Celsius (C) scales for measuring temperature. Also, the scales used by some survey groups, businesses and professional organisations could be assumed as interval scales. Then, lastly, a ratio scale has two characteristics, namely equal measurement units and an absolute zero point. The ratio scale can express values of multiples and fractional parts, and these are true ratios (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014).
Reliability and validity are central issues in scientific measurements. Different techniques are followed for quantitative and qualitative studies. Reliability refers to an indicator’s dependability, indicating that the information provided by indicators does not vary as a result of characteristics of the indicator, instrument or measurement device itself. It is expected that measuring instruments will offer consistent results (Neuman, 1997; Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014). In business or social research, focus is placed on inter-rater reliability (that will evaluate the same item with the same judgment), test–retest reliability (that the same results will occur on different occasions), equivalent form reliability (that different instruments will produce the same outcome) and internal consistency reliability (for all items, the same instrument will produce the same results as indicated by Leedy and Ormrod (2014).
Both reliability and validity reflect the degree to which error is possible in measurement. Measurement can only be accurate if measured consistently. When the reliability of a measurement instrument is increased, the validity also increases (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014).
The validity of a measurement instrument is the extent to which the instrument measures what it is intended to measure. The validity of a measurement instrument can take different forms, which include face validity (on the surface it looks like measuring as expected), content validity (it reflects the various parts of the content domain in appropriate proportions), criterion validity (results correlate with results from another instrument) and construct validity (it measures patterns of a characteristic that cannot be directly observed) (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014).
When conducting qualitative research, external reliability, internal reliability, internal and external validity are recommended (Bryman, & Bell, 2014; LeCompte, & Goetz 1982).
In qualitative research, validity is sometimes referred to as ‘trustworthiness’, which could be described as engagement and persistent observation over a longer time to facilitate trust. Triangulation occurs when multiple data collection methods, sources, investigators and theoretical approaches are used. It includes peer review and debriefing to ensure additional independent evaluation. A search for negative cases to un-confirm the proof, explicit clarification of research bias and subjectivity, verification of thoughts and documentation as well as external independent review are other techniques used to bring about trustworthiness. Lastly an adequate research context is ensured through thick and rich writing (Bryman, & Bell, 2014; Creswell, 2013).

Data analysis and interpretation

‘Data analysis’ refers to a search for patterns in data. Once a pattern is identified, it is interpreted in terms of a theory or the setting, within which it occurred, thereby providing a possible deeper interpretation of its meaning (Neuman, 1997).
Although qualitative data analysis is less standardised than quantitative data analysis, it requires more effort by the researcher who is required to read, reflect and compare in a logical way through conceptualisation as well as open, axial and selective coding. Most of the data collection is dependent on the personal involvement of the researcher. Methods of qualitative data analysis include successive approximation, analytic comparison, domain analysis and ideal types, such as conversation analysis, discourse analyses, narrative analysis, rhetorical analysis, critical discourse analysis, semiotics and thematic analysis (Neuman, 1997).
Quantitative researchers, in contrast, follow an approach of deductive reasoning beginning with a premise and then drawing logical conclusions from it. Objectivity is maintained through predetermined statistical procedures with objective criteria to evaluate the outcomes. Data is typically reduced to means, medians, correlations and summarising statistics. One or a few variables are identified with the intention to study and collect data relating to those variables, with a focus on the validity and reliability of the measurement instruments (McBurney, 1994).
Five types of main variables are relevant within quantitative research. This includes dichotomous, nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio variables. Univariate analysis refers to one variable at a time, while bivariate analysis refers to analysing the relationship between two variables. Univariate analysis utilises frequency tables and diagrams. Measures of central tendency use the arithmetic mean, median and mode, whereas measures of dispersion use the range and standard deviation. Bivariate analysis utilises contingency tables, and the techniques include the Pearson’s correlation coefficient r, Spearman’s rho as well as phi and Cramér’s V. Furthermore, to verify the level of statistical significance techniques, the chi-square test is utilised. Some researchers manage to combine elements of both approaches, in which case the research is referred to as having a mixed-method design (Bryman, & Bell, 2014; Leedy,& Ormrod, 2014).

 Limitations

It is important for researchers to acknowledge the weak points of their own studies and indicate areas for improvement. The researcher has the responsibility to ensure that the limitations are clearly indicated, particularly when the quality of the studies reviewed was not good (Green et al., 2006; White, & Schmidt, 2005).

Ethical considerations

Whenever the subjects or participants are human beings or other creatures that can feel, think and experience distress, researchers should evaluate the implications of the research approach and the effect of it. Most ethical considerations during research fall into the following categories referring to the subjects or participants: protection from harm, voluntary and informed participation, right to privacy and honesty with professional partners. Internal review boards and professional codes of ethics play a critical role to ensure ethical research. Researchers should align with the standards of the different bodies (Bryman, & Bell, 2014; Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014). This section concludes the discussion of the theoretical framework. The following section demonstrates the application of the framework during the analysis phase of the study with reference to research and design strategies applied in previous studies concerning personal branding.

Methodology

The data extraction was done independently by the researcher and the research supervisor, and the results were compared (White, & Schmidt, 2005). The approach followed two steps to review the relevant methodology systematically. Firstly, a literature search was performed, and secondly, there was a selection of relevant studies guided by the inclusion and exclusion criteria, which are described in the paragraph below. The purpose was to analyse methods used previously in studies relating to personal branding. The searched terms used were personal brand*, individual brand*, professional brand*, self-brand*, and self-marketing. The asterisk allows the search engine to use all variations of the word; thus, including terms such as ‘branding’, ‘brands’ and ‘branded’, as an example. Publications which appeared between 2002 and 2014 were included in the search. The search was initiated on 17 June 2014, and a wide bouquet EBSCOhost and ProQuest database were used. A full list is attached as Annexure A.
The search was further limited to full-text publications in English. Only articles which were identified as peer-reviewed were included. Although it is the ideal to have a complete operational protocol (White, & Schmidt, 2005), it was only developed after some pilot searches. Many clearly promotional titles were found, despite the specification that results should reflect peer-reviewed articles. These were excluded, as Babbie and Mouton (2012), caution that only information or data that is accepted by the scientific community should be included in building the body of knowledge. The initial search also yielded results pertaining to the link between individuals and product brands, such as “Place branding: creating self-brand connections and brand advocacy” (Kemp, 2012). This and similar articles typical of consumer behaviour were excluded. The search was completed on 19 June 2014, using the search engines, inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as search terms as indicated above. In total 56 articles were captured when doing the computer search, after excluding duplications in the reach of the EBSCOhost and ProQuest bouquets. After the researcher had reviewed the list, a total of 36 articles met all criteria.
The elements of research as indicated in 3.1.2 to 3.1.7 were utilised as a framework to analyse the articles and are discussed in section 3.3 below.

Findings

In total, 56 articles were located given the search strategy. Finally, only 36 articles were analysed (see Annexure B), given the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study. The Journal of Marketing Education (N=2) and European Journal of Marketing Management (N=2) both published two articles each, but no other journal published two or more articles. No author published more than one article. In the sections that follow the findings will be discussed in terms of the elements of the framework utilised.

Research paradigm

It was possible to identity and report the paradigm reflected as a set of laws, theories, methods and applications that form the scientific research tradition of the articles. In total, only six articles were quantitative, reflecting a positivistic critical-rationalistic approach, which acknowledged that the truth is revealed through a focus on the rejection of the nil hypotheses. The four qualitative articles suggested the presence of hermeneutics. The position papers (in total 25 articles) also relied on hermeneutics. In most cases, the authors of the articles viewed their assumptions about certain elements of the body of knowledge in the way they gave explanations of the phenomenon. It may therefore be stated that the field of personal branding is dominated by interpretive hermeneutics towards knowledge creation, which is seen as the subjective human understanding of the phenomenon personal branding obtained by means of the process of interpretation and dialogue (Gringery et al., 2013; McBurney, 1994; Neuman, 1997). The next paragraph provides insight into the research design strategies identified in the analysed articles.

Research design strategies

The research design describes the general strategy planned and developed to address the research objective (Leady, & Ormrod, 2014). In total, six articles followed a quantitative research approach (inclusive of variables, causal relationships and hypothesis testing), five articles followed a qualitative research approach (captured and discovered meaning from documents, observations and transcripts), whereas 25 articles were position papers (reviewing information and forming a subjective opinion) (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014; Neuman, 1997). The next paragraph offers a reflection of the sampling methods in the different articles that were analysed.

Sampling

Sampling is a process of selecting cases systematically for inclusion in a research project. The framework in Table 3.1 both provides a summary of the identified sampling procedures and shows how it was applied to analyse the sampling approach followed in the articles (Leedy, & Ormrod, 2014; Neuman, 1997).

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT
OPSOMMING
ABSTRACT
DECLARATION
DEDICATION
PREFACE
CHAPTER 1 Orientation
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem statement
1.3 Goals and objectives
1.4 Importance of the study
1.5 Delineations
1.6 Theoretical framework
1.7 Research methodology
1.8 Chapter division
CHAPTER 2 Personal branding: A systematic literature review of academic literature
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Literature review
2.3 Methodology
2.4 Plan of analysis
2.5 Findings
2.6 Conclusions
CHAPTER 3 Personal branding: A systematic review of the research and design strategies used when investigating personal branding
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Literature review
3.3 Methodology
3.4 Findings
3.5 Conclusion
CHAPTER 4 Developing a personal brand: Systematically exploring popular literature on the topic
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Literature review
4.3 Methodology
4.4 Findings
4.5 Discussion
4.6 Limitations of the study
4.7 Contribution
CHAPTER 5 The development and validation of a measure of a comprehensive personal brand
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Literature review
5.3 Methodology
5.4 Results
5.5 Discussion
5.6 Conclusion
5.7 Limitations of study
5.8 Suggestions for future research
5.9 Acknowledgements
CHAPTER 6 The relationship between personal branding and critical career success factors
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Literature review
6.3 Methodology
6.4 Statistics calculated
6.5 Results
6.6 Discussion
6.7 Limitations of the study
6.8 Recommendation for future research
CHAPTER 7 Conclusions, limitations and recommendations
7.1 Conclusions
7.2 Limitations
7.3 Recommendations
7.4 Summary
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT