Hahaha   The problem with that statement is that you get an unsolvable game-theoretic recursion.

If, to be *recognized* as a successful surgeon, you have to look like a lumberjack, then the smoothest of actors will of course adapt to this perception, and most scammer-fake-surgeon charlatans will look like lumberjacks, to adhere to the image that the best surgeons "don't look like a surgeon".  It is then the good surgeon that doesn't need publicity as "good surgeon looking like a lumberjack" that will dress nicely because he has the money and doesn't need to play his "lumberjack" role to get to a job, because he's good enough to do without image building (like argued in the blog article).
However, once that's the case again, most actors-charlatans will again look like fancy dressed people, because they don't want to look like the charlatan-lumberjack fake surgeons.  And so on.

There's a world where this "lumber jack attitude" is in fact often the case: computer science and physics.  The smooth guy in a fancy suit is never going to get hired, because the image of the brilliant computer scientist or physicist is the dirty porky fat guy in front of his terminal, slurping coca cola and eating pizzas while looking at his code / data / calculations.  But this is now so much part of the image of a good physicist or computer scientist, that if you go for a job interview, you better DON'T dress fancy.

So a physicist that can "afford" to dress nicely, must be one hell of a physicist,  because he doesn't need his "porky fat man image building".

etc...