Skip to content
    ← Podcast
    PERSONAL BRANDING
    Podcast 14 min read

    The Psychology of Personal Style w/ Kimberly Parry

    with Kimberly Parry

    Chris Do and Kimberly Parry examine how personal style communicates identity, confidence, and professional intent.

    Chris Do

    Chris Do

    Founder, The Futur™ · August 5, 2026

    The expensive suit that says nothing new

    An expensive outfit can make a person look successful and interchangeable at the same time. Kimberly Parry, a stylist who combines fashion styling with archetypal coaching and personal and professional development coaching, works at that uncomfortable intersection. Her perspective matters because she treats clothing not as a substitute for identity, but as a way to express it.

    Chris Do describes meeting a fellow speaker at a summit who wanted an assessment of his appearance. The man wore a dark blue Italian suit tailored to his body, a luxury T-shirt, white sneakers, and an expensive watch. Nothing about the ensemble sounded careless.

    That was precisely the problem.

    The speaker had assembled the recognizable equipment of professional success. To Do, the outfit communicated competence, taste, money, and membership in the same category as everyone else onstage. It established that the wearer belonged without offering much reason to remember him.

    Do's response was not a recommendation for a different jacket. It was a question about function: “So what job is your clothes doing for you?”

    The distinction is central to their conversation. Clothing can reassure an audience, suggest authority, or announce a willingness to challenge convention. But an outfit chosen without a clear intention can end up doing a job its owner never consciously assigned.

    Looking professional is not the same as looking distinctive. The speaker's suit was not a failure of taste. In Do's reading, it was an effective expression of a very generic position.

    That does not make the uniform inherently wrong. A person seeking familiarity and conventional credibility could reasonably choose it. The problem emerges when someone expects an outfit built around conformity to communicate an individual point of view.

    Parry recognizes the same pattern among male podcasters: black T-shirts, sometimes accompanied by a cap. An apparently casual rejection of corporate dress can become another standardized costume. Changing the uniform does not automatically change the thinking behind it.

    These are observations about particular professional scenes, not reliable ways to diagnose someone's character from their clothes. Their value lies in exposing a decision that often goes unexamined: whether a visual choice expresses the wearer or simply reproduces the surrounding market.

    The broader territory is personal branding, also the subject of Personal Branding Masterclass w/ Daniel Priestley. Here, however, the point of entry is unusually tangible: the clothes already hanging in a closet.

    Parry's answer is not to replace every conservative outfit with something theatrical. That would trade one formula for another. Her argument is that a wardrobe becomes more useful when the person inside it can explain what it represents.

    The first decision is not what to buy. It is what needs to become visible.

    The difference between a surface and a source

    Parry separates three terms that are often treated as synonyms. Fashion concerns clothing and its creation. Image concerns presentation and perception. Style reaches into the person making those choices.

    Her working distinctions are straightforward:

    • Fashion is the artistry of clothing. It includes design, construction, and the creative industry producing what people wear.
    • Image is outward presentation. It concerns how clothing helps someone appear to other people.
    • Style is identity expressed. It extends beyond clothes into leadership, communication, relationships, and conduct.

    The separation matters because each problem calls for a different intervention. A wardrobe can be refreshed through shopping. A public image can be managed through messaging. Neither necessarily changes the underlying person or clarifies what that person wants to stand for.

    Do offers a visual analogy: a piece of fruit cut open. The skin is the image, the part available to immediate inspection. The core represents the style beneath it.

    It is an imperfect but useful distinction. The surface is real and consequential, yet it is not the whole object. Treating it as the whole creates the expectation that clothing can supply qualities the wearer has not developed.

    Parry puts the limitation plainly: “Clothing can only do so much for you.” In her approach, the work of getting dressed rests on work that happens elsewhere: understanding personality, acknowledging preferences, and deciding how to participate in the world.

    That is why her definition of style includes things that never appear on a shopping receipt. A leadership style affects decisions. A communication style affects how ideas land. A relationship style affects how people experience being around someone.

    An outfit participates in that larger pattern. It does not get to overrule it.

    The conversation's most useful tension lies here. Both speakers care deeply about visual presentation, yet neither treats it as sufficient. The external details matter most when they correspond to something the person can sustain after the first impression has passed.

    This also complicates the familiar language of authenticity. Dressing authentically does not mean ignoring an audience, refusing polish, or declaring every existing habit sacred. It means making choices that connect the demands of a situation with a recognizable personal point of view.

    Someone can change a silhouette without abandoning an identity. Someone can keep a conventional suit without disappearing into one. The relevant distinction is not ordinary versus unusual. It is considered versus inherited without examination.

    That emphasis on the person beneath the presentation offers a useful companion to The Personal Brand Framework That Gets You Hired. The connection is the problem of making identity legible, rather than merely making a surface more attractive.

    Parry's version begins before the wardrobe consultation. If the purpose is unclear, the shopping becomes an elaborate search for an answer that a garment cannot provide.

    The fitting room has an audience

    Do has encountered a peculiar form of resistance while helping friends shop. Someone asks for a change, rejects unfamiliar options, and eventually buys something barely different from what is already in the closet. The transaction happens. The experiment does not.

    He describes the result as a purchase only three percent different from the original. The number functions as an observation about tiny increments, not a measured finding. It captures the gap between requesting transformation and accepting the discomfort that accompanies it.

    Parry sees a similar mismatch in some of her male clients. They arrive because a spouse has commented, a professional opportunity has exposed a weakness in their presentation, or the clients they want are not responding. There is a reason to change, but not necessarily a desire to change.

    Some want a shopper. Parry offers a more involved process.

    The objections also reveal an audience that is absent from the fitting room. Do hears friends worry that their peers will mock an unfamiliar look. A garment is being judged not only for its shape or comfort, but for the reaction it is expected to provoke later.

    That changes the nature of the decision. The risk is no longer simply buying something that looks bad. It is becoming visible in a way that the existing social circle has not approved.

    Parry connects this resistance to experiences of clothing and identity: children asserting preferences, adolescents trying different presentations, and embarrassing reactions that make experimentation feel costly. These are the interpretive examples she uses in her coaching discussion, not a universal developmental sequence.

    Do offers two possible responses to friends who ridicule a change. One is to reconsider whether those relationships support personal growth. The other is to preserve the relationship while setting a boundary around the ridicule.

    The second response is more precise than demanding enthusiasm. Friends can dislike the clothes without turning the person wearing them into a running joke. Support need not mean identical taste.

    Do interprets some pushback as fear that a changing friend will leave the group behind. Parry offers another possibility: someone else's willingness to evolve can expose an uncomfortable reluctance in the observer. Neither explanation should become an automatic verdict on every critical friend.

    The practical point survives without mind-reading. A wardrobe decision can become entangled with expectations about loyalty, belonging, and who is allowed to change.

    That social dimension connects naturally with Dealing With Negative Feedback. Here, the feedback is not attached to a published project. It follows the person into a room.

    Parry's approach is to reconnect the experiment with its purpose. A change has to serve something the client actually wants, rather than satisfy a stylist's appetite for novelty. Without that connection, the familiar outfit retains a powerful advantage: it requires no explanation to anyone.

    Confidence cannot be borrowed with the clothes

    Do notices another obstacle in photographs taken while friends try unfamiliar clothes. Their shoulders fold inward. Their hands become awkward. Their faces appear unhappy. The garment has changed, but so has the way they occupy it.

    He interprets some of this as self-sabotage. A person uncomfortable with a new silhouette can present it so reluctantly that the resulting image seems to confirm the original objection. The photograph then becomes evidence against an experiment that never received a fair trial.

    Parry accepts that interpretation as one possibility, not the only one. Sometimes a look fails because it does not connect with the person wearing it. Confidence cannot make every borrowed aesthetic feel honest.

    That qualification protects her argument from becoming a demand for unquestioning obedience. Resistance is not always a defect to overcome. It can also be information that the proposed direction is wrong.

    A client who admires Do's clothes can be responding to several different things:

    • The silhouette or construction of a particular garment.
    • The confidence with which he wears it.
    • The clarity of a recognizable personal point of view.
    • The permission his appearance seems to give other people to experiment.

    Only the first item can be purchased directly. The others require a different kind of work.

    Parry makes that distinction when she describes people wanting Do's presence without recognizing why his choices work for him. Copying the clothes does not transfer the intention behind them. A convincing imitation remains an imitation if the wearer has no personal connection to it.

    This is where the conversation moves from styling into presence. Do argues that posture and movement can be adjusted even on a day when someone does not feel especially confident. Standing upright and moving calmly can change the immediate impression.

    Parry wants to investigate what preceded the posture. How did the person feel when entering the room? What thoughts were active? Her interest is not simply in teaching a more persuasive pose, but in understanding the experience being expressed through the body.

    These positions are complementary when kept within their limits. An outward adjustment can help someone participate more comfortably. It cannot establish, by itself, what that person's internal experience means.

    Nor should posture become a diagnostic test for confidence or character. The useful application here is reflective: noticing how a person feels and moves in a particular outfit, then deciding whether the difficulty comes from unfamiliarity, poor fit, or a deeper mismatch.

    The relationship between inward certainty and outward expression also sits alongside Where Do You Draw Confidence From?. In Parry's account, the wardrobe supports confidence most effectively when it stops impersonating its source.

    The objective is neither flawless performance nor permanent comfort. It is enough self-knowledge to distinguish a worthwhile stretch from a costume.

    The rules should serve the wearer

    When Do asks for rules, Parry recalls an inconsistency in her styling education. In women's styling, she was taught to create the illusion of an idealized hourglass shape. In menswear, she encountered an instructor who emphasized knowing the rules in order to help clients break them.

    Her objection is not to technical knowledge. It is to assigning that knowledge different purposes: correcting one person's body while expanding another person's freedom.

    Parry prefers the second purpose. Understanding shape and proportion should create options, not turn every wardrobe decision into an attempt to approximate a prescribed ideal.

    Her account is specific to the training she describes. It does not establish that all women's stylists work one way or all menswear stylists work another. Its value is in the professional choice she made in response: carrying the permission to experiment across the divide.

    Fit matters more than the number on the label. That is her clearest practical correction for clients who have attached their identity to a clothing size.

    Parry identifies three numbers that, in her experience, can constrain how women dress: size, weight, and age. A person can arrive at the rack with a number already designated as acceptable, then judge the body against the label instead of judging the garment against the body.

    Her alternative is to treat sizing as a starting point. The number helps locate a possible fit. It does not define the person or settle whether the clothing works.

    The practical distinctions are small but consequential:

    • A preferred size is not a substitute for evaluating the garment on the body.
    • Familiarity is not proof that a fit serves the intended presentation.
    • A styling rule can inform a choice without becoming an obligation.
    • An outfit should express the wearer, not simply pursue an approved shape.

    For men reluctant to explore fit, Parry often starts with the problem that brought them to her. If someone feels that prospective clients do not take him seriously, she asks what his presentation is communicating.

    Her example is a cartoon T-shirt worn into a high-value client meeting. The point is not that cartoon shirts are universally unprofessional. It is that a choice should be evaluated against the situation and the job it needs to perform.

    That returns the conversation to Do's speaker in the Italian suit. One person may need more conventional credibility. Another already has it and needs more distinction. The same wardrobe advice cannot solve both problems.

    Rules become useful when they sharpen that diagnosis. They become restrictive when they substitute for it.

    Parry's approach therefore leaves room for both polish and rebellion. Neither is inherently more authentic. The relevant question is whether the choice responds to the actual person, the actual body, and the actual purpose, rather than an abstract standard of looking right.

    The structure beneath the surface

    Parry organizes her work through the Succeed with Style framework, a five-layer pyramid that places image at the top rather than the base. The ordering is her central argument made visible.

    The bottom layers concern identity and connection. The middle concerns capability. Motivation helps sustain effort. Only then does the structure arrive at the part most people associate with styling: appearance and presence.

    Her five layers are:

    • Personal style: the foundation of self-knowledge and how a person understands their own identity.
    • Relationship style: how someone communicates, connects, and treats other people.
    • Performance style: natural skills, talents, education, and the capabilities represented on a résumé.
    • Motivation style: the incentives and sources of encouragement that sustain effort through difficulty.
    • Image: the visible presentation and presence that express what sits beneath it.

    These are not five shopping steps. They are a coaching structure for locating what a wardrobe change can and cannot address.

    A client can have a performance problem that clothing will not solve. A talented professional can also have a presentation problem that obscures real capability. Treating every difficulty as an image issue confuses the visible symptom with the underlying work.

    Parry argues that people often begin at the third layer. They identify themselves by their skills, education, job, or résumé, leaving the personal foundation less examined. Alternatively, they begin at the top and attempt to build a recognizable image before deciding what it should represent.

    The pyramid reverses both habits. It asks for a person before a performance, and substance before packaging.

    Relationship style is especially important in this ordering. A personal brand is not experienced only through a photograph or a stage entrance. It is also experienced through conversation, collaboration, and the way someone responds when another person needs something.

    Motivation receives its own layer because Parry rejects the assumption that everyone is driven by the same reward. Money does not explain every decision. Knowing what sustains a particular person makes the structure more specific than a generic prescription for ambition.

    She extends the framework into a discussion of AI, arguing that identity and human connection deserve greater attention as more performance tasks become automated. That is her strategic perspective, not proof that any category of work is permanently protected from technological change.

    The narrower lesson is useful without the prediction. Defining a person exclusively by output leaves out how that person builds trust, collaborates, and makes choices.

    Image still matters. Parry calls it a “three-second resume,” a metaphor for how presentation can communicate before a conversation begins. The phrase is not a guarantee of accurate judgment within a measured interval.

    The aim is correspondence: an exterior that offers a fair introduction to the person an audience will encounter next. Good styling does not have to explain everything. It has to avoid promising someone who is not there.

    A better brief than looking better

    There is a revealing difference between Do's shopping experiments and Parry's professional practice. Do has little patience for friends who request his time and then resist every suggestion. He describes a one-shot rule: after an unproductive outing, he will not keep offering the same help.

    Parry screens for willingness too, but her boundary concerns the kind of work the client wants. Someone seeking only a look can find a less involved service. Her work requires an appetite for examining the internal alongside the external.

    That is not a claim that everyone needs coaching to buy clothes. It is a definition of her service and the conditions under which she believes it works.

    A useful style brief starts with an honest problem. The client has to say what is not working, what feels wrong, and what they hope a different presentation will make possible.

    Without that honesty, even a technically accomplished stylist can end up solving the wrong problem. A client can agree politely in the fitting room and abandon the result later. Apparent cooperation is not the same as a genuine connection to the clothes.

    Parry therefore needs feedback about what resonates, not just permission to take control. Her method depends on distinguishing uncertainty that deserves exploration from a preference that deserves respect.

    The conversation suggests a more useful brief than simply asking to look better. What professional impression is missing? Which choices feel personally meaningful? Which objections concern the clothes themselves, and which concern the people expected to see them?

    Those questions do not prescribe an aesthetic. They make the decision more specific.

    For someone attached to a size, the next useful move is evaluating fit without treating the label as a verdict. For someone anticipating ridicule, the work can involve a boundary with friends. For someone copying a admired speaker, it means separating attraction to a garment from attraction to the confidence of its wearer.

    For the speaker already dressed like every other speaker, the work is different again. He does not lack evidence of professionalism. He needs to decide whether that evidence is enough to communicate the position he wants to hold.

    This is the practical consequence of treating clothing as a tool. The right choice depends on the assignment. An outfit can be polished and still answer the wrong brief.

    There is no requirement to become louder, stranger, more expensive, or more fashionable. There is a requirement to stop expecting an unexamined uniform to perform the work of a considered identity.

    The next fitting-room decision can be smaller than a reinvention and more consequential than a purchase: whether the garment expresses an intention the wearer can name and a person the wearer recognizes.

    The clothes should introduce the person, not invent one.

    TRANSCRIPT

    When image is done right, when fashion is done right, it becomes your three -second resume. You walk in the room and people have an idea of who you are and what you're about before you even open your mouth. My name is Kimberly Perry and you are listening to The Future. There's a recent fascination of mine, which is fashion and what it says about you or what your presence, your energy, and people might describe it as your vibe or your aura, how it transmits to other people, nonverbal cues as to how to look at you and how to perceive you. And there's a moment in my story here where I'm walking through one billion follower summit, but there's a lady and she's doing something that seems kind of interesting. She seems to be pulling people in and she starts talking to me immediately. And she goes, I think I need to talk to you. I'm like, how come? You just look like the kind of person that I need to talk to. And then she steps back and she gives me a whole, like, it's your aura. And it really crystallizes something that I've been playing around with. And the reason why we're having our guests on today, which is personal style in terms of your fashion choices, what you're putting together. So Kimberly Perry is a stylist known for helping clients refine their look with style that feels polished, personal, and easy to wear. Her approach blends creativity and attention to detail, making fashion feel both elevated and accessible. Kimberly, welcome to the show. Hello. Thank you. I am so excited for this episode. Let's start here. What is fashion? What is personal style? Can you give us your take on this? Yes. And I think it's very important to clarify what those mean, because just like with what you do with personal branding, I think you and I define personal branding very similarly, but the rest of the world tends to focus on social media presence and strategy and image. And that's why I think it's so important, especially my approach to fashion is to clarify the difference between fashion, image, and style. So fashion is the artistry, the design, the construction of clothing. It's about what we wear, but it's also that creative industry. When you think about fashion runways, high fashion, it's the artistry of clothing and construction of clothing. Image is about how we use clothing to present ourselves to the world. three, the design, the construction of clothing. It's about what we wear, but it's also that creative industry. When you think about fashion runways, high fashion, it's the artistry of clothing and construction of clothing. Image is about how we use clothing to present ourselves to the world. And a lot of times when we talk about image, it's related to how other people view us and how other people perceive us. And in the world, especially in the world of business, we know that you have seconds. And in the world of social media, I mean, the attention span is maybe a millisecond at this point, but you have seconds to make a first impression. And so your image and what you wear, the fashion you wear plays into that. But where I define style differently, and this is where your kind of take on personal branding and my take on style are really aligned. Style goes beyond image. It goes beyond fashion. And your personal style is about knowing who you are and how you communicate that to the world. So you have a leadership style, a communication style, a relationship style, and yes, a fashion style that when it is grounded in who you are and how you want to show up for life becomes a powerful tool that's just part of the whole package. And so that's why I think it's important to differentiate because a lot of people want clothing to do something for them that they need to bring for themselves to life. If you're not bringing yourself authentically, clothing can only do so much for you. Are you using fashion to describe like an industry? Fashion is the industry. It's what trickles down to what we get in ready wear. The clothing that we wear starts at this creation of fashion that is cutting edge. It's creative. It's expressive. It's dynamic. And then from the runways, people take those ideas and those concepts and then they imitate them, recreate them and standardize them so that they are more ready to wear for the regular human who's not rocking a runway in everyday life. And draw the distinction between image and style one more time because I understand the concepts individually. But why are we separating these two things? It's really important to separate because it affects the way that we approach them. the regular human who's not rocking a runway in everyday life. And draw the distinction between image and style one more time because I understand the concepts individually, but why are we separating these two things? It's really important to separate because it affects the way that we approach them. If you think about image consulting for celebrities and high profile people, their image, what the news is saying, the way that they're represented online, the way people perceive them can affect their business and affect their brand. But image and style are not always connected. You can repair an image by feeding news feeds to the press, but your style comes from who you are. And there's a swag, there's a presentation, there's a way that people bring themselves to life that cannot be fixed with image consulting. It can't be fixed with saturating social media. The only way that your style translates authentically and powerfully, and one of the reasons that I approach you in this day of AI, it is our differentiator. So many people are afraid of AI and AI taking over the world. And the thing that makes us resilient and that makes us relevant in an AI world is our humanity. And that's our personal style. That's who you are. And you can't fake that. I'm a visual person. So I'm imagining a diagram where we take an apple and orange, we slice it in half and we see the core. That's your style. And the outside, maybe the skin is the image is how people perceive it. Yep. All right. When you said swag, what is swag? Okay. I was raised in your city. I, one of the things that we connected on, I know you're San Jose, I'm Sactown, I'm Sacramento, but it's just the way that you carry yourself when you walk in a room. It's that energy and that presence in the corporate world. They call it as executive presence, but it's how you walk. It's how you talk. It's your mannerisms, your body language. All of that plays into the swag that you carry and bring to life. If we are coaching someone, if we're looking at somebody and they haven't physically changed at all and they're wearing the exact same clothes, how can we guide them? Like that's not good posture or presence. And this is better. Like what are some things that they're doing to hurt their swag? I'll say that starting one layer above where I like to go. If we're looking at somebody and they haven't physically changed at all and they're wearing the exact same clothes, how can we guide them like that's not good posture or presence and this is better? What are some things that they're doing to hurt their swag? I'll say that starting one layer above where I like to go. The way that you carry your body language, it could be due to structural stuff, but a lot of times it's your confidence. When someone comes in the room, how they carry themselves, you can tell if they have some ego. You can tell if they're insecure. You can tell if they're naturally confident just in their tone of voice, in the way that they posture, the way they hold their shoulders. And so I start with how did you feel when you walked in the room? What were you thinking? What was going through your head? And because all of that, their answers show in the way they come into the room. And so it's not so much about teaching them to be a character or play a role. It's more helping them understand what they're bringing to the room so they can walk into a room and command it without demanding attention. Even if you don't feel good about yourself today, there are a couple of things that you can do so that you don't draw negative interpretations about your mental state. How does it stand up straight, chest forward, shoulders back, and a slow, calm, deliberate movement is the way you want to be. People who are like looking left and right, super exaggerated emotions, that's the opposite too, which is like, I've arrived, everybody. Check me out. So there's a line there between believing in oneself and just asking everyone to pay attention to you. And it's usually like a turnoff for most people. I mean, it works on some people, obviously, but for most people, like, yo, just relax a little bit. That's ego at play, I believe. Yep. It's what I call the faux pro. When the faux pro walks in the room, you can feel it. The fake it till you make it, you can only fake it so far and it doesn't make it very long. Okay, so there's something else that I wanted to explore with you because I've been trying to help people who are like, hey, I'm really curious about what you're doing and I'd like some help. And then we'll go shopping together and there's a ton of resistance there. Oh, that won't work. That looks, that reminds me of this and I have all these negative emotions. And so the typical playbook is they will buy something 3 % different than something they already own in a different color. And they're thinking, I'm making all this progress with Chris. Why do you think that is? Oh my goodness. The psychology of men's fashion. popping together. And there's a ton of resistance there. Oh, that won't work. That reminds me of this. And I have all these negative emotions. And so the typical playbook is they will buy something 3 % different than something they already own in a different color. And they're thinking, I'm making all this progress with Chris. Why do you think that is? Oh my goodness. The psychology of men's fashion and women's fashion is amazing. When I was certified in menswear styling, the psychology of menswear fashion, I'm telling you, it could do like marriage therapy forever. But one of the things that I say, and it's the honest truth, men are the biggest pain in the butt to style. It's just the truth. And the reason is, is they usually come to me because there's a necessity. Their wives are picking on them. They're getting feedback from the market. If they're wanting a job promotion at work, or if they're entrepreneurs, and wanting to attract a higher level of client, they're getting the concept that there's something about their presentation that's not working. And so they know something needs to change, but they don't actually want to change. And so what they want is a personal shopper. Really, they want a mom for me, not for you, right? Like they want someone to do the shopping for them, or just tell me what to wear, without actually changing anything about what I do or who I am. And the whole thing is, if there is something that's blocking you from your next level of success, if there's something that's getting in your way, then change is going to be part of that. And change is always uncomfortable. Our lizard brains are trained for that. And I think I don't like being super gendered or stereotypical about things. So just making it clear, we're speaking collectively here. The male psyche was set to protect and defend. And the caveman instinct is not geared towards change. The caveman instinct is geared toward stick to the norm, know your surroundings, have comfortable, familiar surroundings, because that's survival. And that's success. And so getting male clients to move into a state of openness, actually, is kind of a more feminine energy, that fluid energy, openness to mentorship and feedback, getting them to relax into that. I've found a key, you know, here's a tip for you. When men come to you for that is really helping them understand the ROI of what we're doing, that it's not about changing who you are. But if you really want the next level of success, if you really want to move into the version of you 2 .0. getting them to relax into that. I've found a key, you know, here's a tip for you when men come to you for that is really helping them understand the ROI of what we're doing. That it's not about changing who you are, but if you really want the next level of success, if you really want to move into the version of you 2 .0, version 1 .0 can't get there. So if you want a higher ticket client, if you want higher level success in your life, it's not dress for the job you want, but it's about becoming the version 2 .0 that's ready for that and can hold that level of success. You said men are usually wired for protection and conservation and things like that, but also men are the ones who do the most dangerous jobs. We will go on adventures and not know that there's a way back. We will do crazy, stupid stuff oftentimes. So when it comes to exploring fashion or personal style, this is where it becomes really weird for me that they stay in a very safe pocket. And most of the times what they do is they say something like this to me. I've always wanted to try that, but I'm worried that my mates will give me a hard time. And I have a very specific response to that. I'm curious, like if somebody came up to you and said, Hey, I've always wanted to try avant -garde this or street wear or something else, but my friends clown on me, how would you advise them? Or what would you say to that? Oh, I love that question. First of all, and when you talk about doing high risk activities, getting to the core of the why you're willing to do that plays a lot into this also. And a lot of times when you look at, and my dad was a military man. And so, you know, when you, again, looking at those protectors, defenders, people who are willing to put their lives on the line, it's usually for either a cause, a core value, or a person that they care deeply about. Social survival though, is a little bit of a different beast. If we break patterns, if we draw unwanted attention to ourselves, that can affect our success. And for women, I think it goes very much to inclusion. And for men, a lot of times it goes around power and influence. So I do think that they're related. And I think that there is something that is the honest truth to that. If you think about the way fashion and identity are linked, anyone who's raised a toddler knows that clothing is one of the first ways that kids claim their autonomy. And then moving. A lot of times it goes around power and influence. So I do think that they're related. And I think that there is something that is the honest truth to that. If you think about the way fashion and identity are linked, anyone who's raised a toddler knows that clothing is one of the first ways that kids claim their autonomy. And then moving into like fifth grade, sixth grade, junior high, which is so painful. It's the period where we're using clothes to try on different identities. Clothing and identity are very much connected. But then somewhere between elementary school and college years, we usually have a fashion fail where something happens, where we get clowned on, or maybe beat up. But we learn that what we wear and how we present ourselves can get us ostracized, which in junior high is life. It can affect our life. It can affect our survival. And that's where our lizard brain kicks in, our protective instinct kicks in. And that's where we want comfort. We want security. And when you figure out a way to blend in with the people around you to get that success, it can be very scary to move out of that. So the gentlemen that come to you, and they come to you for a reason. You have a very clear point of view. You are a man of style. You're also a man of fashion. And they want that, but are scared of what it's going to cost. What's it going to cost to me professionally? What's it going to cost to me socially? What are people going to say? And the real vulnerability isn't in what they wear. It's what are people going to say when I show up 100 % me? That becomes very personal, but we can put up the front, like attack the front, and you're not attacking me, but put yourself out there 100%, which I think in this AI world for personal brands and entrepreneurs, it's going to be essential. It is forcing us into an age of self -exploration and self -ownership that we've needed for a long like I'm lighting up, but people are only forced into it when there's a necessity. The way I try to explain this to my male friends, whenever they bring something up like this, you have a circle of people who really deeply care about you, but we also come from a culture where differences are not usually embraced. We make fun of each other all the time. I think if a group of women were around and some woman fell on their face, they're like, oh my God, are you okay? And they'd help each other. The opposite would happen. If a guy fell on his face in front of his friends, they'd be clowning on him and nose bleeding. It's like they're going to remind him of that failure over and over again, but sometimes it's very toxic. sort of not usually embrace. We make fun of each other all the time. I think if a group of women were around and some woman fell on their face, they're like, oh my God, are you okay? And they'd help each other. The opposite would happen. If a guy fell on his face in front of his friends, they'd be clowning on him and nose bleeding. And it's like, they're gonna remind him of that failure over and over again. Sometimes it's very toxic, but I also think sometimes it helps to build resilience, some kind of grit in the person. But the way I would explain it is this. When your friends see you moving in a different direction, they fear something that they cannot articulate to themselves just yet, that you're eventually gonna grow apart and that you're gonna lose the friendship. They're gonna lose you. And so the only way they know how to respond is to pull you back in. It's very crab mentality. And so I just say to people, there's a couple of ways you can do this. You can be brutal about it. It's like, you know what? Anyone who doesn't support my personal self -expression and growth is not really my friend to begin with. Or you can also say, hey guys, I'm gonna explore some things. You may not like it. And that's cool. But it's not cool if you clown on me because then you're gonna make it very uncomfortable for me to be around you, which I still wanna maintain that relationship. And this just goes beyond personal style. If you get a new girlfriend or partner, if you get a new job, if you're doing exciting things, a new hobby, they feel that immediately and they're gonna pull you back in. Like, who would do that? Whatever it is that they're not into, they're gonna clown you for it to bring you back into that circle. Okay, here's another thing I've noticed. The people who ask me to help them with fashion, we try things on. That's just my thing. Just keep an open mind. Try stuff on. Cool. They try it on and it looks terrible. And then I'm like, well, let me try it on. And they're like, wow, that looks amazing. And I couldn't figure it out until I started to study the still photos of them trying things on. I think subconsciously, they're so uncomfortable in that new silhouette that they are making themselves uglier. They're hunched over. Their hands and their face are really awkward. It's like a sour face and just, it doesn't look good. But I said, if you stood up straight like you owned it, would look amazing. And I noticed this, that they're self -sabotaging this new aesthetic. Do you experience something similar or do you have a different take on this? Yes. And I will say there's two reasons for it. It's not just one. Well, and you know, like there's ever black and white thinking. We're going to leave that open too. But I will say the one that you mentioned, the self -sabotage, which we do anytime we're moving into change. And again, human beings are meant to be evolutionary. I'm going to leave We're going to leave that open. Yes. And I will say there's two reasons for it. It's not just one. Well, and you know, like there's ever black and white thinking, we're going to leave that open too. But I will say the one that you mentioned, the self -sabotage, which we do anytime we're moving into change. And again, human beings are meant to be evolutionary creatures, but we've also got this part of us, the animalistic part of us that craves certainty and comfortability. And those two can't exist in the same place at the same time. If you're going to evolve, there will be elements of discomfort. And so we do sabotage moving forward. And talking about the crab thing, sometimes they're worried about losing their friend, but I think more often than not, their friend becomes a mirror to something uncomfortable in them. They see their friend evolving and they're scared of their own and they don't want to see it. So yes, there's a self -sabotage. But then you also have a piece where someone might see Christo and they're like, oh man, he's got this cool shirt that he's wearing. He's got these cool like drop crotch pants. I want to try that. I want to rock his style. But there's a reason that you can carry that off. And it's not just because you've got the confidence to do it, but it's because you know who you are. You're very intentional about what you're wearing. And it's not about what other people think, but it's about, this is Christo. Like this is the Christo I'm bringing to this stage. People see Christo and they're like, oh, I want that swag. I want that confidence. I want that whatever. But they're not going to get it trying to be you. When they'll find their style. Sometimes they might try on a kilt and not every man can pull off the kilt. And it's not because they don't have the confidence, but not all of them have that inner character, that inner persona that resonates with that. When it's not aligned with your personality. And when it's not aligned with who you are, it's going to feel just as uncomfortable and inauthentic as wearing a pair of pants that's a size too small. You do this as a profession. I do this as a hobby. And I'm very interested in playing this space. And I've come to this conclusion because my buddy Drigo and I, we talk about this all the time. We talk about like, Chris, do you want to help them or not? I said, well, not really. Because my patience is like that big because I'm not being paid to do this. And you've asked me to give you something very valuable, my time. And then you don't want to listen. So I'm like, I'm kind of done. I'm writing you off right now. So I've developed a new rule. The rule is you have one shot with me. We go shopping. If you show me any resistance, if you are kind of frumpy about any of this, we're done. We'll finish. And I'll never try to help. And you've asked me to give you something very valuable, my time. And then you don't want to listen. So I'm like, I'm kind of done. I'm writing you off right now. So I've developed a new rule. The rule is you have one shot with me. We go shopping. If you show me any resistance, if you are kind of frumpy about any of this, we're done. We'll finish. And I'll never try to help you again. I'm good with that. Now, in your case, you're a professional. This is how you make a living or this is your area of expertise. So what do you do with your prospects in terms of how you onboard them so that you can really help them? For me, the work that I do, I actually combine fashion styling with archetypal coaching and personal and professional development coaching. And so in a very similar way for people who come to me and they just want to look, I'm like, honestly, you can get it cheaper. And that's not what I do. I help people connect with who they are, helping people identify their life purpose, helping them get clear on their core personality. That's what I do through clothing. And so if people don't really want to do the internal with the external work, they're not the right client for me. But it's that same kind of a thing in how open are you to really being honest with me, first of all, about what's resonating with you, about who you are. If you're not going to be honest with me about that, I can't do what I do. And if you just want a subscription service, honestly, in the day of AI, you can get it way more cheaper than you can with me. And that's not my sweet spot. I'm most passionate about the personal development side of things and the archetypal coaching and helping people really bring that out in a way that leverages their success. And so their style is very linked to their life goals or their reclamation of their confidence, their character, rebuilding their lives or taking their lives to the next level. All right. That makes sense. So basically, I've come to this conclusion that you got one shot and basically everybody screws up the first shot, but they like it when it works. Even if they don't understand it, they want to know what all the hard rules are, as if there's a book, a source, a video, a movie, something they can, they need to know and understand what the rules are. So what are the rules? This is going to light me up for a second here talking about the difference between women's fashion and men's fashion, because for women, most women know the ideal women's body shape and a lot of men do too. Do you know what it is? No. For women, I gave a talk to a room full. They need to know and understand what the rules are. So what are the rules? This is going to light me up for a second here talking about the difference between women's fashion and men's fashion. Because for women, most women know the ideal women's body shape. And a lot of men do too. Do you know what it is? No. For women, I gave a talk to a room full of 14 to 21 -year -old women. And the only man in the whole room was working AV behind me. And I asked him, I said, what's the ideal body shape? The entire room, 14 -year -old girls said an hourglass body shape. And when I was getting trained in women's styling, what they kept saying is, these are the rules. You need to help women follow the rules so that you could create illusions for their body and make them look as close as possible to the ideal body shape as we can. And I wanted to bond it in my mouth. Well, as I continued in what I was doing, I had men asking me, hey, do you do this for men? And I was like, well, let me go get certified in menswear styling. And I wanted to get certified by a male who styled men. And the first thing he said is, oh, and this lights me up so bad. He said, there is an ideal body shape for men. It's a trapezoid for those who care. But he said, the difference between men and women and styling men and women is that men don't care. So your job as a fashion stylist is to know the rules so you can help them break them. And that resonated with me in my core, both for my coaching work and for my styling work. And I said, we are ripping that out of the menswear and taking it to women. Like we are taking our glass slippers to the glass ceilings. I help people channel their fashion rebel, their rule breaker, because it is about self -expression. But I will say that the rules that apply are to know your body shape, know what works for your shape, and then treat it like an art form. And what I found in combining coaching with styling is your body, like literally your body, shape, your eye color, your hair color, your skin color is custom tailored to your personality. It is crazy, crazy how custom tailored your body is to your personality when you style it. And so the key is to know yourself. Know your personality and know your body shape. And then you can dress it in a way that expresses who you are rather than trying to dress to impress. Let's just say somebody is really curious about our conversation right now. I want to help them get a quick win. What are some mistakes that people do? Are there rules of thumb, both for men and for women? Is there something that you can share? The number one thing that women... And then you can dress it in a way that expresses who you are rather than trying to dress to impress. Let's just say somebody is really curious about our conversation right now. I want to help them get a quick win. What are some mistakes that people do? Are there rules of thumb, both for men and for women? Is there something that you can share? The number one thing that women make the mistake with is getting stuck by numbers. kill women's psyche, and it hurts the way that they dress. Their size, their weight, and their age. Those three numbers absolutely affect the way women dress themselves. It affects the way they present themselves. And I can't tell you how many women have a size in their mind. Like, I need to be a size X. There's no rhyme or reason, but there's a number that they feel like they're supposed to be. And so they buy clothes in that number when the bigger issue is fit. Sizes on a label are just there to help you find the right fit. Like, this is a starting point. So what's the solution for that? One, to understand that numbers are a starting point. That's what it is. Just to redefine what the number means. It's not a label, like it's on a label, but it doesn't label you or define you. It's just there to help you find your right fit. With men, it's that comfort zone principle. Men want to wear what's comfortable without really exploring their fit because it takes time. It's about really wanting to explore what is it that you want to communicate that's different. What's not working for you is usually where I start with men. And that's usually the first starting place, the first win for men. And when they say, oh, like my clients aren't taking me very seriously. Well, what about your outfit isn't taking you very seriously? Like if you're wearing a high school cartoon t -shirt going into a seven -figure client. But if there's something that's not translating, where could you zhuzh that a little bit? Where could you take that to the next level? All right. There's a lot for me to talk about here. And I think this is going to tie into an idea that you've talked about or written about called bro pros. I'm going to assume I know what bro pro is. I'm going to describe one. And then you tell me about right or wrong. I'm speaking at a summit and I'm talking about personal branding. And one of the speakers, let's just say his name is John. It could be his real name or not. He comes up to me. He's like, bro, roast me. I'm like, I don't want to roast you. Well, you know, I like what you're doing. Just tell me like, what do you think about what I'm wearing? I'm going to describe one, and then you tell me about right or wrong. I'm speaking at a summit, and I'm talking about personal branding. And one of the speakers, let's just say his name is John. It could be his real name or not. He comes up to me. He's like, bro, roast me. I'm like, I don't want to roast you. Well, you know, I like what you're doing. Just tell me, like, what do you think about what I'm wearing? I said, do you really want to know? He goes, yeah. Okay, so just to describe what he's wearing. a dark blue Italian suit that's been very tailored for his body, probably with an expensive, quite luxury t -shirt. And he's wearing white sneakers and probably an expensive watch. So I said to him, okay, let me ask you this question, because I have this theory. And my theory is that your clothes are a tool, and tools are used to accomplish a job. So what job is your clothes doing for you? And he just looked at me, like, really puzzled. Like, what are you talking about? So I think you and I are very much of the same mind here, where I encourage people to take off the corporate mask. I don't mean just the way you look, but the way you sound or what you write and what you wear. So we also identify the corporate uniform. He's wearing very much the speaker's professional corporate uniform. Every male speaker dresses exactly the same. Every single one of them, look them up and down. They pretty much all wear the same thing. I said, so the job that your clothes are doing is to say, I'm a professional speaker. I'm successful. I have tailored suits. And this is from Italy. And I have taste. And then I'm like every single other person who's up here. So I have conservative ideas. I'm professional. Maybe I challenge you 5%. But you should trust me. That's what your suit says. But it's super generic. It's like every single other person up here. And he smiled. He's a very, very good sport about this. He's like, I'm a mess. I'm like, I'm not saying you're a mess. But if that's the intentionality behind your corporate uniform, maybe you're a bro pro. I don't know. But you look like every other guy speaker who's up here. So I'm going to throw it over to you. What is a bro pro? And did I just describe one? Yes. Same thing with podcasters. If you look at podcasters for males, black tea, black tea, black tea, sometimes a cap. And sometimes it's forward facing, sometimes backward facing. And there's reasons for that. So we started this conversation talking about fashion and style and image. And I talk about the Darcy effect. That's one of the things I love talking about with entrepreneurs and style. Because in the Victorian age, in those books, there were three distinct kinds of individuals. There were men of fashion. There were men of style. And then there were dance. and there's reasons for that. So we started this conversation talking about fashion and style and image. And I talk about the Darcy effect. That's one of the things I love talking about with entrepreneurs and style, because in the Victorian age, in those books, there were three distinct kinds of individuals. There were men of fashion, there were men of style, and then there were dandies. So the men of fashion are like the Wickhams. They could look really good. They knew how to put an outfit together. And so they'd walk into a new city or a new town. Usually they were military men, but they'd come into a new city or town and all the women just thought they looked so great. And they thought they were so wonderful and they could look great, but there was no substance. So that's a man of fashion. They can look good, but there's not really anything underneath. And a lot of times they were the rakes and the rogues and the bad, bad dudes. Then you had the dandies and those are like the Mr. Collins. They're the tryhards. They're the copycats, the imitators. So they would try really hard and they're the comic relief in the book. Like they annoyed everybody. Like you were talking about the person who comes in the room and seeks attention and demands attention and really they repel it. Okay. So that's the dandy, but then you had the men of style, the men who knew who they were. They weren't going to mess around. They didn't care about playing to other people's ideals or societal norms. And they were really the men of style and they were the ones who set the trends rather than chase the trends. So how we do that in a modern context and an entrepreneurial stage speaker context is you've got the bro pros, the faux pros and the goats is what I call it. And it's just that concept. You've got the bro pros. You can look really good. They've got like, I'm going to be crispy like Omar. And I'm going to like wear some jeans like Chris. Oh, because this is what's going to create it. And what you get is that Instagram real black shirt, black shirt, black shirt, black shirt. You get the bro pros who maybe know some things. They have some clout, but they don't know who they are and they don't bring it. Then you have the faux pros, which we all know is why there's a trust recession so bad right now. Everyone who's like, Oh, I'm the new guru. And let me tell you all these things I've learned and have never done, or let me make money overnight. I'm going to quit my nine to five and start a business because it's the easiest thing ever said. No entrepreneur ever, but the faux pros try, but then you get the goats. And Neil D 'Angelo is one that I love because he's a black T guy. He was a pattern interrupt. He wasn't doing it to be a cool kid. He was doing it because he was sick of showing up as suits in the real estate industry. And he was sick of trying to be something he wasn't. And he showed up a hundred. ever. But the faux pros try. But then you get the goats. And Neil Dingra is one that I love because he's a black tea guy. He was a pattern interrupt. He wasn't doing it to be a cool kid. He was doing it because he was sick of showing up as suits in the real estate industry. And he was sick of trying to be something he wasn't. And he showed up 100 % authentic. But that's what a goat is. When people talk about Alex Hermosi and the way that he did things, so much about his aesthetic came out of necessity. He was sleeping in a gym. He gave his finger to society and said, no, I'm not going to play by these rules. It's killing me. It's suffocating me. And now that he's made it, it's like it's still giving the finger. It's like, yeah, I did it. And I'm still going to rock my brand tea. And I'm going to still rock my flannel because this is how I did it. Like, why would I change for you? Why would I change how I show up? And that's a goat. Okay. What are the five layers of style and how do we make the most of this? What's the style framework? Yes. Okay. So I've developed, and this is what I use when I speak to corporate, when I speak to one -on -one clients, it's the succeed with style framework. And it goes back to that concept that style is more than about how you look. So if you picture a pyramid with five layers, the image is the icing on the cake. That's fashion style. It's where a lot of people go when they think about style, image, and brand. The base layer is your personal style and your personal brand. The way I define personal brand, people say you buy from brands that you know, like, and trust. Your personal brand is built on how much you know, like, and trust yourself. And the formula for creating that is personal development plus personal style is how you build a personal brand. And that's the foundation that most people skip. The second layer is your relationship style. No one succeeds on their own. We all have different strengths and we also have our weaknesses and how you communicate, how you connect, how you treat people. Your relationship style is second only to your personal style. But most people start with layer three and they have since the industrial age, especially, but layer three is your performance style. It's your natural skill sets, your talents, the things that you have, your education, your resume. That's where so many people start with as the base for style. And it's why 83 % of the world is burnout is because they never got clear on their foundation. And then on top of that is your motivation style. And not everybody is motivated by the same things. Not everybody's motivated by money. education, your resume. That's where so many people start with as the base for style. And it's why 83 % of the world is burnout is because they never got clear on their foundation. And then on top of that is your motivation style. And not everybody is motivated by the same things. Not everybody's motivated by money. When you know who you are, when you know the relationships that you have, you know, your personal strengths, and then you know, your Scooby snacks, you know, it's going to motivate you through the hard times when you're like crying in your shower, wondering why you ever started a thing or why you ever dated that person. Your motivation style comes there. And that's where your inspiration and motivation come. And then the very top layer is your image. It's your presence. And it does matter. It's the icing on the cake. Like if you think about a cupcake, a cupcake without icing is like a glorified brand muffin. Nobody wants to buy it. Nobody wants to eat it. But like icing with no cake is a sugar rush brain freeze and it's going to make you sick. When image is done right, when fashion is done right, it becomes your three second resume. You walk in the room and people have an idea of who you are and what you're about before you even open your mouth. And that's the layers of style. But so many people focus on one. They focus on image. They focus on the tip of the iceberg when it comes to starting a personal brand or social media presence, which you see all the time. Or they start with level three. The first question most of us ask, oh, what do you do? What do you do for a living? But the questions we really need to start with and what AI is doing, and I applaud it, is AI can automate level three. What most people have relied on and defined themselves by is why so many people are scared right now. Because AI can do that. AI can automate. But what it can't recreate or replicate are those bottom two layers. Who you are and how you connect with other people. And that is our human differentiator. It is why I'm not worried about AI taking over the world. Anyone who's had AI customer service knows. It just is like sometimes you need a human who can have a conversation and answer a question without an automated response. It's that is style. When you've got all those pieces firing together, literally, it's not a matter of if you can achieve success. It's when and how big your life is going to blow up. Kimberly, it's been a pleasure. If people want to find out more about you, where can we send them? You can find everything on my website, which is emergencelifecoaching .com. My speaker site is emergencelifecoaching .com forward slash Kimberly Perry, or find me on LinkedIn, Kimberly Perry. Beautiful. Thanks for sharing your passion, your profession with us. how big your life is going to blow up. Kimberly, it's been a pleasure. If people want to find out more about you, where can we send them? You can find everything on my website, which is EmergenceLifeCoaching .com. My speaker site is EmergenceLifeCoaching .com forward slash Kimberly Perry, or find me on LinkedIn, Kimberly Perry. Beautiful. Thanks for sharing your passion, your profession with us. I look forward to having more conversations about fashion with you. Thank you.
    Download transcript

    Enjoyed this? There’s more where it came from.

    Get insights on creativity, business, and design from The Futur.

    You can unsubscribe anytime. By submitting, you agree to receive communications and to our Privacy Policy.

    “So what job is your clothes doing for you?”

    — Chris Do

    Key Takeaways

    Details

    Topic
    PERSONAL BRANDING

    Share