Business Naming Basics

I recently read a blog post at Greentech Media about a trend toward creating company names with double vowel words. Here are several they mentioned: Jadoo, Soraa, Kaai, Deeya, Oorja.

As I commented on their blog, I think it will be a short-lived trend.

Using double-e’s and double-o’s are perfectly acceptable in the middle or the end of a word, but to lead off with “Ee” or “Oo” makes it difficult for readers to pronounce and comprehend. As for double a’s, i’s and u’s, they just complicate the pronunciation and comprehension situation even farther – no matter where in the word they happen to be placed.

Now I’m an advocate of unique corporate names. But I also have other criteria I attempt to apply, sometimes with limited success. Those criteria might include memorability, relevance and comfort.

I’m also an advocate of coined word names (aka neologisms) for their uniqueness. But I also apply the criteria of memorability, relevance and comfort – along with pronouncibility.

In the names cited by Greentech, the name origins were often relevant to the company or product in another, sometimes obsolete, language. That doesn’t excuse their adoption unless they’re only marketing to Sri Lanka natives or sandskrit readers.

Names are sometimes adopted out of desperation. There’s not enough time to come up with a really superb name in the first week or so. Then the outlandish and obscure are seen in a favorable light.

Since the business name is vital in reflecting the corporate personality and tenor, I suggest taking all the time it takes and don’t settle for obscurity.

Tags: Naming Issues by MartinJ
No Comments »

Quite often a business name will come to mind, and then adapted by the entrepreneur in charge even before the business plan has been written.

Bad idea.

A lot of information needs to be sifted and digested before a start-up is ready for a corporate name.

The very first thing that must be considered: Exactly what are you naming? Identify that first.

Is it a single business that has no aspirations for going global? Is it the company only that you are naming, or is it also a product line, a series of models or styles, or a single service?

I have a client and friend who had used the same name for his first product and for his company. He came to me when he was ready to introduce his second product. Already in his third month of business he had experienced the need for a standard naming hierarchy.

For companies who plan to introduce multiple product lines, and models and styles within them, you may need to establish a naming hierarchy early on just to make sure you won’t be confusing customers later on.

Perhaps you will be naming a product that is replaced by newer versions – like software – so you’ll want to establish that ground work early with a hierarchy, or as some prefer to call it, a brand architecture.

From the very beginning, set up a structure for your new and future names. By so doing you won’t have to backtrack later when re-naming can be costly and confusing to customers and prospects.

Tags: Naming Issues by MartinJ
No Comments »

IBM, RCA, AIG and MSN are recognized corporate names, but I wouldn’t follow their lead when naming a company.

First of all, almost all three-initial named companies began as something else: International Business Machines, Radio Corporation of America, etc., etc. Those names were so cumbersome shorthand names were naturally adopted, probably internally at first, but rapidly spreading to suppliers, distributors and customers. The next step was adopting the shorthand in the companies’ external communications. So over time, and with big communications budgets, the initials began to represent the company.

But with newly-formed companies initials mean nothing.

Initials have no personality They don’t resonate. They don’t inspire. They communicate no passion, history or expertise. They are just initials, having no actual meaning, just an identification – like a part number.

Most often those initials stand for something. But I know one company from the 1970’s whose initialed name stood for nothing relevant. That company was NBI, and those initials stood for “nothing but initials”. Needless to say, it was a Boulder-based company. And it no longer exists.

But usually those three initials represent multi-syllable, Latin-ending, generic descriptors that vaguely describe the company’s business category. So they started off with a bad company naming strategy – making the name comply to its industry and/or product description. What else could they do except to adopt the initials?

Now some initial sets can work as names if those initials already have a familiar and appealing connotation for their customers because of previous associations: MVP, QED, ASAP come to mind. But most three-initial names might just as well have been picked from a bowl of alphabet soup by a blindfolded chimp as far as relevance is concerned.

The best names for companies are short, active one or two word names. Even a coined word name is so much better than lifeless initials. And usually those short names have fewer syllables than a set of three initials. Remember that a major function of a corporate name is to represent the company in a distinctive, memorable way. Names like Google, Yahoo, Amazon, Apple are easily remembered compared to CRW, MSN, AOL and IMC.

So when naming a business, stick to words, preferably one or two short, active Anglo-Saxon words.

You may be long-remembered for your efforts.

Tags: Naming Issues by MartinJ
No Comments »