Recently in Names
I've been sent perhaps a dozen free books on branding and marketing in the year and change I've been blogging. I've never written about them - mostly because there's rarely anything about naming or verbal branding in them.
This book doesn't have that disconnect... The Soul of the Corporation by Hamid Bouchikhi and John R. Kimberly is an impressive book. And it is almost entirely related to what I do for a living. I'd suggest that it's one of the more advanced books on the concept of corporate identity, and it is backed by a slew of research (and the Wharton School.) While I didn't read it cover to cover yet, I did read the chapters that discuss the role of identity in situations that matter to naming - such as mergers, acquisitions, the beginning of new brands, and such. All of 'em were spot on - or a least headed in the right direction. As an example - the book identifies the ingredients of Successful identity Change as:
Other interesting tidbits:
Perhaps most refreshing was the near total lack of talking-heads from major branding firms that typically populate books like these. We get to see things through the eyes of employees, stakeholders, and customers - not the guys that developed (and are defending) the brand. Who cares what we, the creators of the identity, think. If the people who live the brand don't say it then it ain't real. Bravo! Many thanks to Wharton School Publishing for the comp. I've dog-eared so many pages that it's beginning to look like there's been trouble at the printer (since most of the upper-outside corners appear to be missing.)
How do you talk about "metering" without mentioning the meter?
That was just one of the challenges we faced while working on this project. We're proud to announce another of our clients (The Automated Meter Reading Association - or AMRA) has launched their new identity. They needed a name that appealed to their core audience of senior leaders, could double as a new name for the industry as a whole, and avoided the verbal association between "meter readers" and "men in overalls" that seemed to be a bit misleading. UTILIMETRICS was launched on October 2nd after over a year of brand analysis, development, and design. Check 'em out. The AMRA/UTILIMETRICS team really impressed us with their understanding of what was needed to reestablish their brand. It isn't every day that you see an association take such a progressive step. Kudos also go to Bates Creative Group for their work on the graphic identity. Can't wait to see what's next for the organization and the technology they represent.
I'm not sure how I missed this site amongst the clutter of naming sites on the internet. An intriguing concept - using a marketplace of sorts to sell names that someone has thought of and wants to sell. If you're a great namer then this just might work...
...but I think that great naming must be in the eye of the beholder because I'm not so sure that the names being sold are the sort of thing I'd advise my clients to buy - even if I was the one to invent the terms. Consider the following:
What really got our blood flowing this morning wasn't the quality of the names themselves... it was the use of the (r) after every single name listed. You see, you can't just slap an (r) on something and have it protected. Trademarks don't work that way. You've got to file for protection in specific classes and receive notifcation from the US government. NameSale has never done this for any of the listed names (that we can find.) They did file for protection on their own name - but that lapsed on July 7, 2005... meaning that the (r) after their own name isn't there legally either. It's a Monday so I've almost got enough ire to slap "NameSale" in my own website name just to prove a point. Sadly "The ThingNameSaler" looks absolutely horrific and makes no sense at all. It was a good idea though, no? Maybe I could sell ThingNameSaler.com(r) and make a fortune! What should the folks at NameSale have done? Well - if they wanted protection in the US they should've used (tm) or (sm.) Perhaps someone over in Sweden can search the PRV and tell us whether some of these were actually registered over yonder. We're guessing that since there's money involved in both filing and searching that neither was done for these names... Come on people! If you're going to play in the naming space at least come with your B game. (Actually, the names provided aren't bad ones... they're just not great names. It's obvious that many of the names in the list were rejected by clients of theirs and they're just trying to recycle them. They're just going about it a little backwards.) If you want to have more fun just check out The Wayback Machine.You can see how the list of names has evolved over the years. Interestingly enough, the Juventure name hasn't sold since late 2001. (But maybe this post will be the one to push it into the sold column!) Good luck in the sale of the domain NameSalers! We'll check up later in the year to see what's goin' on.
What would happen if Saddam's "Mother of All Wars" fell in love with Putin's "Father of All Bombs?"
"Mother of All" has become a trendy way of saying "best" or perhaps "will redefine the meaning of" (though the latter doesn't feel particularly prone to trendiness.) How does this relate to naming? Well, there's the obvious fact that both Saddam and Putin used these lofty words to refer to important things (okay, so they weren't really products, but they still needed names...) And there's the more relevant fact that "MoA" has been used thousands of times in products and services since it was coined. MoA appears to be more commonly used in commerce than FoA - at a ratio of about four or five to one. Of particular interest to me is the fact that (as far as I can tell) there are exactly zero products that use the phrase "Mother of All" in their names that have become wildly successful - other than the originally referenced war, of course. I predict that we'll see similar results from "Father of All" in the coming years. We may even see it become more popular than MoA for a while. But I'd be willing to wager that no product with FoA or MoA in its name will ever crack the top 100 spots on Amazon or any other reputable mass retailer. Could it have something to do with the fact that the terms are typically used tongue-in-cheek? Or that they're too closely linked to pop-culture and prone to becoming dated too quickly? Or is it that the logical impossibility of something becoming the mother or father of anything *after the thing is already born* is just too goofy to consider seriously? I'll leave you with this thought. How is it that "The Father of All Bombs" could be invented more than a half-century after the nuclear bomb (a much more powerful weapon) was dropped? It seems that the FoAB is more like the smaller, better behaved nephew of the atom bomb, doesn't it? But "The Nephew of All Bombs" just doesn't have much oomph... So much for truth in advertising....
(No, We Still Don't Like Acronyms.)
Why? Because except in rare instances they're forgettable, confusing, costly, and time intensive. ...among other things, of course. Forgettable because most acronyms (and initialisms) have no connection to the idea behind the letters. Confusing because if someone wants to get to know the organization or product behind the letters they've got to learn two different names - the abbreviated one and the long, drawn-out one. Additionally, the pronunciation of an acronym or an initialism is often not intuitive. Consider:
Costliness... Supporting two unique identities - the short and long version - takes money. It appears in the use of different names for internal and external documentation, or in different logo presentations, or in linear inches when writing job descriptions for publication in the paper, or - relating to the last issue listed - in time spent explaining what the acronym means. Time is a significant disincentive for the use of acronyms. If the goal is to do something productive with the hours in your day and your staff is forced to expalin the acronym every time they say it to someone new... aren't you losing a bit of money every time conversation is side-tracked? Yes, you could argue that the additional conversation is about your company so it's "all good" but wouldn't you rather have a conversation better targeted to what you want from the person you're talking to? If it takes 15 seconds to clarify your name each time you say it and you say your name to ten new people a day... that's 2.5 minutes a day or 12.5 minutes per week per staff member. Almost an hour a month of lost time multiplied across your entire sales staff. It seems to me that it is better to have the listener ask a question about what you can do for them or the value of your offerings intead of asking the most basic question (i.e. "Umm... what's that mean?") Acronyms have a way of making people feel stupid - they're the professional version of "AMonkeySaysWhat?" - forcing us to stop the speaker to clarify an issue that the speaker should've addressed or let the speaker go on as we focus on the fact that we have no clue what was just said. There's an old military prank that guys pull on new recruits - commenting that the hardest part of the job is cleaning up after all of the spent B-1RD (pronounced "Bee One Arr Dee") fuel in the hangar. It's a rare recruit that figures it out in the first couple days. Want a few more reasons? How about these:
Nope. Unless you're fortunate enough to be in Hammond, Indiana. Those guys are easy to find. Most of the other 1.8 million "ABC Towing" hits are for other companies in other cities and states - and are entirely unrelated to the guys in Hammond. Acronyms, plainly stated, are perhaps the fastest way to become permanently anonymous in business. That said, there are exceptions. One quick look at FCUK and you'll see there are ways to get attention. But (thankfully?) there can really be only one FCUK. However, I know without even looking that even this name has been copied. I'll give ten to one odds that FUKC and FCKU are both being marketed as copycat brands... (But that is a rant for another day.) Aww heck... I couldn't resist!
Looks like the DSCC has selected the four finalists to vote on. (See yesterday's post for context.)
They are:
Quick thoughts:
Really. Maybe if they started by telling us what the slogan was supposed to do for the party and the platform we could've produced something better... That of course would require the party to have someone who knew what the heck you could achieve with a slogan. Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?
Okay, I’ve had it. We’ve all grown tired of names without vowels in the cell phone industry: Razr, Slvr, Krzr, etc. [Ed.: And don't forget the Interweb!] So today I’m trolling through luggage on the Target website and what do I find? A rolling carry-on bag called the BAUER ORGNZR.
I’d just like to say for the record that I don’t want my clothing orgnzd when I travel. If all the vowels were missing from my clothes, how would I bttn my shrt? Would my scks and shs still fit my ft? And I shudder to think what would happen to my laptop. I’d end up writing like an advertising geek, lose all my friends, and spend my waning years alone in a thrd-flr wlkp. Too sad.
...and another Stokefire name hits the market.
How do you develop a name for a green media firm without using the words "green," "eco," or any of the other current buzz-words used in the space? By focusing on how you're different and what you're trying to achieve rather than slapping a "me too" name on that blends in with the crowd. emPivot opened for business this week and is already gaining attention as the place to go to find and share new perspectives on green issues. Why emPivot? Because the founders (Chace Warmington and Thom Wallace) felt strongly that their purpose was not to spread the gospel of green to the choir, but instead to offer a place where real people can discuss every aspect of green - whether they're passionate supporters, detractors, or on the fence. This is about empowering a change in perspectve - a change in opinions - or a change in lifestyle. The concept of being green doesn't move all that much, but our understanding and perspective can change rapidly. While "green" was off-limits for the name, it was still in play for the tagline - something we proposed using to contextualize a name that didn't immidiately shout its purpose. (You'll note that Google, Yahoo, Kodak, Exxon, Sears... and just about every other great brand in the world... doesn't disclose their market in their name. They use advertising, taglines, and other tools to get the context across. We think we're in good company here.) Stokefire developed both the name and the tagline for the new company (a brand owned by Ecofusion.) The result: emPivot: View Green From Every AngleWe also developed alternate taglines for future use - and we'll trumpet those as emPivot grows their brand over the coming years. We'll post a full case study and press release later this month - and will have even more information available once our redesigned corporate website sees the light of day in September. Great job thus far Thom and Chace... looking forward to more great things from your team!
This is only loosely related to naming. And yet I find myself unable to stop myself from writing about it. Perhaps you can scream at me (like a banshee?) and I'll stop.
According to Web sources, a banshee is a wailing, weeping, screeching, or screaming harbinger of death. So why is the term coming up in business? Perhaps as a warning to those that make bad business decisions? Or because of the reference to Celtic mythology? Sadly, no. Mostly it's just because people don't know what the word means. There's "Grow Business Like A Banshee" from the American Chronicle - perhaps a reference to the fact that when you tell people they're going to die they're more apt to buy life insurance? Chet Holmes (CEO of Chet Holmes International) wrote the article without a single reference to the helpful screeching babes. Based on the article it seems, in fact, that the term "like a banshee" is actually a stand in for "people who can multiply by two." Who knew? There's someone going by the handle "daibebtates" on 43things that wants to "learn to type like a banshee." This is one guy I do *not* want to have in the cubicle next to me. Though not technically business related, there's a woman who met a guy who'd "want to kiss and make out like a banshee" but never went any further. I'm tellin' you... death can be such a turnoff. Makes sense to me that after shouting into a woman's mouth about morbid stuff I'd be in absolutely no mood for hanky panky. Only related to business when preceded by "doing my...", Kitty Foreman of "That 70s Show fame shouted "I have to pee like a banshee" as she rushed to the bathroom. We are left to wonder why we heard nothing from her once the door shut. Professors even fall victim to misuse - saying things like "This thing will be spinning like a banshee" as if it were a subclass of dervish. Or perhaps a brand of wooden top. The real cause for this post was something read to me by my wife (honest!) that came from O, The Oprah Magazine. The name of the piece was "Network like a banshee." Is it just me, or does everyone else also picture someone showing up, grabbing a beer, a snack wrapped in a greasy napkin, then turning to the crowd and shouting, HI EVERYONE! I'M TATE! YOU ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!C'mon - with all Oprah's money you'd think she could hire editors that catch this stuff... At least Yamaha got the name/sound connection right. (Though the whole ATV as symbol of impending death is a little distasteful to me given the safety issues it has...) Lesson in naming:(?) Don't use a word just because it feels right. Make sure you spell it right and don't unintentionally choose a homonym or eggcorn that makes you look foolish or uneducated. The ear isn't always right...
Ever want to have a big-time title? The Republicans are ready to let you earn one. For five million dollars.
Yep. Five big, big, big ones donated (or rather offered to the RNC to sponsor the Republican National Convention) gets you:
(Perhaps this is because as the minority party they figure someone on the right side of the fence should get a co-chair title.) And the Democrats, you might ask? What are they offering up? For the bargain price of $1 million you can have:
The adjective in question? Presidential. If I were going to donate a million bucks I think the more obvious title would be "Rich." It's a good thing that the title the Dems selected doesn't suggest that power and influence can be bought, isn't it? If you don't have that top level of funds available you can consider offering up a bit less. Both parties have developed nifty - and strangly similar - levels and titles. Check this out:  What does this tell us? Perhaps:
You want to see a spike in donations? You want to get press? You want to get people talking? Here's how: Use controversial platform topics as your funding levels. Imagine the Democrats having an "Equality Advocate" level or the Republicans with a "Protectors of Marriage" sponsorship. Sure it is divisive. But imagine the power of being able to show that there are 5,000 people or companies willing to not only say that they are for (or against) gay rights, but show they are committed with a dollar sign next to their name. You want more notice? Add in right-to-life issues, death penalty, and the like. How many churches and community groups wouldn't be throwing dollars at the campaigns to show their support for a cause that mattered to them? Will it happen? I'll almost guarantee that it won't. But I'd love to actually see a party or candidate take a stand like that. If it matters to the candidate/platform then why not allow the constituency to show their support for the idea? We'd know real fast whether or not an issue had real support. Are you with me? Interested in more on this topic? Earlier this year I wrote a post about the terms the individual candidates used for their fund-raising efforts. I must admit that even the worst ideas used by the candidates can trump the best the DNC and RNC have pulled together. Is it because the categories were developed by committee? Probably. Add another nail to the coffin that contains focus groups and working committees, please. (Though "Mile High Plus" is a pretty impressive name to be approved by committee... hard to believe someone didn't choke on the sexual connotation.)
While researching our peers in the naming industry we came across an interesting situation. Every month we swing by all of the naming sites we can find to see where the competition and the industry as a whole is headed. You'd be amazed what you can anticipate by looking at the lists of recently named companies out there. (Evocative single-word names, anyone?) Or the stances that companies take on what sets them apart. (In this industry attitude is apparently just about everything. Well, that and your portfolio.)
Anyhow, we came across a site that listed a name that was very familiar to us. In fact, one of our friends in the naming industry had also claimed they had given a firm the same label. And when you clicked the links provided by each naming company they both brought you to the same site! How can this be? Did the two companies work together on developing the name and not tell anyone? The answer? No. It appears the following occured:
Alpha obviously selected the name as right for this client, but Beta seems to have been the originator of the name concept and was savvy enough to reserve the website. Which one counts? Legally it would seem that each has a claim to the name, though one has a claim to naming a ".COM" and the other a company. A couple weeks back I found a corporate namer that listed numerous names that were obviously fictional. (Spunkwave, anyone?) This isn't quite the same. Korwitts hadn't even reserved the websites (which were often still available, mind you) so the names were purely theoretical. In her case she's just slammed some letters together and put them on the web. There's no registration and no ability - should she have actually come up with a strong name - to defend a name as her own. So, putting aside the previous example, can someone claim credit for naming a firm if they weren't the ones to work with that firm? Does camping on a website name give you the right to claim that you named the company that buys it from you? If so, at what point does the claim of "inventing the name" not ring true? If I just write a word on my blog (e.g. "Alacabraxify") and someone comes along and uses it for their company name can I say that I named the firm? If I hire a group of punters to help come up with ideas and one of 'em says the name that we eventually use (note that we don't typically hire punters) must I say that the hired hand came up with the name? Can the hired hand claim it (barring any signed documents preventing said claim?) Where is the line? And what would you advise Alpha and Beta do to resolve this? Update 1:38 EDT - Alpha and Beta came to an agreement after this post was written but before it was published. Beta has kept the name on their list of names they've created, but they've removed the client link. Anyone out there have an opinion as to whether or not this is satisfactory?
It's getting pretty crowded in here, ain't it?
Athol Foden - head namer over at the descriptively-named Brighter Naming - has started up the Name Awards blog. While I haven't yet figured out what the Name Awards have to do with the content on the blog, it is obvious that Mr. Foden has considerable experience he brings to the table. His opinions are interesting even if they're often on the opposite side of issues from the opinions we (or more accurately "I", in this case) hold. (I wasn't immediately attracted to the name Alinghi and am not a big fan of Blu-Ray.) Side note - Stokefire was named during the "blue craze" that is still echoing on today. In fact, Bluebulb was one of the early concepts we came up with. We ditched it because it wasn't deep and felt like a "me too!" response to the naming environment. Mr. Foden is asking interesting and unusual questions - such as how you would market the Osama brand in light of recent world events, and how Adam and Eve got their names. (We think we might know a guy who could help with that last one. But he hasn't talked for a while...) Welcome to the conversation Mr. Foden. Looking forward to getting to know you through your words...
To those of you who are on the executive team, board, and who assisted in the development of today's newly named association... actually now an alliance... I just wanted to publicly say "thank you." You did a great job coming to a unanimous decision after so many diverse opinions were voiced. Having so many people who start with diverging opinions coming together to further their organization is a beautiful thing. Especially when you select such a versatile name. Can't wait for the launch later this year.
Hope you enjoyed both the process and the result. Waiting is the hardest part. Especially when we're wanting to talk about you out in the open already. Kudos! And to everyone else... you'll have to wait a few months until we pull the wraps off this one. But the wait will be well worth it.
We talk to many marketing, branding, and graphic design firms in our area and frequently ask about where they got their name. Typically the answer is something like "It sounded cool" or perhaps "we kept searching until we found one where the website was available and made a bit of sense."
Today I spoke with Bruce Gemmill, president of Campbell and Associates - a marketing firm located in Herndon Virginia. In addition to being an all-around good guy who is involved in the local chamber and other organizations, he had a nice story to tell about his firm. I was curious how a guy with the last name of Gemmill might end up becoming president of a boutique marketing firm with the name Campbell. I was guessing he'd bought it from someone. I was wrong. As Bruce told me, he'd spent years leaving messages and talking with administrators for his clients - and invariably people would respond with "Thank you Mr. Campbell." As noted above, that is not his last name. His last name, Gemmill, is a name not many people have heard of - and it sounds awfully close to Campbell when heard over the phone - or even in person. Rather than spend the remainder of his career correcting people on his last name, Bruce went with the flow. He named his firm "Campbell and Associates" and in the process ended up with a name that is highly memorable even though it appears on the surface to be common. Sometimes it isn't the name itself that lends character to the company. Sometimes it's the story. Okay, often it is the story. (In fact, we tend to prefer the story behind the name to be at least as powerful as the name itself. It lends strength to the brand.) Bruce's selfless act of removing his own last name from his firm showed a lot about the company's core values. And it gives him a nice story that helps people remember who he is, what his firm's name is, and even provides a peek at his own persona. Kudos, Bruce. Thanks for taking the extra thirty seconds to tell me your story. Hope others enjoy it as much as I do.
We're occassionally asked how important it is to have a unique name - as in one that exists nowhere else in the world. And our response hasn't changed much over the years.
Unique in your industry is likely important. Unique in the world is not. While it isn't necessarily a bad thing to coin a new term, it certainly makes a naming project more challenging, and the resulting marketing campaign will likely cost more. (You're not only paying to put your name out there, you're also having to use 'air time' to explain what it means or ensure that people spell the name correctly.) How hard is it to come up with a unique term? Taking a look at the US Patent and Trade site we find that it's actually pretty easy to find a combination of letters that have only used once. Just starting with the letter "A" we quickly discover some unique opportunities. There are 1,326,511 documents filed with the letter "A" standing alone. (Note that this doesn't mean that the word is in the name, only that it is in the filing somewhere - perhaps in the description... but since we're looking for something unique we don't even want to see the word in the description.) Moving on th "AA" we find we're down to 1122 documents. AAA gives us 780, AAAA has 28, and AAAAA finds just 3 filings. If you want to find an existing unique name you're looking at SIX letter As in a row. And it looks like there've been a few people who noticed that six As were taken and moved even further. Check out ACTIVE LIQUID MINERALS AAAAAA, STAR-ZYME A AAAAAAAAA, and even more impressive, "AAAAAARGH! Inc" - the registrant for the mark "COMEDYCITY." While computers are getting better at suggesting the right spelling for a name we're searching for, we still occasionlly rely on correct spelling to find things - such as in a phone book, an off-line index, or even when searching online in a search engine like the USPTO. Imagine having a name like "AAAAAARGH!" How would you explain how to find your firm online? Would you say "Just type in ARGH with six As and an exclamation?" (That's the way we'd do it if we were saddled with the name, but it's still a mouthful, and who is to say anyone would remember the number six here?) Maybe it's better to say "Sextuple-Argh!"? A decent rule of thumb: If your average ten-year-old doesn't know the short-hand for the number of letters (e.g., "double" or "triple") then you've probably put too many of the same letters in. Anything more than three in a row is hard to count quickly, and the short-hand for them would be unfamiliar. How many Americans could find an organization that went by the shorthand - "Nontuple-A?" Unique can be found through the use of repetition, yes. But a company that works this hard to be unique may be expecting too much from their audience. And additionally, in a world where every website misspelling is camped, having seven or eight As in your name just means that you'll lose traffic to the guy with six or ten of 'em. Originality ain't easy. And it takes more than math to get there.
We don't have the answer yet, but we're checkin' it out.
We've identified a few patterns and we're lookin' to see which one takes the cake as the all-out-overused champion of them all. We'll look to Seth Godin's list, TechCrunch, and a few other places to see what we find. Is it:
My peeve? I'm pickin' truncation. Flickr be damned. And I'll go out on a limb and pick truncation as the most common fault as well. C'mon folks - show that you care! We might not be able to stop the madness, but at least we can show we won't go quietly. Results of our back-of-the-napkin research to come next week.
The folks over at Igor's Snark Hunting site have been sending us a bit of traffic due to the fact that our site may have had a bit of social networking overkill.
We have a popular post here from February that discusses and rates the trends in Web 2.0 naming and might be of interest to you. But if you're clicking through just to see the offending links you're going to be disappointed. We'd been quite fond of them as they were colorful, pretty, and acted as a nice visual indicator that one post was ending and another was beginning. (Okay, so when I think about it a bit more I've gotta agree they were just clutter and there for absolutely no reason at all... but still... It made me feel popular. Or at least potentially popular.) Sadly, I have thin skin (and little talent) when it comes to my blog-designing skills so I have put my tail betwixt my legs and removed the ninety-dozen links that got the hump-backs on my case. I was going to say something witty here about the hatin' being directed at us due to Igor's fear of fire, but realized just before I hit the "publish" button that Mary Shelley might've risen from the dead to correct me. So, Igorians... if you think of any appropriate comebacks you can feel free to pretend they were hurled by us and be suitably humbled and intimidated. Yeah. We roll like that. Maybe it'll have something to do with 'stooping to your level' (Oooh snap!) Though we'd appreciate it if you could make it a bit more witty and significantly less obvious. We'd be more agressively peeved if it weren't for the fact that they called us "an actual blog" - thus alleviating our fears that we were only hypothetically a blog, or worse, only metaphorically blog-like. Here's to hoping that the "actualness" of our blog was not inextricably linked to our abundance of clicky bookmark art. Anyhow, thanks for the tip, Igorians. You're enabling positive change from afar. And maybe... just maybe... tomorrow I'll be back writing about names and stuff.
This Post is PG-13. Youngsters please go about your business elsewhere.
Frequent readers will know that I really do try not to slam peers in the industry over their work. I will occasionally discuss slip-ups (and we've pointed to a few from Landor), negative stakeholder reactions (Weber Marketing Group has been exceedingly helpful in bringing an inside look at a difficult project,) and bad decisions made by consumers. I did once tear apart a firm in New York for putting together a video that was so awful I couldn't help but watch the catastrophe multiple times to be sure I absorbed all of its horribleness. After yesterday's post and numerous comments and emails on how strange Maryanna's business was, I was prompted to look into what else she has going. Lo, she's a corporate namer. ...With an online portfolio containing "just a few of the many names created at Biz Naming Central." This is the part of the story where things begin to go badly for Maryanna. Sadly it appears that it's the start of the story - and it pretty much stays on track from what we can see. Maryanna has listed a slew of names - many of which are highly evocative. And most of which (again sadly) are fatally flawed. Also note that we couldn't find a single name on the list that was connected to a business we could locate online (not even a mention of the company in an online phonebook!) But maybe we didn't look hard enough. It is obvious that Maryanna is a highly creative individual - we at Stokefire just happen to believe that creativity must be tempered by practical and experienced analysis, and we find that the latter is severely lacking. Here are a few (or more) examples:
The name? "Spunkwave." Rather than explain to you why this name is so striking to us, I will instead just list what we found in Google when we looked for the company. (I've edited the findings for our most delicate readers. If you search Google you'll likely see the beautiful/horrible truth.)
For some creativity comes easily. Sadly it often is the case in this world of specialization that creativity and hard analytical skills aren't paired in the same person. Perhaps this is the case here. And bringing this back to something a bit more related to what we do at Stokefire - we know that there are different skills required to name well. It's why we break our name generation process into multiple parts. We've found that the skills required to pull names out of thin air are different than those required to iterate on a single promising idea to find the best option. A mix of pure creatives and analytical types is required to discover, develop, analyze, adjust, and release a great name. Having all of one type results in greatly reduced chances for a strong identity. That said, we did think there were a few interesting or promising names on Maryanna's list. She's certainly got creativity. But her apparent approach puts the responsibility for knowing whether or not the creative name is a good one on the shoulders of the client. We at Stokefire feel strongly that our clients shouldn't have to know what makes a good name - that's what our expertise is for. We're not cheap - and part of what you're paying for is our ability to prevent you from (and this is going to sound really bad, but we don't mean it that way) releasing your own "Spunkwave." The names on Maryanna's list appear quite similar to the stuff that shows up during our creative sessions. Perhaps that's what the list actualy is - since there's no mention that the names are in use (only that they were created.) And for a creative list it ain't bad. But creative lists aren't what a client needs. Clients need guidance. What good is a big bunch of creative names if the client has no tools with which to measure how appropriate they are for their particular goals? Sure, it's better than a kick in the face (though that kick will often be less expensive) but what does it actually get you? More on name lists versus brand development and on the creative process... to come.
I'll be the first to admit that naming your kid takes a lot of effort, thought, and in most cases comprimise. I would even go so far as to talk with someone - perhaps a historian or psychologist - about whether or not the name has any negative connotations. You could even open up any one of hundreds of naming books that tell you what every name means - or one of dozens of websites that allow you to search for names by their meaning.
One should also take the thirty seconds necessary to ensure you're not creating a catastrophe down the road when little Albert Sammy Smith is asked for his initials. For me, naming was an intensely personal thing when it involved my own son. The question of who we wanted to honor (a great grandfather and both of his grandpas), how we wanted him to have options as to what he would use (Ted, Teddy, Theo, Theodore, TJ, etc...) to express his own personality... Now that you know my views - read this article. Yes. People really do that for a living. Once you close your mouth (or stop laughing - if you're a corporate namer) I'd love to know what you think. Is there a place for people who offer a baby naming service where the names "Liz" and "Doug" are seen as first and foremost pertaining to fat kids? (Our new intern, Liz, would prove an exception to this rule, by the way.) Sure, almost every name is going to have connections for people - but if you know a Doug from decades ago who was the brightest and skinniest kid in your 3rd grade class aren't you going to have different thoughts about the name? For me, I'm hoping that little Teddy doesn't select Theo as his preferred name. People in generations before and after mine don't understand why. But ask a Gen-Xer and you'll get the same answer every time: "Oh yeah - that's way too Cosby." If you only know one person with a name, then that name will be inextricably linked to that person in your mind. I only know one Theo - and though I did think he was pretty cool in the eighties - I don't really want that in my mind when I think of my son. I'll make my question more clear. Is there a reason to pay $350 to get someone else's prejudices and experiences applied to your own flesh and blood? Whaddaya say? Are you going to hire self-named "Nameologist" Maryanna Kowitts?
It's a rare day that we get to offer our blog readers something more than just information.
Today is a rare day. Stokefire's Southern retreat in OBX (North Carolina) just finished renovations and we didn't schedule anything there for the next three weeks on the off chance the work wasn't finished in time. The property is located in Corolla Light in the outer banks. Sleeps ten, has space for seventeen eaters (more if you eat on the couch), less than two minute walk to the beach, small shopping area, and the local private clubhouse (access is included.) While we typically only discount for business partners (and we offer a week's stay to clients engaging in major contracts) we're opening up the discount for the next few weeks to anyone that's interested in staying at our little corporate playground. So - if you're interested in staying here just tell 'em that Tate sent you and they'll agree to the discount. Naming Content: There appear to be some hard and fast rules when naming a resort home. You can pick:
And as an extra bonus, there's a mondegreen in the song that has been interpreted as:
We wanted fun, we wanted memorable, we wanted not to offend our neighbors. Check, check, and check. Done. (Should we have done a contest?)
Quite a few of our clients often call into question one of the most basic assumptions we tell them to make. The assumption? If a name can be shortened in any way - via acronyms, dropping syllables, or just using the first portion of the name - your customers will find and use it.
(The companion parable to this - that you should never try to create your own abbreviated name from your full length name unless your clients force the issue - is something I'll address another time.) Most recently a client protested that I was being overly pessimistic and that people aren't that lazy. Here's what they said in as close as I can get to an exact quote: That's an overreaction, Tate. You should have more faith in the human race, nyo? We're not that lazy.Perhaps you can guess which word I'm going to point out as proving my point. No, it isn't the apostrophe-"s" of "That's". It's "nyo." If we can't take the time to pronounce a two syllable thought ("You Know") then how can we expect ourselves to say the long version of anything? If you examine where this particular example of truncation and shortening comes from I think you'll find that it traces back something like this:
I'm sure there are linguists out there that would be upset about this for all sorts of reasons. And I'm certain there are others that show this as proof that our language is healthy and adapting. My only reason for bringing it up is to show that we're always going to try to make things easier for ourselves. It isn't General Electric, it's GE. It isn't Kentucky Fried Chicken - it's KFC. And Stokefire? You'll never see us call ourselves "SF" or any other shortening. It's one of the reasons why we don't use mid-Caps in our name. Midcaps promote the use of acronyms and abbreviations. We figure if we're going to go to the expense of creating a name for ourselves and printing it on business cards we probably shouldn't be using a name that begs to be abbreviated. After all - we try hard to get our name in front of our prospective partners and clients... why would we want to double our effort by putting two names out there? (The real one and the abbreviated one.) We endeavor to have a name that doesn't go the way of "Do You Know What I Mean" and instead begs to be sounded out. Maybe even emphasized. And we endeavor to create those for our clients. Sure, there's power in GE, KFC, and IBM - but those names have millions of dollars of marketing to keep them in the minds of prospective clients. For companies that wish to be a bit more economical with their marketing dollars it makes sense to get a name that doesn't break down into an acronym. Seems to be working well for Google, doesn't it?
I received a letter in the mail from one of my representatives yesterday. It contained a newsletter with the title "Whippletter."
As you can probably guess (since you're one of our highly intelligent readers) the esteemed Senator's last name is "Whipple" (First and middle names are Mary and Margaret.) My question: Does this cramming together of words actually do anything positive for the Senator's brand? My follow-up question: Since no guide is given to how to pronounce this munged word what would you think the pronunciation should be?
When looking for creative ways to conjoin two terms you should consider the impact to more than just the way the words look on the page. Show them to people and ask how they'd pronounce it. If people stumble (as most did when I asked around the office) then consider getting rid of the confusing bits. (This is related to a widely accepted concept - that the human brain will look for familiar patterns when trying to figure out how to pronounce something. But sometimes the model identified doesn't provide clear guidance - like the brand "Vild" - is it pronounced like "Wild" and "Mild" or like "Sild" and "Gild". Interestingly most people hit on the latter pronunciation even though the former is more common.) What do you think?
Managing expectations is one of the hardest parts of developing powerful names. We work hard at the beginning of a project to ensure that expectations are set correctly. There's a misconception that names can do absolutely everything for a company. For example, here's a (slightly modified) list of things a client wanted from their name on a recent contract - before we helped them pare it down.
Let me be very clear: Names are the starting block, not the finish line. A good name can help set you apart from your competitors - and can perhaps help with a couple other goals as well... but it cannot get you repeat customers in most situations. You cannot, I'm afraid, have a name that does absolutely everything for your company. You also cannot have a name that doesn't have at least a few drawbacks. All the best names in the business have flaws - Google sounds like baby-speak, Caterpillars are squishy and eat crops... But the names set them apart - allowing them to get noticed and position themselves versus the competition. From there the companies can take over. Memorability, evocativeness, pronunciation, strategic fit... these are things we can work on with a name. (We have twenty-six other variables we throw in there too... but you can't have a name with all thirty variables pegged at "10.") For anyone out there struggling to find the perfect name... just stop. Perfection is not attainable. When you break a name into its constituent variables some will be strong and others won't. Just ensure that the portions that you're leveraging the most for your business are associated with the strong aspects of your name and you'll be set. Forget the All-Everything name. Just try to get one that is good at something while avoiding any major pitfalls. You'll be so far ahead of most other companies that you'll forget you ever wanted anything more.
Here's a quick aside - since I'm still getting back into the swing of things after spending time with Theodore (more on the story of his name another time.)
The night before Teddy was born we went to see Garrison Keillor's Prarie Home Companion. It was a great experience and Wolf Trap is an exceptional environment to take in a show. We sat on the lawn near the front and listed to beautiful music, heard Garrison talk, and basically enjoyed ourselved on what we had been planning as our last pre-kiddo outing. ...though we had no clue how literal that was. The show ended and we walked about a mile to our car. And then sat. And the weirdest thing happened... This group of people who had a pleasant evening together turned into the rudest bunch of drivers I'd ever seen. As we attempted to get out of the parking lot we spent about ten minutes trying to catch the eye of drivers so they would let us into the exit lane. This didn't work at all since no one would look at our car. We followed this with about five more minutes of frantic waving - which we should've known wouldn't work since (as noted previously) no one was looking at us. Next step - I asked my lovely wife to ask a driver if we might cut in (since the cars were coming from the passenger side.) Sure - it took a few cars before anyone would even admit that they could hear her. (And for the record, it is remotely believable that someone might not have seen our frantic waving and yet was still allowed to drive a car - but for someone not to hear my wife say "excuse me" when both windows are rolled down and to also ignore the polite wave - that's just... yeah... rude.) But the rudeness got worse. We finally made eye contact and were able to get an acknowledgement to our greeting (probably after 20 minutes total of trying) and we asked "May we cut in?" The driver of a Lexus SUV smiled at us and said... "No. Sorry." Well... at least she apologized immediately for being rude. The next car again was with the "I can't see nor hear you" crowd. The one after that saw the whole thing and actually was very pleasant - its occupants saying "it's not like anyone will get out of here much faster by squeezing you out." A special thanks go to these kind anonymous people. However - to the folks that didn't let us in - particularly that last two... I have this lesson in naming: If you are going to be rude to other drivers while driving your own car and sitting in traffic that doesn't move - perhaps you should get license plates less memorable than "RN I HOT" and "TWITTY"Should you see them on the road please give them an appropriate "hello" from me. Wave with as many (or as few) fingers as you please. I suppose this actually does have something to do with naming for business. If you're going to put out a product that angers your customers you probably want to avoid a memorable name. This is one reason why we didn't take the "herbal Viagra" contract that came up last year. I didn't want to be the guy that named the product that caused semi-virile men to storm the gates of a product manufacturer. And I'm not a big fan of naming for obscurity. And in fairness to the ladies in both offending vehicles - perhaps they were in a hurry to get out of there because they had a woman going into labor in their car. Oh... wait... that was me.
If you attempt to make any comments on our blog in the future you'll note that we've added a CAPTCHA plug-in that will ask you to input a couple words before your post is approved.
Normally we find these programs annoying and would avoid them. Sure, it only takes an additional 5 seconds or so - and given that we've had less than a thousand valid comments on our site it would have been less than an hour and a half of time wasted for you readers. The only benefit is that it would save our precious time and effort. We use Akismet - so most of the comment spam doesn't get to us - and the stuff that gets through takes us about 30 seconds a day to eliminate. So, why are we giving reCAPTCHA a try? Because we love the name and the idea behind the company. The idea is this (taken from the reCAPTCHA website): About 60 million CAPTCHAs are solved by humans around the world every day. In each case, roughly ten seconds of human time are being spent. Individually, that's not a lot of time, but in aggregate these little puzzles consume more than 150,000 hours of work each day. What if we could make positive use of this human effort? reCAPTCHA does exactly that by channeling the effort spent solving CAPTCHAs online into "reading" books.How cool is that? This company is trying to "recapture" 150,000 hours of human labor per day. Of course their product isn't omnipresent, but still - going after that much lost productivity is admirable - and the cause is worthy. Capturing the text of books in the public domain and making them available online is an admirable goal. Thousands (or even millions) of texts can be made available to those without the ability to read or see - the digitized text can be read or translated far more easily when in electronic form. As for the name itself... It has just a touch of wit to it - since it sounds an awful lot like a New Englander saying "recapture" - and recapturing is exactly what the service does. We are recapturing words that would otherwise be lost to the printed page. And for those that are interested, CAPTCHA is an acronym/initialism coined at the turn of the century. It means: "Completely Automated Public Turing Test to tell Computers and Humans Apart", and was trademarked by Carnegie Mellon University. (And yes, "CAPTCHA" is a bit of a stretch, isn't it? Shouldn't it be CAPTTTTCAHA? Or Maybe CAPTTCHA? I suppose aesthetics count for something...) Any other naming blogs (or other blogs...) that are looking for a way to reduce comment spam and make the world a better place... I can't think of a better way to do it than getting reCAPTCHA going on your own site. Given all this, I think that an apology is no longer warranted for putting a CAPTCHA on our site. Sure, you're taking five seconds longer... but somewhere and sometime there will be someone who hears or reads that word you identified and will be unknowingly appreciative... And isn't that payment enough for your time? Wiseacres need not answer.
May 26th, 2007 at 8.30 pm
Theodore Joseph Linden was born.
Weighing in at 6 lbs 10 oz.
Congratulations Sarah & Tate!
Oh, cute! A whale naming contest!
The local CBS affilliate is having a contest to name a mother and calf that have gotten lost up the Sacramento river. Cool right? Right. Except as I seem to recall, many of these whales that wander up rivers tend not to live to see the ocean again. On the plus side, there's not much at stake here with the names. Whales probably don't care - or know - what we call them. On the down side we're going to have a whole bunch of little kids following Bonnie and Clyde - or whatever their names will be - and I don't know how easily they'll believe the whales went to live on the farm with the pet dog. So we're naming two animals that may be doing their best to off themselves for some reason. Let's make it a fun story for the kiddies! Whee! Interested in a better story about dying or dead whales? This one is my all time favorite. And it may just be the first story to ever use "Splud" to describe the sound of a whale exploding. After you read Dave Barry's version I encourage you to watch the video - especially the 30 seconds following the explosion. Bring the family! |