Harry and Meghan’s row with the royals shows the dangers of branching out from within
One of the reasons the public is obsessed with Harry and Meghan is that they represent a major economic trend that’s resonating well beyond the British royal family: the growing tension between individual branding and the power and prestige of being part of an institution to be.
And it’s not just the royals, it’s an issue for all industries.
In the past, when it came to money, security and status, the path was clear: get a job at the most prestigious institution you could get and become a valuable team player.
That meant giving up part of your identity. You would not be known to people outside your area of expertise and probably not even within the company.
This was in large part the relic of the last stage of industrialization – the era of the man in the gray flannel suit. Back then, stars were for the movies, and office work meant keeping your head down and devoting yourself to the advancement of the institution. In exchange for your loyalty, you received a small share of the institution’s success and reputation.
This has been reversed in our current economy. In all other industries there are fewer movie stars but more high-calibre people. For the film industry, it was a symbiotic relationship, relying on stars to draw people into theaters. But the dynamic troubles other industries because it creates tensions between being a star and being a good institutional team player.
This dynamic is particularly noticeable in the media industry. Young aspiring journalists want to build their brand on social media by expressing provocative opinions while enjoying the resources and reputation of the world-renowned media companies that employ them.
Close
Harry and Meghan have benefited from their standing as part of the British royal family, but at a cost to both sides. Photo: Reuters/Andrew Kelly/File Photo
This is a dangerous business for their employers. At least the New York Times or the Washington Post have spent many decades building their reputation as top journalism, and the majority of journalists there still work carefully and thoughtfully, without chasing the limelight.
But for better or worse, these institutions are also now being linked to the high-profile social media antics of some of their reporters, who have used their employers’ status to rise independently to big stars.
You can’t blame the reporters for wanting to increase their own name and reputation. The media industry no longer offers the same security as it used to and building your own brand means more job security.
And it doesn’t just happen in the media. The whole economy has changed. Many industries reward superstars – they get higher salaries, fame and the ability to monetize their own brand while leaving everyone else behind.
In theory, superstars become superstars because they’re more productive and talented, not just because they’re good at social media.
This is evident in industries ranging from academia to public health to banking and the British royal family. The once-mysterious Goldman Sachs faces this tension.
Chief Executive Officer David Solomon, who works part-time as DJ D-Sol, is making headlines by focusing on his hobbies and reportedly changing the culture to reward more high-profile bankers involved in off-firm activities rather than the guys with gray flannel suits.
It’s always been the case that you have to market yourself to get ahead. The difference now is that people are no longer doing this through internal politics, but on a broader stage – often beyond their company and their entire industry.
Close
Undated Netflix handout photo of Harry and Meghan for their documentary
Our modern economy not only rewards the stars with a higher premium, but also makes self-promotion easier.
Social media has democratized attention and exposure for those who crave it. Unsurprisingly, this upsets colleagues.
Not everyone can be a superstar, either because they don’t have the talent or temperament, or because they don’t want to spend their days marketing themselves. Some people would rather just get the job done and focus on learning hard skills.
People who refrain from self-promotion have always paid a price, but at least in the past the price hasn’t been so high as the gain in fame has been smaller and the value of institutional affiliation more significant.
Companies also had more control over their employees and were less tolerant of brazen self-promotion. By building their brand externally, celebrities can raise the profile of their workplace, but they can also cheapen the brand and embroil it in divisive political or social issues.
When a star gets really big, they can capitalize on the prestige of the institution (and the hard work of their peers) and set up their own business.
In theory, superstars become superstars because they’re more productive and talented, not just because they’re good at social media.
But there’s evidence that superstars in the office can mean less pay for everyone else, suggesting that any productivity gains they bring don’t fully cover their higher pay.
https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/harry-and-meghans-fallout-with-the-royals-shows-the-perils-of-branching-out-from-within-42217783.html Harry and Meghan’s row with the royals shows the dangers of branching out from within