The politics controlling the Optiva name change are immensely complex, and the sensitivities and legal issues involved prohibit me from sharing them. But those with privileged knowledge from behind the scenes understand the truth, and in this case, the truth surrounding Optiva's situation in no way correlates to the superficially strategic quips people like Denise Wymore offer up merely because credit union name changes piss them off.

Wymore says the exact same THREE things with respect to EVERY name change EVERY credit union has EVER considered -- regardless of the specifics in each case, regardless of market conditions, regardless of competitive pressures, regardless of the health of the sponsor, regardless of the vitality of the credit union, regardless of just about everything:

Wymore-ism #1: "Bigger isn't better. Better is better."

Wymore-ism #2: "Name changes instead of trying to improve your service is just putting frosting on the pig."

Wymore-ism #3: "Credit unions would never have to change names in the first place if they just remained true to their sponsor."

These issues are completely irrelevant in Optiva's situation. Denise Wymore has no knowledge of the situation surrounding the name change. She only has her opinions. If she had sat in Optiva’s Board room over the last year and understood the issues they are facing, she would have a much different attitude.

This situation really illustrates the huge philosophical differences between Weber Marketing Group and Denise Wymore. Wymore has built her career around categorically telling credit unions NOT to change names -- period. Weber Marketing Group helps credit unions make the decision to change or not based on a strategic, methodical and deliberate process that entertains all possible outcomes. And our recommendations are based on market research, not just our opinions or anecdotes ripped from the pages of Peter Drucker books. While Weber Marketing Group has advised clients to change names as well as to NOT change names, Wymore approaches each credit union with her own fore drawn conclusion: Don’t change names. This message resonates mostly with those who have already decided against a name change and just need an outside consultant to affirm their position.

And to clarify another misconception perpetuated by Wymore, trademark law offers protection to entities and products to avoid confusion in the marketplace. The USPTO provides this protection according to what industry or service you provide, not a blanket form of protection across all industries and services. Banking, insurance and investments is covered by USPTO Class 36. If no one has registered a trademark under Class 36, and your registration goes uncontested for five years, you will enjoy unfettered protection in that classification of products and services. If you want blanket protection in all categories, you have to apply in each category (say toothbrushes, for instance) and let the USPTO decide.

In Optiva’s case, I don’t believe there’s really any room for marketplace confusion between Optiva Credit Union in Iowa and Optiva tootbrushes. People aren’t going to ask their toothbrush for an auto loan, nor use their debit card to clean their teeth. We here at Weber Marketing Group are confident that the USPTO will agree.

Jeffry, I understand if you can't go into this because of complex politics and so forth - but here's an important (albeit touchy-feely) question for this whole Optiva situation:

What story does the name tell?

And that's not a challenge, I'm really curious. Like I said before, context is important (maybe the most important). But every brand launch needs to be rooted in the real narrative and culture of the organization. How has that played out with Optiva?

And Tate, this isn't really relevant to this thread, but I love your blog's tagline.

Quick responses from Stokefire HQ...
Jeffry - thanks for the post about USPTO classes. Saves me a lot of typing!
Brent - I like the question you pose and would enjoy hearing a response too, though I'm not going to be upset if I don't see one. Jeffry has gone above and beyond the call here... Still, my fingers are crossed.
...and Brent... Glad you like the tagline. Lest you think otherwise, we try to prod with an eye towards civility. We're trying to figure out how to bring the tagline over to the corporate side at the moment. Unfortunately our clients tend not to want to be poked with sticks...

Some clients place trademark protection as a top priority. That tends to result in names that are coined or off-category, such as Optiva.

The rational argument for the name is that it partially resembles words such as "options," "optimism," and "opportunities." These words synergize neatly with financial services, and are cornerstones of the new brand's vocabulary.

The emotional argument for the name is that it looks and sounds nice. (Please keep in mind, a lot of what follows is subjective, and some might dismiss it as phooey.) It looks and sounds "alive" and "vibrant." The word starts and stops with vowels, which (arguably) make the name more soothing, open, inviting, as opposed to "hard" letters like "k's" and "t's." It's gota very classic, almost Latin construction to it (as Tate observed) that people tend to find reassuring in a provider of financial services.

Kodak is perhaps the best example of the naming strategy Optiva chose to follow, which hinges on two maxims:

1. Coined names are easy to trademark.
2. Coined names have no meaning, which means the organization is free to define their name any way they choose.

So, to answer your question Brent, the Optiva name doesn't really tell a story. But does it need to? Is that the expectation and criteria by which names should be evaluated? Or is a name just one component in an organization's brand toolbox, used to help shape perceptions? Is the "story" and meaning behind a name to come from the name itself? Or from first-hand experiences with the brand -- its ads, products, employees, etc.?

The bizarre truth is that new names are scrutinized at a level that doesn't even remotely exist with existing names. When you really think about it, most names are really stupid. Just look around the mall: Banana Republic, Gap, Coach, Old Navy. What the heck do those names have to do with anything? And what "story" do they tell. "Banana Republic" teeters on a derogatory slur. "Gap" says something's missing. "Coach" is a fat, sweaty guy. And "Old Navy" is a bunch of crusty, salty sailors.

It seems that "dissonant names" with absolutely no connection to their category are often the most successful. Perhaps we are all drawn to brands that have seemingly random ecclecticness -- just like the people we find interesting.

Maybe instead of calling these "dissonant names" we should call them "poetic." Allusive, imaginative, bold explorations of language.

This is turning into yet another exceptionally interesting thread.
Jeffry said:

So, to answer your question Brent, the Optiva name doesn’t really tell a story. But does it need to? Is that the expectation and criteria by which names should be evaluated?

This got me thinking about the semantics of the question and what we expect out of names. If we look back we can see that Jeffry is right: There are many names out there that don't tell a story in and of themselves, but when given context by a representative of the company seem to make more sense.
Kodak supposedly doesn't mean anything at all, and the guy that developed the name says he liked the letter "k" and just fiddled around with it until he found something the felt right (though I personally think that Kodak isn't completely meaningless - it is far too similar to Kodiac - and the 80,000 hits on Google for this pairing seem to indicate that there's something to this.) In the case of Kodak, the fact that the name is meaningless has become part of the culture of the brand. The story is told frequently, especially by marketing folks, to illustrate how you don't have to start with a meaningful name to create a meaningful brand... Kodak has turned meaningless into a message.
But that's the key. The meaningful brand does have a story. Almost every strong brand has some sort of story about their name - even if the name itself is a jumble of letters. The story doesn't necessarily have to be told in the initial grouping of letters, you can use the letters of the name as the spindle to wrap the story around. While I'm not certain that Optiva is the best possible name, I am sure that with a skilled branding team the name can fit within the culture they are trying to build. I'm not big on Latinate names, but Jeffry's right... if you want to find a shortcut to implying stability and history that's certainly one way to do it.
Interestingly, names that by themselves describe the story are far weaker than names that only support the brand image. Purely descriptives such as General Motors, American Piping, and Alexandria Glassware do a great job of saying what they do, but provide no ability to wrap a story around them. These names do a great job of establishing who doesn't want to do business with you (e.g., if you don't need glassware and don't live in Alexandria you're not going to be bugging Alexandria Glassware with questions) but it doesn't do anything to set you apart from the competition.
Your name is your chance to hint at your differences and start showing why people should do business with you. The Latinate aspect of the Optiva isn't a big hit with me (anything that is shorthand for anything else should probably be avoided since shorthand almost always = cliche) but if the company gets behind the implied meaning and leads with the right attitude and message it could work.
Last thought. The whole thing about Optiva sounding more like that toothbrush is pretty bogus. Sure, the toothbrush had it first, but if you think about it, Optiva has almost nothing to do with teeth. If you go by the logic seen around the net we should be jumping on the toothbrush company for having named a toothbrush in such a way that people might think it is supposed to be used on their eyes. "Opti" is certainly evocative of "Optic" isn't it?
Where was the fuss over that?

Jeffry,

I can see your point - the story comes in time as the brand develops. But the thing about all of the made-up names you listed (Gap™, Old Navy©, Kodak®, etc®™©) is that each brand they represent was nonexistent when the name was created. They had nothing but potential and future context to go with, so of course there wasn't a solid brand story to work with. There wasn't a brand.

These were about story creation.

The University of Iowa Community CU was chartered in 1938. Optiva, before it was Optiva, came pre-packaged with a rich history and culture. The credit union already had a brand - and when you're renaming a brand that has almost 70 years of depth behind it, it seems the goal should be to accurately communicate the depth and reality of that brand, not to start from scratch.

This is about story communication.

In the case of brands like Kodak, the brand design was about kicking off and creating a narrative. In the case of Optiva, it should be more about communicating the narrative that exists.

I'm sure I'll write about it in a post of its own at some point... but how many of you remember the history of the name Exxon? Before Exxon the name was Esso, and before Esso the name was Standard Oil. I'll grant that the name changes weren't all voluntary, but the name Exxon was universally panned when it was introduced (including the slam of "the name started with two strikes.")
Sure, they've had some PR hits over the ages, but no one notices the qualities of the name anymore... it is just a part of the world lexicon.

Every time I see or think about Exxon, I still think about the Exxon Valdez and its drunk captain spilling crude oil all over Prince William Sound in Alaska. And how long ago was that? Fifteen years? More?? That's an amazing amount of brand damage caused by a single employee.

I agree Jeffry.
It seems to have faded a little bit, but it is certainly staying around. I seem to recall a time when most people could name the ship captain - that's long gone. Certainly for Gen Y-ers and up this is an association that will never completely go away. And yes... it is truly amazing that one guy can cause that much damage to the environment, a brand, and popular culture with so little effort.

UPDATE - 12/07

The membership vote in favor of Optiva has been certified. The Iowa State Dept. of Finance has concluded its investigation, declaring that there is absolutely no merit to the claims of a small handful of opponents that the credit union mishandled the naming vote.

Congrats Jeffry!
Now begins the battle of making the Optiva brand identity real. (I actually think this one will be more of a challenge for your team than Red Canoe. Seems like the folks at Optiva are a little more risk-averse than the RC crew.)

The initial visceral reaction to a name change always fascinates me. But the sentiment seems to swing/normalize after a few weeks. Here is a link to a blog where someone is now defending the new Optiva name.
The author's assessment of financial naming is amazingly insightful — especially for an industry outsider. And he's a good writer, too. Bill Virgin could learn a thing or two from this guy :)

Interesting article you pointed to Jeffry.
A lot of critics could do to take a deep breath and read it. Even me. (I'm not a huge fan of Optiva - I think Red Canoe is a stronger example of your work - but agree that Optiva is at least as workable as just about every other CU name out there.)

Since Jeffry mentioned me in this thread (thanks again for the endorsement) I feel I have to say something.

I know we're not privy to the "behind the scenes" of the name change of Optiva but the so-called defending of the Optiva name (see Jeffry's reference above) sounds more like an acquiescence.

"I'll have to admit that my first reaction was that Optiva is an odd name for a financial institution. It sounded more to me like a prescription drug for glaucoma. Each time I hear it, I half-expect an announcer in the background to be saying, "Ask your doctor if Optiva is right for you."

My second reaction was admiration for the guts it must have taken to make this choice. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall at the Board of Directors meeting where that name was originally being pitched. Whoever did most of the talking must have just returned from selling snow to the Eskimos."

Here's the problem I have with the Weber process. In Optiva's AND Red Canoe's FAQs (on their websites) The A: to the Q: How did you select the new name? is as follows:

A: We spent many months working with a joint team of board, management, and an experienced naming firm to create a name that celebrated the best of what our credit union has become while positioning us for the future. We conducted research with our members, communities and staff to gather vital information about our organization. After carefully evaluating hundreds of names we felt that (INSERT NEW CREDIT UNION NAME) best reflected the direction of our new brand.

Weyerhaeuser to Red Canoe?
University of Iowa to Optiva?

These names celebrate the BEST of what the credit union has become AND positions them for the future. Seriously?

Come on, let's be honest. These names have nothing to do with celebrating their history. I live in Washington State, grew up in Oregon, and can tell you that the Red Canoe means nothing to the Pacific Northwest.

The statement could be true for HP Credit Union changing their name to Addison Avenue (which pays homage to the garage location where it all began) but not for these two names. For the money I'm sure Weber charges, you'd think each credit union could get a custom Q and A for their members.

That's all I'm saying.

Two quick comments, Denise... (and thanks for what is always a thought-provoking commentary.)
First - I was able to find a reference with Red Canoe and the Northwest. Just start scrolling through the hits on this search and you'll find a few. Something to do with the exploration of the Yukon. And here's a book with the reference, too. I can understand some people not being comfortable with the name, but given the number of products in the northwest with a "red canoe" reference it seems likely that this one isn't going too far out on a limb. Sure, it is risky for a financial institution, but it isn't completely random.
Second - I hadn't seen that the same text was used on both sites. The Internet is a strange, scary, and wonderful thing. Sometimes it catches stuff that in past generations would've been missed. Templates are great for speeding up processes, but not so good when multiple clients cut-and-paste to their public sites from the same text. Any efficient organization uses templates, that's the nature of working in an industry with repeatable processes. Heck - just look at the line most companies put at the top of press releases "(COMPANY NAME) - a leader in the (INDUSTRY) field today announces (UNREMARKABLE THING.)"
It is possible that even though the text is boilerplate the meaning is still true. Now, if we found that every single client has said exactly the same thing (a research task I am not willing to undertake, as I have a living to make) then this goes from a minor slip-up to something less tasteful.
I would argue that most companies should be looking to connect with heritage (or whatever it was that the two you referenced were connecting with) but should do it in their own way and their own language. This seems like a training issue more than anything else. Perhaps having each company spend some time to put the information in their own language would be worthwhile... People are generally interested in saving time, so if you just say "Reword it before you send it out" it will rarely happen. Much easier to cut, paste, and send/post.

Tate,

Not to split hairs but I think my point was watered down a bit. It's not the cut and paste that bothers me ,it's the phrase --celebrate the BEST of what the credit union has become AND positions them for the future-- that I have a problem with. It's so much rhetoric.

The Red Canoe and Optiva names don't celebrate the best of Weyerhaeuser and Univeristy of Iowa.

We ARE big recyclers here in the Pacific NW -- gotta give them credit for that.

Denise -
I see now what you're referring to.
I still think that without seeing it twice it isn't so obviously rhetoric. But I'll agree that when you *do* see it twice it does have a certain element of cheese to it. I'm still a fan of the Red Canoe name regardless.
And oddly, in their own way each of them does celebrate what they have become and positions them for the future... it's just that every good new name or brand should do that. So, it should go without saying. Even the companies that name themselves after the past are positioning them for the future.
Regardless, I think when you do have to rename something it is awfully hard to come up with compelling reasoning behind the new name. I give Jeffry and his team points for giving more than most naming companies do - a script to follow. So many companies have no reason at all - and that makes it awfully hard to create a memorable brand.
You have good points, Denise. I guess I'm torn between being a realist consumer and a realist Thingnamer.

Tate,
I think you make a great realist Thingnamer. That's why I love your blog.

I always read your comments with a little "poke poke" sound in my head. And visualize a little cartoon character doing the poking.....or maybe that's just the coffee talking.
D.

Better watch out or I'll have second thoughts about renaming the blog...
Too late. Already havin' 'em now.
Dang.

Weber Marketing Group presents names — from the banal and expected to the progressive and truly unique. We comment and advise clients about the pros and cons of each name’s distinctiveness, marketability and relevance. Ultimately, our clients make the decision. Once that final decision has been made, then it’s both firm’s responsibility to support the new name inasmuch as possible.
One may dispute that names like Red Canoe and Optiva DO or DON’T represent the best of a credit union’s PAST and FUTURE. Either side of this argument is completely subjective. In any case, a central part of the strategy is to help current members accept the new name by reassuring them the credit union isn’t “abandoning its past.”

Here are the FAQ sections for credit unions who changed names where Weber Marketing Group wasn't involved. You'll notice a remarkable degree of similarity.
MEMBERS COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION (formerly HON Employees)

http://www.memberscommunitycu.org/about_qa.htm
AMPLIFY CREDIT UNION (formerly IBM Employees)

http://www.goamplify.com/news/qa.cfm
QUORUM FEDERAL CREDIT UNION (formerly Kraft Employees)

http://www.quorumfcu.org/site/NameChange_FAQ.pdf
NORTHRIDGE COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION (formerly Hoyt Lakes)

http://www.nrccu.org/asp/products/product_1.asp
CREDIT UNION OF TEXAS (formerly Dallas Teachers)

http://www.cuoftexas.org/faqs.html
ELEVATIONS CREDIT UNION (formerly University of Colorado)

http://www.elevationscu.com/namechange/faqs.cfm
PRIME FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION

http://www.primefinancialcu.org/info/name_change.aspx

It seems a bit unfair to single out Weber Marketing Group for a lack of originality about name change FAQs.

Just guessing here Jeffry, but I'm pretty sure that Denise isn't singling out your firm because it doesn't do good work. I know first-hand that the stuff you guys provide is well above the mean. The mere fact that you're able to consistently get clients in the CU industry would indicate the same.
I think that the implication is that our industry is the problem... and in some ways I agree. Most namers aren't particularly thorough, don't provide pre- and post-launch support, and often only provide the name as an afterthought to what is otherwise a glorified graphic identity package.
There's a lot of skepticism around the value of a professionally built name. Pointing to other companies in our industry that aren't doing a very good job may strengthen her points rather than weaken them.
There's a compliment buried in all of this analysis. In the process of breaking open the two names we've discussed we haven't mentioned anyone else. No one has been brought forth as an example of "doing it right" for CU branding. If there was a paragon of efficiency or quality in the industry (other than you) wouldn't that have happened?
I know it is hard to see it when the grenades are apparently all being thrown at you... but those of us watching from the hills may have better perspective.

Tate, you may have misinterpreted the spirit and intent of my last post.
I agree that Denise wanted to -- as you put it -- "hurl a grenade" when she blasted Weber Marketing Group for an unoriginal FAQ. But her grenade struck me as more of a dud since FAQs for credit union name changes don't seem to warrant a lot of creativity. For the most part, the kinds of questions people frequently ask when a credit union changes its name are the same. And the answers are pretty much the same too:
- No, we haven't forgotten you.

- No, we haven't been bought, sold or merged.

- Yes, your checks and ATM card still work.

- Yes, this was a thoughtful and strategic process.

- No, it wasn't reckless and willy-nilly.

- Yes, the new name has meaning.
And to clarify, the credit unions I referenced in my last post mostly changed their names by themselves. So my post isn't really a counterpunch at any naming competitor so much as an illustration that CU name change FAQs are pretty standardized. All those credit unions probably did the same Google search I did and realized the wheel didn't need to be reinvented.

Tate,
Speaking of Amplify (see Jeffry's FAQ list above) in my opinion, they did EVERYTHING right with their name change. This from their FAQ:
"We have worked for more than two years now to build a convergence of technology, communications, systems and service capabilities, and combined it with our passion for serving our members and our communities. The result is a new approach to business and lifestyle that goes “Beyond Banking.”
They really did -- BEFORE changing their name to Amplify. Pictures of their completely redesigned branches were in CU Times Magazine last week. They served the IBM Texas employees since 1967 and have expanded their field of membership to much of Austin. They HAVE to be cool and on the edge. The new name truly reflects their commitment to changing their image. I love it.
Their website is less than exciting www.goamplify.com-- but if you get a chance to see their branches -- you really should. The experience sounds amazing. The community seems to have embraced it -- can't find any negative press.
I remain,

Culture Consultant,

Denise

I agree. I like the Amplify name, brand and manner in which they've handled themselves.

Update: There were a handful of angry members who tried to derail the name change from "University of Iowa Community Credit Union" to "Optiva" by claiming irregularities in the member vote. The Iowa Division of Finance investigated and issued its ruling, saying that the vote was conducted legitimately and there is no basis to the claim. Not that this is much of a surprise, since the client hired one of the nation's larger accounting firms to conduct the vote.
The credit union officially becomes Optiva on March 1.

Jeffry,
This just in. From the Iowa City Press-Citizen:
Opponents of the planned University of Iowa Community Credit Union name change are asking for a new election on the proposal Feb. 28.
A petition containing 151 names was delivered to the credit union's main office Tuesday. The appeal is in response to the credit union's planned name change to Optiva Credit Union on March 1. The petition states that the election was unfair and the current name should be kept, said Tim Taffe, a credit union member opposed to the change. The petition also asks for the credit union to end its bank conversion program.
The name change had been approved in an election Oct. 4. Opponents of the name change are alleging the election was illegal.
No action in response to the petition has yet to be determined, said Jim Kelly, UICCU senior vice president of marketing.
FROM ME: I understand the credit union's business reasons for wanting to change the name but I also love to see common bond still alive and kicking.
http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007702070306

This IS an interesting thread.
Allow me to add a different perspective.
I am not a "thingnamer" but I do happen to have a background in language, particularly English (and a bit of Greek and Latin). I also happen to be a member of "the client" that is the topic of this thread, though I was NOT involved in the name selection.
I like the new name "Optiva" in most regards. Certainly it is a bit unfortunate that that which makes it similar to "optimistic" and "opportunity" also lends itsself well to "optics" and "optical" and I SEE that connection. I can also agree with Denise that the name really doesn't speak to "the best of our past".
On Jeffry's side, I do like the use of vowels. One of the peculiar advantages of this name (besides the obvious ease of trademarking a "unique" name) is in its dissimilarity to other names in this industry. "First" this, "Community" that, "National" blah blah blah, they all sound the same.
To me, they sound like big brick buildings (which is based on typical constuction of the type of institution with such a name, I know) but when the name itsself sounds institutional, that gets away from how the Credit Union sees its business.
A Credit Union is not an "institution" per se, it is a group of PEOPLE. Choosing a name substantially different from the norm disassociates us from that brick building feeling (which may be why a latinate was chosen).
On the other hand, changing a name usually has more to do with a focus on the future rather than the past anyway.
One other point in any naming process is that the namer usually has a list of things they DON'T want. My parents didn't want to give me a name that didn't have a shortened form because theirs don't. The new name has the same kind of reaction embedded within it. Moving from a name that is VERY specific to a name that is definitely not specific.
While the past relationship with the University (and the future relationship) is VERY important to the organization, the Credit Union IS NOT the University. In that regard, this name change is more about creating a new brand than it is about renaming an old one. The old brand was dominated by the University because it was the University's brand bringing a part of that into the new name could actually be counterproductive.
An example of Weber's work that is very similar but kept a piece of the past was "Veridian Credit Union", also in Iowa. Though I don't care for that one quite so much. Despite the connection the past, the "story" behind the name, and the similarities to "verdant" and "veritas", and despite the similarities to "Optiva" (no pre-existing meaning, short, the "v", etc) it has a very different feel to it.
The naming process for Veridian was very similar, but for two BIG differences:

Timing - The vote was held in the midst of a politically charged atmosphere surrounding mid-term elections.

and Location - Iowa City is a very political town.
All that aside, the only thing that really matters is that "the client" made the decision and the membership (despite a few vocal opponents) approved it.