Marketing Education Review

ISSN: 1052-8008 (Print) 2153-9987 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/mmer20

Inside Out Personal Branding (IOPB): Using Gallup

Clifton StrengthsFinder 2.0 and 360Reach

Paul S. Busch & Scott W. Davis

To cite this article: Paul S. Busch & Scott W. Davis (2017): Inside Out Personal Branding (IOPB):
Using Gallup Clifton StrengthsFinder 2.0 and 360Reach, Marketing Education Review, DOI:
10.1080/10528008.2017.1367930

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2017.1367930

Published online: 08 Sep 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=mmer20

Download by: [Australian Catholic University] Date: 09 September 2017, At: 15:31
 INSIDE OUT PERSONAL BRANDING (IOPB): USING GALLUP CLIFTON
STRENGTHSFINDER 2.0 AND 360REACH
Paul S. Buscha and Scott W. Davisb,*
a
Mays Business School, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA; bJones Graduate School of Business, Rice
University, Houston, TX, USA

A personal brand is an individual’s reputation and unique image, which can be a crucial differen-
tiator in today’s hypercompetitive job market. This article’s two main objectives are: to present an
evidence-based approach to developing the self-awareness component of a personal brand, and to
analyze the impact of the assignment on student learning outcomes. The Gallup Clifton
StrengthsFinder 2.0, which provides an inside (or internal) assessment, is used in conjunction with
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

360Reach, which provides an outside (or external) assessment, to guide marketing students through
an inside-out approach to developing their personal brand (IOPB). Students report that the assign-
ment helps them understand their talents, improve self-awareness, and prepare them for their job
search and career planning.

this concept has been applied in classroom settings. We

We live in an age of unprecedented opportunity:
If you’ve got ambition and smarts, you can rise to
the top of your chosen profession, regardless of
where you started out. But with opportunity
comes responsibility. Companies today aren’t
managing their employee’s careers; knowledge
workers must, effectively, be their own chief
executive officers. It’s up to you to carve out
your place, to know when to change course, and
to keep yourself engaged and productive during a
work life that may span some 50 years. To do
those things well, you’ll need to cultivate a deep
understanding of yourself—not only what your
strengths and weaknesses are but also how you
learn, how you work with others, what your
values are, and where you can make the greatest
contribution. Because only when you operate
from strengths can you achieve true excellence.
(Drucker, 2005, p. 5)
In this passage, Drucker articulates why developing self-
awareness is so important to an individual’s success. We
assert that true self-awareness is the foundation for creat-
ing a personal brand. But what exactly is personal brand-
ing? In this article, we review the literature to better
understand how personal branding is defined and how
Address correspondence to Paul S. Busch, Mays Business
School, Texas A&M University, 215E Wehner Building, 4112
TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-4112. Email: pbusch@-
mays.tamu.edu
*Current affiliation: Marilyn Davies College of Business,
University of Houston-Downtown, Houston, TX, USA
then discuss a new approach for an assignment we refer to
as inside-out personal branding (IOPB), which is designed
to help students leverage the benefits of understanding
and creating their personal brand.
We organize the article as follows. First, we summarize
key takeaways from branding literature and review other
personal branding assignments that informed the IOPB.
Second, we present an overview of the IOPB assignment.
Third, we detail student evaluations of the assignment and
analyze the implications. We conclude with a discussion
of results, an acknowledgment of the study’s limitations,
and opportunities for future research.
In this research, we had undergraduate business stu-
dents and graduate-level students in a marketing leader-
ship course engage in this personal branding exercise. As a
result of completing the IOPB assignment, students were
better able to articulate their unique strengths and talents
in their resumes by using language from both the Clifton
StrengthsFinder and 360Reach. This deeper self-under-
standing also helps students improve personal and profes-
sional relationships and portray themselves more
effectively during interviews and in their social-media pro-
files. These outcomes are evident in follow-up surveys with
students who completed the IOPB assignment.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The concept of personal branding was first discussed by
Erving Goffman (1959) in his book The Presentation of Self

Marketing Education Review, vol. 00, no. 00 (2017), pp. 1–16.

Copyright Ó 2017 Society for Marketing Advances
ISSN: 1052–8008 (print) / ISSN 2153–9987 (online)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2017.1367930
 2 Marketing Education Review
in Everyday Life (see also Khedher, 2014). Peters, who is
credited with coining the term “personal branding,” con-
tends that the development of a personal brand is compar-
able to a company branding and marketing its products.
“We are CEOs of our own companies: Me Inc. To be in
business today, our most important job is to be head mar-
keter for the brand called You” (Peters, 1997, p. 4).
Rampersad (2008) states that “your personal brand is
the synthesis of all expectations, images, and percep-
tions it creates in the minds of others, when they see or
hear your name” (p. 34). Horton (2011) equates perso-
nal branding with one’s professional story.
Effective and credible personal brands, just like the
best corporate brands, are built from the inside out. As
Arruda (2002) asserts, “personal branding is not about
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
building a special image for the outside world; it is
about understanding your unique combination of
rational and emotional attributes—your strengths, skills,
values and passions—and using these attributes to differ-
entiate yourself and guide your career decisions” (para. 2).
Therefore, the first step in creating a personal brand
is to understand one’s unique combination of attri-
butes, which determines the value one brings to a
company or project. A strong personal brand differenti-
ates a person in a way that clearly frames and commu-
nicates this value. The focal point of the IOPB
assignment is the self-awareness component, which
lays the foundation for and initiates the process of
creating an authentic and relevant personal brand.
Branding Literature
Dimensions of Brand Personality
There are several aspects of brand personality and
personal branding that inform each other. In her semi-
nal article, Aaker (1997) defines brand personality as
“the set of human characteristics associated with a
brand” (p. 347). In this view, brand personality takes
the human as its starting point and then attributes
these characteristics to a product. In contrast, personal
branding starts with the concepts of product branding
and applies that framework back to the individual.
Brand personality emphasizes the brand’s symbolic
meaning rather than its utilitarian or functional value
(Aaker, 1997). Arruda (as cited in Chritton, 2014, p. 75)
contends that for personal brands, personality attributes
can be divided into two categories—rational and
emotional:
Rational brand attributes are the table stakes that get
you into the game. . . . The challenge is usually
many people meet these minimum requirements.
It’s a competitive world, and whether you’re seeking
a job, a promotion, or a new client, relying on your
rational brand attributes would be a failed strategy.
Emotional brand attributes . . . are those traits that
get people excited about you. They are your person-
ality characteristics and life experiences. You layer
them on top of the rational brand attributes and use
them to make emotional connections with those
who are making decisions about you. Together,
your emotional and rational brand attributes speak
to your unique promise of value.
The personality traits associated with a branded pro-
duct, and with an individual’s personal brand, are
formed during a period of time through numerous
interactions and experiences. Consequently, brand per-
sonality tends to be enduring and distinct.
Establishing the Human Brand
Close et al.’s (2011) research on brand cues and how
they influence the entry-level placement of marketing
doctoral graduates suggests that “the previous research
on branding and quality perceptions of new product
brands appears to generalize to human brands” (p.
935). Just as consumers rely on brand attributes and
cues to help them determine product quality, inter-
viewers often determine an applicant’s quality based
on first impressions. In addition, just as consumers
judge a brand based on intrinsic and extrinsic cues, so
do interviewers with respect to candidates. Intrinsic
cues provide direct evidence of a candidate’s quality,
and extrinsic cues provide indirect evidence. An inter-
viewer may consider intrinsic cues, such as an appli-
cant’s grade-point average and leadership roles held,
and extrinsic cues, such as the reputation of the appli-
cant’s alma mater and previous employers. To market
themselves as a high-quality brand, job applicants need
to be aware of how they express their intrinsic and
extrinsic cues. In other words, these internal and exter-
nal cues communicate a candidate’s quality and “shape
the candidate’s brand image” (Close, 2011, p. 924).
Brand Mantra
The work of Keller (1999) on brand mantras is highly
relevant to personal branding: “A brand mantra [is a] short
three to five word phrase that captures the irrefutable

essence or spirit of the brand positioning” (p. 45). Keller
maintains that a company needs to manage its brand both
internally and externally. Likewise, the IOPB assignment
requires an individual to conduct a self, or internal, assess-
ment using StrengthsFinder, and an external assessment
using 360Reach. A brand mantra has three components:
emotional modifier, descriptive modifier, and brand func-
tions (Keller, 1999, p. 48). Consider the two examples
below.
The resulting brand mantras would read: “Disney is
fun, family entertainment” and “Grace is an affirma-
tive, responsible servant leader.”
The work of Aaker (1997) on brand personality,
Close, Moulard, and Monroe (2011) on humans as
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
brands, and Keller (1999) on brand mantras informs
our understanding of how these traditional concepts
in branding apply to the personal brand. Now we
turn our attention to the recent research on personal
branding assignments that have been used in collegiate
marketing classrooms.
Recent Research on Personal Branding
Assignments
Recent research has detailed how to implement various
personal branding assignments and has showcased the
efficacy of these approaches. Details of these assign-
ments can be found in Table 1, which discusses the
objectives and components of personal branding
assignments, as well as their findings.
Smith (2004) emphasizes the importance of identify-
ing a target market—that is, the industries and compa-
nies to which the student wants to apply. The most
relevant personal branding finding was that students
learned about themselves and defined their career goals
while improving written communication and critical-
thinking skills.
Stanton and Stanton’s (2013) work directly influ-
enced the IOPB assignment by providing a structure
for a personal branding statement that includes (1) a
value proposition, (2) differentiation, and (3) a target
market. This structure helped students articulate what
they bring to an employer and what sets them apart.
Edmiston’s (2014) Professional Online Presence
(POP) assignment focuses on using students’ personal
portfolios to communicate their personal brand
through social media. A significant contribution of
Edmiston’s (2014) 10-step approach is providing
2017 3
detailed guidance on how to establish an online iden-
tity, create and promote content, and monitor one’s
personal brand.
Edmiston’s (2016) work provides additional knowl-
edge and skills using social media. The “Perfect Pitch”
assignment requires students to develop and post a one-
minute video to YouTube to share with potential
employers. Edmiston’s (2016) assignment helps stu-
dents realize that marketing concepts and tools can be
applied to products and to themselves, which enhances
their appreciation of marketing’s value and power (p. 4).
The demonstrated success of these assignments pro-
vided motivation for our IOPB approach. This literature
review reveals a need for increased experiential learning
activities as instructors transition from a teaching to a
learning approach. These assignments inform students
that personal branding is an ongoing and dynamic
process that does not end with the semester.
THE INSIDE-OUT PERSONAL BRANDING
ASSIGNMENT
The Gallup Clifton StrengthsFinder 2.0 and
360Reach
The inspiration for the IOPB assignment comes from
William Arruda, who Entrepreneur magazine identified
as “the personal branding guru” (Tice, 2007), and who
has recognized the significant value in combining
360Reach and StrengthsFinder (Arruda, 2010). When
used in combination, these two assessments offer a
comprehensive understanding of one’s internal
strengths and external image as inputs for one’s perso-
nal brand.
Arruda’s company, Reach Communications, uses
360Reach as a tool to help employees enhance the
value they bring to their company. 360Reach is a
“web-based personal brand assessment that enables
career-minded employees to get the real story about
how they are perceived by those around them” (Reach
Personal Branding, 2016, para. 1).
StrengthsFinder helps students discover “their
unique combination of strengths” (www.gallup
strengthscenter.com) by distilling their top-five
strengths. Tomkovick and Swanson’s (2014) research
provides an excellent analysis of the relationship
between StrengthsFinder results and marketing stu-
dents’ success in the workplace.
 4 Marketing Education Review

Table 1
Literature Review: Recent Research on Personal Branding Assignments

Assignment Course Details

Author Objectives Assignment Components (Level, Title) Findings

Smith (2004) 1. Develop writing 1. Executive summary ● Undergraduate Students report the project helped
and critical-thinking 2. Situation analysis ● Principles of them learn about themselves
skills 3. Target market marketing and define career goals. The
2. Help in the job- 4. Goal setting assignment was effective for
search process 5. Apply the four Ps to personal helping students to apply
3. Enhance learning in branding written communications and
large classes critical-thinking skills.
4. Improve the useful-
ness of the
Principles of
Marketing for
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

majors and non-

majors
Stanton and Stanton 1. Gain an under- 1. Develop a personal situation ● Undergraduate Students found the assignment
(2013) standing of brand- analysis ● Principles of challenging but rewarding.
ing applied to self 2. Write a one-sentence brand marketing Students report it forced them
2. Link personal brand statement to think about themselves and
to product life cycle 3. Post brand statements to course their career goals.
3. Identify target mar- discussion board
ket/industry 4. Offer peer feedback on personal
4. Identify needs of brand statements
hiring employers
5. Identify brand
deficiencies
6. Develop unique
selling points
Edmiston (2014) Extend students’ 1. Establish an online identity ● Undergraduate Students report better
professional 2. Create social media accounts with ● Essentials of understanding of personal
portfolio to create a personalized URLs selling branding and their social media
professional online 3. Develop content skills. Students realized that
presence (POP), 4. Promote your brand name and personal branding was an
including: online presence ongoing and dynamic process
1. Personal mission 5. Promote your content that did not end with the
statement 6. Actively network semester.
2. Resume 7. Monitor your brand
3. Work samples 8. Measure your online “klout” score
9. Engage your audience
10. Manage your brand presence
Edmiston (2016) To understand: 1. Develop a personal brand promise ● Undergraduate Students crafted a pitch video to
2. Reflect on specific characteristics ● Strategic digi- share with potential employers.
1. The definition of
that define/reinforce their personal tal media They achieved a greater
branding
brand understanding of their
2. The concept of per-
3. Refine the personal brand points professional value and
sonal branding
and begin development of video increased self-confidence.
3. How to develop a
scripts
personal brand
4. Create videos and upload to
promise
YouTube
4. How to use social
5. Publish and share videos
media to develop a
positive impression
in the mind of
others

For the IOPB assignment, students first complete the
StrengthsFinder self-assessment. The result is a perso-
nalized list and description of the participant’s top-five
strengths. Students then use the 360Reach tool to ver-
ify those strengths from an external point of view. The
360Reach assessment is sent to individuals who know
the target person very well (e.g., family, close friends,
supervisors, and coworkers). These responses give
insight into how this person is perceived by others.
Taken together, these two inputs form the basis of the
IOPB assignment (see Appendix A).
The Personal Branding Statement
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
The IOPB assignment’s major deliverable is the creation
of a personal branding statement, which includes:
1. Value/benefits
2. Differentiation
3. Target market
The following is an example of a personal branding
statement from a former student, Grace (this student’s
name has been changed here to protect anonymity).
● Value/benefits: Grace is a motivated individual
who efficiently manages a team, taking owner-
ship of her responsibilities and exceeding expec-
tations using her leadership and analytic skills.
Her hard work, knowledge, communication
skills, problem-solving skills, and creativity are
unmatched. She uses her strategic and decision-
making skills to achieve success for her client
projects.
● Differentiation: Grace is a leader who capitalizes on
specific team strengths to achieve project success.
Her dedication to work, quest for learning, and
ability to build strong relationships is unique. Her
capacity to relate to others helps her build strong
and successful teams, and her positive attitude is
an inspiration to others.
● Target market: Digital marketing agency
EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT
After completing the IOPB assignment, 35 students
from a Master of Science (MS) marketing leadership
course and 81 students from an undergraduate (UG)
freshman business course assessed the assignment’s
effectiveness through a 31-question online Qualtrics
2017 5
survey. The survey items were derived from the mar-
keting education literature on personal branding
and from the authors’ experience in teaching perso-
nal branding. Specific survey items were drawn from
Smith (2004), Stanton and Stanton (2013), Edmiston
(2014), and Edmiston (2016). Based on seven years’
experience in working with students on personal
branding assignments, the authors were interested
in student learning outcomes related to improving
self-awareness, the practical benefits of the assign-
ment, and students’ expectations of the amount of
time required to complete the assignment, as well as
the actual time spent completing the assignment.
Because we combined scales from multiple works
and added our own scales, we used exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis to test and validate the
factor structure for our sample. Students’ responses
were captured three ways: (1) open-ended questions,
(2) five-point Likert scale questions (1 = strongly dis-
agree, and 5 = strongly agree), and (3) other closed-
ended questions. Other closed-ended questions
address items such as how students plan to use the
personal branding information (e.g., in cover letters,
in resumes). We report this survey data in the fol-
lowing subsections. For the Likert questions and
results, see Table 2.
Exploratory Factor Analysis
We conducted a principal component analysis with
an oblique (Oblimin) rotation to empirically group
the survey items into related factors. Factors were
consistent between the two student groups accord-
ing to independent analyses, so we combined the
data sets to consider common questionnaire items
from all 108 completed surveys. Three extracted fac-
tors accounted for 53% of total variance and met the
criterion of having eigenvalues greater than 1. We
removed one survey item from the analysis (“The
assignment increased my overall self-confidence”),
which cross-loaded on multiple factors (>.40). All
14 remaining Likert scale survey items loaded at
values greater than .50 on at least one factor, and 9
loaded at values greater than .60 (see Table 3 for the
rotated factor loadings [correlations] of the three
extracted dimensions). Cronbach’s alphas for each
factor exceeded .70, indicating high internal consis-
tencies. Conceptually, the three factors approximate
the broader issues we set out to study: Branding and
 6 Marketing Education Review

Table 2
IOPB Survey: MS Marketing and Undergraduate Business Students Post Assignment Survey

Strongly Disagree Neither Agree nor Agree Strongly Number of

Number Statement Disagree (1) (2) Disagree (3) (4) Agree (5) Responses Mean

Branding and Self

1 I would recommend the 360Reach 0 0 3(9) 13(41) 16(50) 32 4.41
assessment to others. 0 3(4) 3(4) 27(34) 47(59) 80 4.48
2 This assignment helped me become 0 0 2(6) 19(59) 11(34) 32 4.28
more self-aware. 0 2(3) 1(1) 38(48) 39(49) 80 4.43
3 I gained new knowledge about myself. 0 1(3) 1(3) 11(34) 19(59) 32 4.5
0 0 6(8) 24(30) 50(63) 80 4.55
4 This assignment helped me fully 0 0 2(6) 18(56) 12(38) 32 4.31
understand the concept of personal 1(1) 3(4) 11(14) 37(46) 28(35) 80 4.10
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

branding.
5 The assignment enhanced the 0 0 3(10) 17(55) 11(35) 31 4.26
vocabulary that I can use to describe 3(4) 4(5) 12(15) 39(49) 21(27) 79 3.90
myself to others.
6 This assignment helped me determine 0 2(6) 6(19) 17(55) 6(19) 31 3.87
what I need to do to improve my 1(1) 1(1) 7(9) 55(69) 16(20) 80 4.05
personal brand.
7 This assignment helped me gain a 1 (3) 0 0 16(50) 15(47) 32 4.38
better understanding of my 4(5) 3(4) 1(1) 28(35) 45(56) 81 4.32
personal strengths.
Practical Benefit
8 I plan to modify my resume and/or 0 2(6) 3(10) 15(48) 11(35) 31 4.13
cover letter based on what I learned 3(4) 4(5) 12(15) 39(49) 9(11) 80 3.60
from the Personal Branding
assignment.
9 This assignment has proven beneficial 0 0 9(29) 12(39) 10(32) 31 4.03
in my PERSONAL life. 2(3) 5(6) 17(22) 42(55) 11(14) 77 3.71
10 This assignment has proven beneficial 0 0 4(14) 15(52) 10(34) 29 4.21
in my PROFESSIONAL life. 0 2(3) 25(33) 35(46) 14(18) 76 3.80
11 Developing a personal branding 1(3) 4(13) 7(23) 12(39) 7(23) 31 3.65
statement made me feel more self- 2(3) 5(6) 25(31) 39(49) 9(11) 80 3.60
assured about applying for an
internship.
12 I would recommend the 0 0 0 9(28) 23(72) 32 4.72
StrengthsFinder assessment to 1(1) 4(5) 9(11) 36(45) 30(38) 80 4.13
others.
Time Expectations
13 This assignment took more time than I 2(6) 14(42) 7(21) 9(27) 1(3) 33 2.79
expected. 1(1) 35(44) 15(19) 20(25) 9(11) 80 3.01
14 This assignment took less time than I 1(3) 13(39) 8(24) 10(30) 1(3) 33 2.91
expected. 9(11) 30(38) 15(19) 24(30) 1(1) 79 2.72

Notes: The MS Marketing students are on the top line and undergraduate business students are on the bottom line. The numbers in parentheses
are percentages.
 2017 7

Table 3
Rotated Factor Pattern for Survey Items

Survey Item Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3

I would recommend the 360Reach assessment to others. (Q13) .752

This assignment helped me become more self-aware. (Q7) .747
I gained new knowledge about myself. (Q6) .718
This assignment helped me fully understand the concept of personal branding. (Q5) .706
The assignment enhanced the vocabulary that I can use to describe myself to others. (Q30) .658
This assignment helped me determine what I need to do to improve my personal brand. (Q27) .549
This assignment helped me gain a better understanding of my personal strengths. (Q3) .549
I plan to modify my resume and/or cover letter based on what I learned from the Personal Branding .770
assignment. (Q29)
This assignment has proven beneficial in my PERSONAL life. (Q23) .744
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

This assignment has proven beneficial in my PROFESSIONAL life. (Q25) .700

Developing a personal branding statement made me feel more self-assured about applying for an .620
internship. (Q19)
I would recommend the StrengthsFinder assessment to others. (Q12) .561
This assignment took more time than I expected. (Q9) .893
This assignment took less time than I expected. (Q10) .890

Table 4
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Summary

χ2 χ 2 df χ 2 p value Goodness of Fit (RMSEA/GFI)

1. Single Sample Models

MS Marketing
Baseline Model 207.46 91 <.01
Factor Model 117.58 77 <.01 .13/.66
Δ Baseline - Factor 89.88 14 <.01
Hypothesized Model 104.84 74 .01 .12/.69
Δ Factor - Hypothesized 12.74 3 <.01
Undergraduate
Baseline Model 369.93 91 <.01
Factor Model 107.65 77 .01 .07/.85
Δ Baseline - Factor 262.28 14 <.01
Hypothesized Model 83.62 74 .21 .04/.87
Δ Factor - Hypothesized 24.03 3 <.01
2. Testing with Both Samples
Invariant Model 259.75 179 <.01 .09/.78
Lambda Model 233.66 165 <.01 .09/.80

(Continued )
 8 Marketing Education Review

Table 4
(Continued)

χ2 χ 2 df χ 2 p value Goodness of Fit (RMSEA/GFI)

Δ Invariant - Lambda 26.09 14 .03

3. Testing Individual Paths Across Groups
Phi 1 2 259.48 178 <.01 .09/.79
Δ Invariant – Phi 1 2 .27 1 .60
Phi 2 3 252.67 178 .29 .09/.79
Δ Invariant – Phi 1 3 7.08 1 <.01
Phi 1 3 257.75 178 .29 .09/.79
Δ Invariant – Phi 2 3 2.0 1 .16
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

Self (seven items; α = .79), Practical Benefit (five Practical Benefit

items; α = .73), and Time Expectations (two items;
α = .76).
Branding and Self
Ninety-three percent of the MS respondents and
97% of the UG respondents indicated that the
assignment helped them become more self-aware
(see Table 2). For both the MS and the UG students,
93% agreed or strongly agreed that they learned new
knowledge about themselves, and 97% of the MS
students and 91% of the UG students agreed or
strongly agreed that this assignment helped them
gain a better understanding of their personal
strengths. The enhanced self-perceptions gained
from the exercise created actionable knowledge.
After completing the assignment, 90% of the MS
respondents and 76% of the UG respondents agreed
that it enhanced their vocabulary to describe them-
selves accurately to others.
Seventy-four percent of the MS students and 89% of
the UG students reported that the assignment helped
them determine what they needed to do to improve
their personal brand. From a curriculum standpoint,
94% of the MS students and 81% of the UG students
reported that this assignment helped them more fully
understand the concept of personal branding. The
branding and self-factor corresponded with students’
willingness to recommend the 360Reach assessment.
In terms of action or intended action, 91% of the MS
students and 93% of the UG students indicated that
they would recommend the assessment.
A majority of students reported the immediate pro-
fessional (MS: 86%; UG: 64%) and personal (MS: 71%;
UG: 69%) benefits of this assignment (see Table 2). One
student noted that the assignment helped his project
group in the course grow closer together. Another stu-
dent felt that the assignment helped him in another
class, where he was a peer leader for UG students, not-
ing that his students even commented about his
increased confidence. One MS student reflected on his
overall experience with the personal branding assign-
ment as follows: “I was able to grasp a better under-
standing of my strengths and weaknesses. It has
impacted my relationships and has given me insight
into why I am the way I am. Knowing my personal
strengths has given me confidence when approaching
a job or internship.”
Eighty-three percent of the MS respondents and 60%
of the UG respondents planned to modify their resume
and/or cover letter based on what they had learned in
the assignment. From a job-seeking perspective, 62% of
the MS respondents and 60% of the UG respondents
reported that the assignment made them feel more self-
assured about applying for an internship. Willingness
to recommend StrengthsFinder, in particular, also cor-
related to the practical benefit factor, suggesting that
students realized a significant benefit from their
enhanced self-perceptions and clear, actionable bene-
fits that resulted from this activity. All the MS students
and 83% of the UG students reported that they would
recommend the assessment. As one student observed,
“I used to think certain characteristics about myself
 2017 9

were negative, but now I know how to tailor them into

Figure 1B
strengths.” Another student remarked that “the more I Undergraduate Time Demand
learn about myself, the easier it is to decide whether or
not I would enjoy a particular job.”
UG Time Demand
Time Expectations Register at
Personal
Gallup and take
branding
Thirty percent of the MS respondents and 36% of online survey
statement and
(37.34 min)
the UG respondents thought that this assignment took assignment
20%
write-up (64.07
more time than they expected (see Table 2). Thirty- min)
three percent of the MS students and 31% of the UG 34%
Register at 360
students thought that this assignment took less time Reach and
than they expected. develop
respondent list
Manage 360 (40.53 min)
Reach emails
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017

21%
Time Demand (46.61 min)
25%
Respondents recorded how much time they actu-
ally spent on the IOPB, in minutes, on the four major
tasks of the assignment. We present the results in time spent on each component of the exercise revealed
Figures 1A. and 1B, which show the average time that time spent on writing the personal branding state-
spent on each task by students and the percentage ment largely drove the overall time difference. The MS
of total assignment time spent on each task. students dedicated considerably more time to this part of
There were notable differences in time spent on the the assignment, MMS = 104.2, MUG = 64.07; t(149) = –4.4,
assignment between the UG and MS students. Overall, p < .001.
the MS students spent significantly more time working
on the personal branding assignment, MMS = 248.7,
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
MUG = 188.5; t(151) = – 4.09, p < .001. This differential
effort may be indicative of greater personal relevance for To further assess our factor structure, we conducted
the MS students, who were more likely to be actively Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) using the Covariance
engaged in a job search. Further decomposition of the Analysis of Linear Structural Equations (CALIS) procedure
in SAS. All tests were conducted in accordance with Jones-
Farmer et al.’s (2008) note on multigroup comparisons,
Figure 1A and results are shown in Table 4. We posited in our
MS Time Demand
exploratory factor analysis that our survey items are repre-
sented by three latent constructs: Branding and self, prac-
tical benefit, and time demand. Using a chi-square
MS Time Demand Register at difference test, we compared a baseline independence
Gallup and take
model with no latent variables to our proposed factor
online survey
Personal (42.63 min) model. We compared the fit of the two models for the
branding 17% MS (baseline χ 2 – factor model χ 2 = 89.88; baseline df –
statement and
Register at 360 factor df = 14; p < .01) and UG (baseline χ 2 – factor model
assignment
Reach and
write-up (104.20 χ 2 = 262.28; baseline df – factor df = 14; p < .01) groups, and
develop
min) rejected the null hypothesis that the observed data have
respondent list
42%
(43.03 min) no latent variables. Our factor model fits the data better
17%
Manage 360 than an independent model. We next tested a model with
Reach emails correlated latent variables to assess our oblique rotation
(58.89 min)
24%
and found evidence that the rotated model improved fit
for the MS (factor model χ 2 – oblique rotated model
 10 Marketing Education Review
Figure 2
Path Diagram of Baseline Confirmatory Analysis Model
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
χ 2 = 12.74; factor model df – oblique rotated model df = 3;
p < .01) and UG (factor model χ 2 – oblique rotated model
χ 2 = 24.03; factor model df – oblique rotated model df = 3;
p < .01) groups. See Figure 2 for a path diagram of the
rotated factor model. Goodness of fit was moderate overall
(RMSEA = .06) and good for the larger sample of UG
students (RMSEA = .04). We tested the lambda matrices
to determine whether the factor loadings varied between
groups and found a significant difference (invariant model
χ 2 – lambda model χ 2 = 26.09; invariant df – lambda
df = 14; p = .03).
Group Differences
While the survey items for the MS and UG students
consistently loaded among the same conceptual group-
ings, we note some revealing differences within indivi-
dual questions. We tested our two independent student
samples to see if there were any significant differences
between the MS students and the UG students, using t
tests with the pooled standard error method. While
both groups were enthusiastic about recommending
StrengthsFinder, the MS students were significantly
more willing to recommend the assessment,
MMS = 4.73, MUG = 4.14; t(112) = 3.62, p < .001.
Perhaps the MS students, further along in their
education and nearer to their transition to the working
world, realized greater benefit from the activity than
the UG students. Overall, the MS students answered
more favorably on questions involving professional
benefits, which is intuitive given their place in the
career life cycle. The MS students also reported greater
increases in self-confidence than the UG students,
MMS = 4.16, MUG = 3.63; t(109) = 2.94, p < .01. The
salience of confidence related to job search for MS
students may explain this difference. The MS students
also reported greater benefit in their professional lives,
MMS = 4.29, MUG = 3.89; t(108) = 2.3, p < .03, and a
greater likelihood of updating their cover letter and/or
resume, MMS = 4.16, MUG = 3.65; t(110) = 2.56, p < .02.
Finally, the MS students observed a marginally greater
increase in self-descriptive vocabulary than the UG stu-
dents, MMS = 4.28, MUG = 3.93; t(110) = 1.86, p = .065.
DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE
RESEARCH
Discussion
The IOPB assignment provides students with an oppor-
tunity for a deep and objective self-awareness assess-
ment. This is a critical first step in developing both

professionally and personally in a manner consistent
with one’s natural talents and values.
Internal and External Inputs
This is the first personal branding assignment in the
marketing education literature that uses the inputs of
both StrengthsFinder and 360Reach. These inputs are
valuable because they provide students with objective
information about their strengths and how they are
perceived by others. More importantly, this informa-
tion helps students to communicate in job interviews
and look for the best fit between their strengths, skills,
and values relative to specific job opportunities.
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
Knowledge of this fit is valuable in choosing that first
job, as well as in long-term career planning.
Branding as a Process
A major insight gleaned from having worked with
different students throughout several years is under-
standing the students’ learning processes, which occur
as students complete the IOPB assignment. The IOPB
post-assignment survey is designed to capture this
learning process by asking questions such as:
● To what extent did it increase your self-awareness?
● What did you learn about what needs to be done
to develop your personal brand?
● How are you going to use this information in the
future?
● What changes have you made to your cover letter,
resume, or social media profile?
The key point here is to evaluate the assignment in
terms of not only the deliverables or outputs, such as
the personal branding statement, but also two addi-
tional items: (1) the learning process students go
through, and (2) the cognitive and behavioral changes
students make resulting from the assignment, such as
increased self-confidence and edits to resumes and
social media.
Time Demands on the Students
Another contribution is capturing the time it takes for
the students to complete the project. This is significant
because instructors should strive to understand the time
demands placed on students for course assignments.
2017 11
Understanding time demands becomes especially impor-
tant for topics related to personal growth and develop-
ment versus traditional course content. Knowing the
time an assignment requires is useful because it facilitates
instructors’ planning with respect to the course type and
whether the IOPB assignment should be used in a tradi-
tional marketing class, or in a career-development or
personal-growth course.
Time Demands on the Instructor
The instructor’s time commitment falls into two
categories: presenting and grading the assignment.
The assignment requires approximately two hours of
class time to present and discuss deliverables and
expectations, as well as introducing the
StrengthsFinder and 360Reach online tools. As with
any assignment, grading is a time-consuming compo-
nent. Because this type of assignment is conducive to
personal (vs. professional) growth and is, in and of
itself, beneficial for the student, a pass/fail grading
approach is recommended. This drastically reduces
the grading time commitments.
Personal Branding for Undergraduate Versus Graduate
Students
The graduate students in this study reported more
time spent on the assessment, a stronger self-confi-
dence boost, more professional benefits, and a greater
likelihood to recommend the activity. Prior research
shows that graduate students tend to show higher
levels of intrinsic motivation than undergraduates
(Rovai, Ponton, Wighting, & Baker, 2007), and may,
therefore, be driven toward self-evaluative rewards such
as those associated with personal branding. Graduate
students, furthermore, are more likely to be planning
and participating in careers. Undergraduate students
may benefit from personal branding assessment nearer
to graduation or as a repeated exercise.
Limitations and Future Research
The study has several limitations. This research was con-
ducted at only one university business school in the
southwestern United States with a limited sample size.
Future studies can incorporate larger sample sizes across
multiple universities. In this study, assessment of the
 12 Marketing Education Review
assignment’s effectiveness was done in the short term;
that is, two weeks after the assignment. Future studies
could asses the assignment’s impact after a longer per-
iod, such as six months or a year. Using pre- and post-
assessments to measure the assignment’s impact is
another improvement. This study relied on self-reported
survey data to assess the assignment’s effectiveness.
Behavioral studies, perhaps observing the self-descrip-
tive vocabulary used in student resumes before and after
the assignment, may provide further insights. Future
experimentation that randomly assigns students as par-
ticipants or non-participants in this assignment may be
revealing when comparing outcomes such as students’
satisfaction with job interviews, self-confidence during
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
the job-search process, and efforts to improve resumes
and social-media profiles.
To increase the benefits of the IOPB assignment, a
peer review of personal branding statements could be
completed. In Stanton and Stanton’s (2013) research, a
peer review helped students in at least two ways. First,
students learned from each other on how to improve
their personal brand. Second, students realized that
they had to not only communicate their unique
brand but also position themselves against their peers
who were competing for the same jobs. Thus, students
deepened their understanding of just how competitive
the job market truly is.
In summary, the IOPB assignment appears to pro-
vide significant benefits to students. It is a major
resource for improving self-awareness.
StrengthsFinder and 360Reach provide objective
information that helps form a more accurate and
functional understanding of oneself. Talking about
oneself in an effective and meaningful way is often
a daunting task. Those who complete the IOPB
assignment can develop a vocabulary about them-
selves to communicate during interviews, on
resumes, and in social media. As students assume
the role of job seekers, this vocabulary helps to ease
the stress of interviewing by enhancing their perfor-
mance and satisfaction with the job-search process.
This research indicates that when during a student’s
education the assignment is completed may make a
difference. Upper-division undergraduates and mas-
ters-level students who are seeking internships or
full-time employment may find the IOPB most rele-
vant because they can put this information to
immediate use. Experience has shown that the IOPB
helps us as instructors to build rapport when we
share our own IOPB assignment results with our stu-
dents. Finally, it is our sincere hope that our market-
ing colleagues find merit in the IOPB assignment and
give it a try with their students. If you do, we are
here happy to assist you in any way we can.
REFLECTION
There are three things that are extremely hard:
steel, a diamond, and to know one’s self. —
Benjamin Franklin
The IOPB assignment is rewarding for us as instructors
because when we share our StrengthsFinder and
360Reach results with our students, we enjoy deeper
and richer communication. By discussing what
strengths, brand skills, and attributes we have in com-
mon, how we use them on a daily basis, and what we
can do to develop them, we have a new way of under-
standing one another. This builds trust and mutual
respect. The additional time and effort on this assign-
ment is well spent because it helps the instructor con-
nect with students in a meaningful way.
An assignment of this nature also lends itself to
animated discussions and feedback sessions with the
instructor regarding the outcomes and insights it
reveals. It is especially gratifying when students inform
us that they have used the assignment in their jobs/
internships or have encouraged friends and family to
do the StrengthsFinder and/or 360Reach assessment.
As Peters (1997) straightforwardly states: “You are a
brand. You are in charge of your brand. There is no single
path to success. And there is no one right way to create the
brand called You. Except this: Start today. Or else”(p. 87).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance and
encouragement in this research of the following indivi-
duals: Jordan Kleckley, Dana Jamous, Kalyn Speck, Taylor
Tondre, Kaitlin Burroughs, Kendall Lindsey, Caelan
Cheshire, and Alyssa Osterhout. The authors are espe-
cially appreciative of colleagues Steve McDaniel (Texas
A&M University), who enthusiastically supports the
IOPB assignment as a component of his MS-level
Marketing Leadership course, and Dr. Karen Smith
(Texas State University), who provided thoughtful com-
ments and insights on an earlier draft of this article.

REFERENCES
Aaker, J. L. (1997, August). Dimensions of brand personality.
Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347–356.
doi:10.2307/3151897
Arruda, W. (2002, October 6). 1-2-3 Success! Three steps to a win-
ning personal brand. Retrieved from http://www.reachcc.
c o m / r e a c h d o t c o m . n s f / r e l a t e d l i n k s / 9C 0 4 B D 1 7 5
D15E94AC1256C4A007ADF0B?OpenDocument#
Arruda, W. (2010, May 18). Personal branding: StrengthsFinder
and 360Reach. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=X5P5AJEHC0M
Chritton, S. (2014). Personal branding for dummies. Hoboken,
NJ: Wiley.
Close, A. G., Moulard, J. G., & Monroe, K. B. (2011, October
8). Establishing human brands: Determinants of place-
ment success for first faculty positions in marketing.
Journal of the Academic Mark Sciences Journal of the
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
Academy of Marketing Science, 39(6), 922–941.
doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0221-6
Drucker, P. (2005, January). Managing oneself. Harvard busi-
ness review, pp. 1–15.
Edmiston, D. (2014). Creating a personal competitive advan-
tage by developing a professional online presence.
Marketing Education Review, 24(1), 21–24. doi:10.2753/
MER1052-8008240103
Edmiston, D. (2016). Developing the perfect pitch: Creating a
positive first impression through social media. Marketing
Education Review, 26(1), 3–7.
10528008.2015.1091660
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New
York: Anchor Books.
Horton, T. (2011, August 19). Branded for success. Retrieved
from http://www.astd.org/Publications/Magazines/TD/
TD-Archive/2011/08/Branded-for-Success
Jones-Farmer, L. A., Pitts, J. P., & Rainer, R. K. (2008). A note
on multigroup comparisons using SAS PROC CALIS.
Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,
15(1), 154–173. doi:10.1080/10705510701758414
Keller, K. L. (1999). Brand mantras: Rationale, criteria and
examples. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1–3),
43–51. doi:10.1362/026725799784870513
Khedher, M. (2014). Personal branding phenomenon.
Business and Management, 6(2), 29–40.
Peters, T. (1997, August 31). The brand called you. Fast
Company Magazine, pp. 83–87.
Rampersad, H. K. (2008). A new blueprint for powerful and
authentic personal branding. Performance Improvement,
47(6), 34–37. doi:10.1002/pfi.v47:6
Reach Personal Branding. (2016). 360Reach. Retrieved from
http://www.reachpersonalbranding.com/enterprise/our-
offerings/360reach/
Rovai, A., Ponton, M., Wighting, M., & Baker, J. (2007). A
comparative analysis of student motivation in tradi-
tional classroom and E-learning courses. International
Journal on E-Learning, 6(3), 413–432.
Smith, K. (2004). Implementing the ‘Marketing You’ Project
in large sections of principles of marketing. Journal of
Marketing Education, 26(2), 123–136. doi:10.1177/
0273475304265542
2017 13
Stanton, A., & Stanton, W. (2013). Building ‘Brand Me’:
Creating a personal brand statement. Marketing
Education Review, 23(1), 81–85. doi:10.2753/MER1052-
8008230113
Tice, C. (2007). What’s in a name? Take control of what the
web says about you. Entrepreneur Magazine, 54, 21.
Tomkovick, C., & Swanson, S. (2014). Using
StrengthsFinder to identify relationships between mar-
keting graduate strengths and career outcomes.
Marketing Education Review, 24(3), 197–212.
doi:10.2753/mer1052-8008240302
APPENDIX A. THE PROMPT
Students are given the following prompt at the start of
the assignment:
By using the time-tested tools of StrengthsFinder and
360Reach, this assignment is designed to enhance your
self-awareness. This step-by-step assignment requires
you to analyze internal and external feedback to help
you develop an understanding of your personal brand.
Criteria: All papers will be evaluated on the following:
● Clarity: Your ability to provide information through
doi:10.1080/ error-free written communication (i.e., typos, mis-
spellings, fragments, or punctuation errors)
● 12-point font, double-spaced, one-inch margins
● Content: Your thoughts should be clearly commu-
nicated and express what you learned
● Time: YOUR PAPER WILL BE DUE ON
OCTOBER 1, 2015
● Send electronically to _______ via email at
__________ AND. . .
● Provide a hard copy by 4:00 p.m. outside professor
________’s office
● Bring a hard copy of your paper to share in class
on _______
StrengthsFinder Instructions
The instructions for completing the StrengthsFinder
assessment are as follows.
1. Go to the website https://www.gallupstrengths
center.com/Home/en-US/Index to purchase an
access code. Scroll down to “Clifton
StrengthsFinder” and click “Purchase.” Purchase
one access code for the “Top 5 Strengths Access.”
The price for this code should be $9.99. Scroll
down to the bottom of the page and click
“Purchase” (you will be required to pay $9.99).
 14 Marketing Education Review
2. Under the “New User,” click “Register Now” to
create an account, or if you already have a Gallup
account, sign in with it now. For new users, fill in
the appropriate information and then click
“Continue.” The next screen will ask for address
information followed by payment information.
Fill in the appropriate information and then
click “Continue” and then “Complete Purchase.”
3. Gallup will send an email with the access code to
the email you previously provided. Make sure you
have at least 35 minutes of uninterrupted time
to dedicate to this assessment before beginning.
(TIP: The assessment has to be completed in one
sitting.) Follow the link provided in the email to
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
enter your access code and get started.
4. The assessment contains 117 questions that you
will individually answer. You will have 20 sec-
onds to answer each question before the next
question appears.
Once you have completed the assessment, take some
time to review your Top 5 Strengths. Under the
“Reports and Tools” column, click on the links to
learn more about your strengths. It is important to
note that these results will continually be available
with your account log-in information.
360Reach Instructions
The process to complete the 360Reach is explained
in the following detailed instructions:
1. Generate a list of respondent email addresses. (TIP:
This list may include coaches, teammates, tea-
chers, mentors, supervisors/managers, coworkers,
friends, family members, sorority sisters/fraternity
brothers, and anyone else who knows you really
well.) Make sure to include people that know you
personally and will provide honest feedback.
Include at least 20 people on the list. Having this
list prepared before accessing the 360Reach web-
site will help this process run much smoother.
2. Go to the website www.reachcc.com/
360V4register to register for a free 15-day trial.
Enter your email address in the box and click on
“register to proceed.” You will be asked if you
want to change your password. Once you have
done that, log-in with your information. (TIP:
Be sure to collect all of your responses within
the 15 days after signing up on the 360Reach
website above.)
3. From the tabs at the top of the page, choose “Do
This First” and fill out the information about
yourself. This is the screen where you can perso-
nalize the email that will be sent out to your
respondents. Next to the “Introductory
Content,” you can adjust the email to be more
informal or friendly. However, be sure to include
the 15-day deadline, as well as the anonymity of
the responses. When you have completed this
page, click “Save your changes.” A pop-up box
will ask you if all of your information is correct;
click “OK” if so. There should be a yellow strip
across the top of the page that says “Page Saved”
if the information saved successfully.
4. From the tabs at the top of the page, click
“Complete Self Survey” to see the drop-down
menu from which you will click “Perform Your
Self Survey.” Perform the assessment yourself to
get an idea of what your respondents will see
and how long it may take them. If you are unsa-
tisfied with the Projective Exercise Questions,
you can return to the previous step to change
these. Once you complete your self-survey, click
“Save your self survey.” (TIP: These results are
primarily used to compare your opinion of your-
self with the opinion others have of you.)
5. You are now ready to send the survey to your
respondents. From the tabs across the top of the
page, click “Request Feedback” to see the drop-
down menu. From this menu, roll your mouse
over “Add respondent to your survey” and click
“Upload email addresses individually or from a
file.” In the boxes provided, enter in the 20
email addresses you collected in Step 1. Click
“Save your new respondents” once you have
entered all of the email addresses.
6. Send a personal email or text message to your 20
respondents before sending them the actual sur-
vey to let them know that they will be receiving
an email from 360Reach in the next few days.
Ask them to take about 10 minutes out of their
day to complete the assessment and give them a
timeframe within the 15-day trial to complete it.
This is an important step because it ensures that
they know to open the email when it comes,
otherwise many respondents will trash the
email. Also let them know that if they do not
see it, it may have gone to their junk mail. (TIP:
Here is a sample email to send to respondents:

“For my ______ course, I am required to partici-
pate in a 360Reach assessment. This external
assessment allows me to receive anonymous
feedback about myself from others. The goal of
this survey is to help me understand my
strengths, weaknesses, team roles, attributes,
and skills. It would mean a lot to me if you
would answer the survey. The answers will not
affect my grade, so please provide honest feed-
back. The survey should take about 10 minutes,
and it must be completed before X date. Thank
you so much!”)
7. If you desire, you may “View sample of your
survey.” This is how the assessment will look to
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
your respondents. This step is not required.
8. Under the “Request Feedback” tab, click “Send
the survey to your respondents.” A list of the
email addresses should appear. Click “Send noti-
fications” at the bottom of the page to send
these respondents the link to your survey. If
you were unable to collect 20 email addresses,
make sure that you have at least 10 to ensure
anonymity. After the initial 10 are sent, you can
add and send additional requests for feedback at
any time during the 15-day trial.
9. After one week, send a reminder to respondents.
This can be done on the 360Reach website, using
the “Request Feedback” tab by clicking the
“Remind people who have not yet responded.”
When there are 5 days remaining, you may want
to send reminders again through the 360Reach
website if you have some respondents who have
not replied. Although you do not know who
these people are, the 360Reach website does,
and will not send emails to those who have
already completed your survey. (TIP: After
5–7 days, send a combined thank-you and remin-
der email or text to your respondents. For exam-
ple: “If you have already responded, thank you
very much. If you have not responded, please
remember that you only have X number of days
to do so since this free 360Reach service expires
by X date. If you have not received an email from
360Reach with a link to the survey, please check
your junk email folder.”)
10. To check the status of your responses, go to the
“Manage Feedback” tab and click “See a
Summary of Responses.” The second line tells
you how many people have responded and the
2017 15
summary should include your brand attributes,
brand skills, strengths and weaknesses, projec-
tive exercises, team role, and any additional
comments. It is important to note that after
the 15-day trial, all of your responses are deleted
and your subscription expires, so be sure to save
all of your responses when you have 2 days
remaining on your account.
11. Under Data Analysis, click on “see a comparison
of your self-assessment and your summary of
external feedback.” This summary allows you
to compare your own results with the feedback
you received. (TIP: Many students suggest copy-
ing and pasting your self-survey and respondent
survey feedback into a Word document. Saving
this information helps when comparing the self
and respondent surveys. You will not have
access to this feedback online once the 15-day
trial expires.)
Branding Statement Instructions
Having your StrengthsFinder results validated through
360Reach findings helps you to truly understand your-
self and how you are perceived by others. To help
develop your personal branding statement, please con-
duct the following exercise:
● List your Top 5 Strengths as identified by the
Gallup StrengthsFinder tool. Now, compare this
with the strengths, attributes, skills, and answers
to projective exercises given from 360Reach. Look
specifically for themes or messages from the
360Reach findings that reinforce your strengths.
● Based on this input, write a personal branding
statement that includes the following:The follow-
ing are subitems of this list item.
● Value/benefits: Identify the value and/or benefits
you provide to a potential employer. (TIP: This
could come from your StrengthsFinder assess-
ment, 360Reach, or your own projects and
accomplishments, such as internships, work
experience, or personal experience.)
● Differentiation: Identify the unique attributes you
offer that differentiate you from the competition.
● Target market: Identify the target market where
you are focusing your efforts. (TIP: Target market
in this case is defined as the field you wish to
work in, such as consulting, advertising, brand
management, etc.)
 16 Marketing Education Review
Reflection Questions
These reflection questions are meant to assist you
in your evaluation. Please answer any two of the
Deliverables
following questions in at least two or three sen-
tences per question as part of your evaluation. Be
sure to restate the question along with your answer.
1. Was there anything that surprised you from the
360Reach or StrengthsFinder evaluation?
2. Did you encounter any difficulties in complet-
ing this assignment? If so, please identify the
problem and offer solutions for future
students.
3. How do you anticipate using the information
from StrengthsFinder and/or 360Reach in your
Downloaded by [Australian Catholic University] at 15:31 09 September 2017
personal and professional life?
4. How can you use your strengths to address your
weaknesses or areas in need of improvement?
5. Feel free to develop your own questions in order to
make this evaluation as useful to you as possible.
1. Top 5 Strengths from StrengthsFinder in num-
bered order
2. Common strengths from 360Reach in numbered
order; specify which StrengthsFinder strengths
relate to your 360Reach results
3. Top-five brand attributes
4. Top-five brand skills
5. Attach printout of 360Reach Profiler Results
summary
6. Personal branding statement
7. Reflection questions
8. Time log: a record (in minutes) of time spent on
the personal branding assignment