Naming projects are the most taxing part of my work as a brand consultant. Today, availability issues (trademark and URL) are so constricting, you have to embrace the creative pressure or you’d collapse in a puddle of despair.
To some extent, the drama of naming is overblown. I tell my clients, and fully believe, that almost any name can turn into a massively successful brand. The evidence isn’t hard to find. Take a simple example: suppose I offered my client the name “NIKE” as the winning solution for their new sports footwear company. They would of course pronounce it to rhyme with “pike.” Then I’d explain how to say it. Then they’d say: “You mean I have to teach the market how to pronounce this totally meaningless name?”
I’d be rightly embarrassed. But today, who would object to owning the Nike brand?
Of course, when I’m presenting names I take enormous pains to generate solutions that make sense, in relation to the company or product to be named, the positioning strategy, the audience, the competitive environment, and long-term corporate plans. I deploy a number of fairly sophisticated strategies to generate my short lists, and they all make for good, strong names.
However, I’ve found there is a wildcard in the naming story, which I’ve come to recognize has paramount importance. It has no objective relationship to sound, look, positioning, target market or company strategies. It’s the owner’s preferences. A company owner will latch on to a solution, or come up with one herself, regardless of my ingenious naming methodologies. And unless there are serious hazards in the solution, I will back it against all the alternatives, even those that I consider objectively “better” names.
Why? Am I just client-pleasing? No. The owner’s belief in the name is actually a critical factor. I want that new company or product going to market with a roar of excitement and conviction. The name will have more impact precisely because the owner and executive team have embraced it passionately. And because almost any name can work, this one factor can be the decisive criterion.
Here’s the analogy I sometimes use. Let’s say you are shopping for a jacket. Three different jackets might “objectively” match your criteria, and make you look just great. But if there’s one jacket you believe looks better, that’s the one you should choose. That’s the jacket you’ll actually look best in, simply because of your belief.