This week I sent out my most controversial newsletter yet. I did think about it. Would this just turn into ‘Julia Gillard’s Jacketgate’?
I have written literally hundreds of newsletters and LinkedIn posts. Every one of them on ‘why’ women are in the predicament of overperforming and underachieving, ‘what’ needs to happen and ‘how’ we should go about it. This is the only time I’ve touched on appearance – or as I like to think of it, packaging.
I’m a fan of ‘you do you’ but when we work to develop our brand, we have an audience/audiences in mind. And what would a brand be without the right packaging?
It is inevitable that we are perceived not just by how we behave and what we know but what we look like. I’m sure you know how much appearance drives interview results for example.
As an older woman it is clear to me that, while we should be given respect and have equal visibility to men we clearly aren’t.
Should society and organisations change? Certainly.
Is it useful to know how to improve our chance of being visible, relevant and influential in the meantime when the odds are stacked against us? Surely.
For me, professional clothing is packaging. We package ourselves for our goals. To my mind this is just understanding the psychology of how we perceive each other.
From a semiotic perspective, we are always communicating via our presentation to the world – even if that communication is a clearly, ‘I’m opting out of this game’.
You note I’m not saying we needed to look attractive – only that anyone/anything that aims to be visible – because being visible makes influence and effectiveness easier – should be aware of what their ‘packaging’ is saying about them and how their market will decode it. We can adjust the effect this has should we choose, while still being ourselves.
Meanwhile, when not in professional mode, us older women can take advantage of our invisibility.
Anyone up for a bank robbery? They’ll never suspect us.
