For example, a marketing professor from Columbia’s Business School (Bernd Schmitt, Ph.D.) commented that “when a product is launched its name is only part of a multimillion-dollar marketing campaign that also involves advertising, research, and social media” (Colapinto, 2011, 41). And while this is certainly true, he goes on to argue that “the name is just a starting point for a brand. The most important branding decision is more about brand strategy, distribution channels – where are the customers you want to reach” (Colapinto). However, Dr. Schmitt is not emphasizing a key part of the brand naming process. If brand name creation is done correctly, the company and the team explicitly address brand strategy and target customers during the creation of the brand name. This makes it is possible to save a large amount of money down the road because the company didn’t complete each stage of the marketing process in a silo. The more companies collaborate and horizontally structure their teams, ideas, and organization during the brand naming process, the more integrated the overall strategy and the less work that has to be done later. These issues would already be addressed during the brand strategizing that took place when the name was created. (Read more about the silo problem in management)

And, although Mr. Colapinto does defend this perspective with examples like F. Scott Fitzgerald who originally wanted to call his iconic “The Great Gatsby” the “Trimalchio in West Egg,” it’s important to realize that the strengths of a well thought out name go far beyond simple consonance and alliteration (although these can be important components). A branding strategy really should be derived and agreed upon during brand name construction. A name essentially embodies aspects of the strategy – while many people might not think much more beyond the brand name, names tend to appeal or repel them on a subconscious level.

Finally, we would argue that brand naming is a dangerous dance between creativity and efficiency. We are big believers in “out there” ideas and some of the great brainstorms that can stem from them. But trademark screening and brand name architecture design tend to be the more challenging and no less important parts of the process, especially when talking about global brands. Our team is more well-rounded because of the requirement to factor in the practical realities of IP protection and the need for global, cultural, and linguistic acceptability. While team members are creative, artsy, and right-brained, they also are grounded in the necessity of developing brand names that are legally available and resonate with different targets around the world. If managed properly, recognizing these constraints can actually sharpen rather than dampen our creative focus, reinvigorating us all and resulting in some truly amazing new name ideas that work in concert with a cohesive brand strategy and pass all legal and linguistic hurdles.

The Naru (Naming Guru) has emerged from the naming reflecting pool to finish sharing his/her branding perspectives from earlier this month.

5b.) Literal / descriptive names are better than emotional names when developing specific product names underneath a family brand.

While emotional, short & snappy brand names should establish strong connections with consumers (e.g., Northface, Nike), too many names of this ilk in one’s brand name portfolio tend to dilute brand building efforts. This type of name works well to establish a new product family’s tone and the brand’s “ambiance.” However, when a family brand  adds additional products and line extension names, it is more effective to stay simple and use literal or descriptive names. At this point, it becomes more about communicating what the additional products are and their key benefits to better establish the family brand, than it is to risk creating potential confusion by launching more brand-like names within the family.

6) There is no such thing as a perfect name.

William Shakespeare has an excellent quote that reads, “Striving to better, oft we mar what’s well.” If we can get past the old English, it’s the “perfect” reference to modern naming. At NameStormers, there is a policy to work with a customer until that customer is happy and it has served us well, resulting in over 80% of our business in recent years coming from repeat customers. Sometimes, it’s well worth the extra effort to really flesh out all the possible creative and viable name options, but not necessarily to find that one name that everyone loves. Striving to find that one unobtainable “perfect” name often ends up diverting the creative effort towards name candidates that no one hates but that no one is really passionate about either. Far better to end up with a name a few are passionate about initially, and that has the potential to excite others when the right window dressing is wrapped around it (a logo, copy and/or advertising), than push a mediocre name that will more than likely produce lackluster customer response.

7) Names with the greatest potential often have the most glaring weaknesses.

This really ties back to the memorability point from last week. Names that are risky often tend to be memorable. Take Google, Starbucks or even the Coppertone QuickCover name. Perhaps, from the Quick Cover name alone, you don’t immediately understand that Coppertone is releasing a new type of sunscreen spray that goes on faster and with less mess than their standard lotion. Many of Coppertone’s consumers tend to be families, and some of the company’s messaging targets mothers of young children. What if a mom was to look at the name “QuickCover” and think, “I don’t want something that is quick, I want something that is strong, protective, and powerful.” Or, “This lotion is going on my 1-year-old who has sensitive skin. Is the spray going to irritate his skin or not afford adequate screening, even though it is fast and convenient?” In reality, “QuickCover,” without the proper context,  could alienate some consumers; however, the name does telegraph a key benefit many might find compelling and memorable. Coppertone also mediated the risk associated with the name through their packaging – including the “Lotion Spray” trailer and the SPF 50 label right after the “QuickCover” name. It reassured those mothers who may have been more reluctant to try it while still conveying the new point of differentiation: that this line extension allows you to “quickly cover” your child. While names that seem too focused on a specific benefit or single emotion might raise concerns during the selection process, they often stand to have the greatest pay-off. With the aid of the right “window dressing” and context, names with a glaring weakness  often become less risky while still being sticky and memorable.

More to come during the next pondering from the Naru.

Click here to read Part I of this installment (this is Part II).

One of the special educational services NameStormers offers is access to the sage naming philosophies of the revered Naru (Naming Guru). (The identity of the Naru is protected so he/she can go about day-to-day life without being chased down the street by marketers and branding strategists demanding one-on-one audiences.)

1) Think like a customer, not like a product developer. (Would you have ever named a computer “Apple,” a shoe “Nike,” or a coffee “Starbucks”?)

Customers need to connect with a name, often on an emotional level, in order to connect with a brand. There are no “how to’s” for forcing customers to identify with a name, just like there is no formula to find people you like and who will like you in return – it’s just a mutual “feeling.” Customer-centrism is often better described as a team ideology to really get inside customers’ shoes. Asking questions like, what do I (the customer) really need? What would make my life easier? What problem can this product solve that I don’t even realize I face? While this may sound more intangible than actionable, Corporate Culture and Performance (as cited on Thinking Like a Customer) credits customer-centric organizations with a 36% higher ROI (return on investment) than their industries’ mean performance. As for naming strategy, start with how you would describe your target market. If they’re a younger, funkier group, focus on names that resonate with that demographic.

2) Memorability, not likability, is what it is all about.

If, when testing a group of names, one name consistently ranks as “liked most” many people would consider that a strong, favorable indicator. Likability is NOT the end all be all. What good is a name that is well-liked if no one can remember it? Presently, in the day of Facebook and other powerful social networking tools, if you forget the name of that one person you really wanted to follow-up with, chances are you can remember enough about them to find their contact information on Facebook without too much trouble. Products and services do not always have the luxury of context clues. Memorability is the one measure that always counts with customers. If they can’t remember the name of a product, the chances of them effectively telling others about it, much less coming back to get it for themselves, is slim to none. (Check out what Mike Carr, NameStormer’s CEO, says to the American Marketing Association (AMA) in June 2009 on memorability.)

3) Passion from a few is more important than consensus from all.

We all have experience with customer reviews – the people who post them either seem to love the products/services they review or hate them. Just like in life, not every person who sees your name is going to love it. That’s okay. As a matter of fact, it’s better that way. Chances are, you’re polarizing those who fall nowhere inside your consumer segment. As long as the name resonates with that segment, and leads to people who post at least once a day about how much they love everything about that product and name, then the name is doing exactly what it was designed to do – attract customers.

4) Controversial names are better than safe names.

This really ties back to memorability. Names that turn heads, drop jaws, make statements, and/or lead to scathing commentary on that one obscure blog that hasn’t praised anything in 10 years, are okay. Controversial names make waves, create buzz, and do a lot of work for you with little to no support from marketing dollars. While these sorts-of names do have inherent advantages, we don’t necessarily advocate creating a name that is divisive just for the sake of creating contention. Controversy doesn’t have to be the focus, but it also doesn’t have to be a reason to drop a name either.

5) Emotional names are better than literal / descriptive names when developing a new brand.  The reverse is true when developing specific product names underneath a family brand.

Think about politicians. As much as they rely on area-experts, and call academicians to share their quantitative research so they can know, unemotionally, through numbers exactly what they should and should not vote for, that is rarely what they use to decide how to vote. Talking to many academicians at one of the top-tier research universities in the United States, they recount that politicians think they want empirical research to tell them what to do and how to craft policy, but time and time again, they vote and create this policy based on pure emotion. Doctorates from vastly different disciplines recount how much more effective a personal story filled with emotion and angst was at swaying politicians’ votes than the most compelling research they had seen presented. Naming for a new brand is largely the same. It’s much easier to connect with customers through their heart strings than through their cerebellum – emotionally evocative names are typically much more effective for new brands.

The Naru is off to meditate, reflect, and gain additional insight. Stay tuned for the Naru’s next installment.

“Consumers are buying private label food and drink products in greater numbers, typically because these products represent better value” (Mintel, The Private Label Food and Drink Consumer, Dec. 2010). But, is this causation or correlation? Are consumers knowingly buying private labels in larger quantities because of their perceived value, or is something else driving the increase?

This same Mintel study identifies several private label names (e.g., Target’s Archer Farms and Dominick’s/Safeway’s Lucerne) where more consumers believe they are actually buying a national brand  than a private label.

While part of this perception is certainly due to clever packaging and well-crafted brand-building strategies, we believe that some of the credit clearly goes to the name. Take for instance two other names that are quickly identified as private labels among almost all consumers: Walmart’s Great Value and Supervalu’s Shop ’n Save. Are any of us really surprised at this? Is there any doubt that a name like Archer Farms just inherently has more national brand potential than a name like Great Value?

But what is also interesting is this takeaway from the Mintel study: “most consumers do not perceive a clear difference between the quality of branded products and those sold under a retailer’s private label” (Mintel, Dec. 2010). This same conclusion has been reported in the press and other studies, with seemingly increasing frequency in recent years. Some herald this as foreshadowing the inevitable demise of national brands. Yet others point to the premium prices, incredible customer loyalty and high margins that certain brands continue to command today (e.g. Apple, REI, Ferrari & Tiffany’s).

So what does all of this mean?  It may mean that national brands have not just an opportunity but an absolute obligation to better differentiate themselves from private label competition. The competition is becoming savvier with respect to brand-building and much better at developing private label names that rival the best national brand names out there.

We do both. We help retailers of all sizes develop strong private label names with the potential to usurp the incumbent national brand’s dominance.  We also help small to large manufacturers and service providers, in both the B2C and B2B arenas, create new brand names that engage, connect emotionally, differentiate and build strong loyalty and preference in a market.  Let us do the same for you.

We recently helped develop the CorFire™ name and a corresponding naming architecture for SK C&C. Here is a little background:

The CorFire solution suite lets retailers, phone companies and others deliver mobile commerce to their customers, today. The CorFire team has over eight years of real world experience providing systems that seamlessly serve half a million consumers in all aspects of mCommerce.  While others are talking about trials, CorFire is talking about implementation, right now, with a complete family of proven, reliable solutions.

The “Cor” in CorFire comes from the Latin for “heart,” as in the central, indispensible, essential elements of a mobile commerce infrastructure. CorFire provides solid, strong, enduring and robust solutions.

The “Fire” in CorFire is about ignition, about launching an industry that will change the way we all live. “Fire” is also about action and power, about helping companies rapidly deploy their all-encompassing mobile commerce solutions. The CoreFire team empowers customers to get to market quicker, with a more comprehensive solution, ahead of their competition. Retailers, banks, credit card companies and others will capture market share now and establish themselves with first-mover advantage.

CorFire is cool and edgy, not stodgy or old-school.  It is about proven solutions, not prototypes or trials.  CoreFire is fun, agile, exciting, fast-moving, responsive and energizing.

Join CorFire and give your customers a ride they will never forget.

Live Life Mobile!

We believe a name like CorFire will give SK C&C  an extra edge when marketing their products and services. Almost all of our clients have found that spending a little time and money upfront on a new name and naming architecture gives rise to well thought out, powerful brands that help telegraph their company’s compelling differentiators.

This bolsters the case for building strong brands. Take organic products or products with a vested green interest for example.

Many green products have negative connotations with consumers because the product category is so saturated that consumers can’t distinguish between which products are truly environmentally-friendly and which are not. I tend to be a consumer who tries to actively buy eco-friendly products and support local business, but…surprise! According to a Brandweek article from August 2010, glass actually requires up to nine times as much fossil fuel to transport and takes up to 14 times the amount of space in landfills. Additionally, only about 28% of glass actually gets recycled. Organic products delivered in thin, plastic containers that don’t contain Bisphenol A (which is suspected of impeding infant brain development) are arguably more environmentally-friendly. Consumer misconception one.

Additionally, anytime I forget to take reusable cloth bags with me to the grocery store, I always request paper. My mentality being – paper bags are biodegradable, plastic ones are not. That being said – paper bag creation flattens millions of acres of forests and uses a significant amount of energy and chemicals. Forgotten side effect two.

Popular messages matter. Even false public perceptions can shape a market, or at the very least shape purchasing patterns within it. Seventh Generation’s (the developer of mainstream, eco-friendly cleaning products) co-founder and chairman perpetuates a third misnomer, “Consumers have come to believe that local is always better, but increasing research shows that, in many cases, [it’s not better] because of the energy inefficiencies involved in transporting local food.” I don’t agree with that – how is it less efficient to transport something from 5 miles versus 5,000 miles away?

For consumers, the point is to consider all of these messages in the context of who says them. For marketers, the point is to be forthcoming or risk alienating your target market. Of course a company selling organic baby food in plastic bags is going to “poo poo” glass containers. Obviously, there is a downside to biodegradable paper bags – the trees it takes to make them. Which shortcoming outweighs the other – the plastic bags filling up landfills or replantable trees? Finally, of course Seventh Generation is going to say that local markets are inefficient– those are their competition! The point is, brand messaging matters. From a marketing perspective, it’s the most legitimate way to inform the public about your product or service. From a consumer perspective, take a company’s branding with a grain of salt – it’s going to be biased. The takeaway…?

The brand naming moral: be who you say you are and select a name that authentically conveys that or the benefit you really do deliver. Customers respect authenticity in a brand name, and as Erik Drake, VP of Marketing for Stonyfield farms said “the easiest message is not always the right product.”

Why does every brand seek the role of the “popular kid?” Is it because the popular brands attract the most interest and consumers? Like the popular clique in high school, they drive the gossip and news that everyone actually wants to discuss.

However, this seems counter to general brand strategy – much less good parenting. Good names are sticky and standout. They might make people laugh, think differently about a service or product, and generally be memorable. They aren’t always pretty. They are oftentimes quirky, eccentric, and creative. Therefore, why do many brand strategies focus on the popular kid idea?

David Cameron recently wrote about the difference between a name and a brand (Branding Isn’t As Important As ‘Experts’ Say?). He described a name as generally empty-bucket – there are good attributes it can have, but the best name in the world won’t make a poor brand or product successful. A brand is kind of like a name’s street cred. You can work hard to shape it, mold it, but how well you resonate with your target audience, and the size of that audience, will ultimately impact the strength of your brand. So, while the name undeniably plays a roll, how do you gain good street cred and why does this oftentimes take the shape of trying to be popular?

Fortunately, there is actually a big difference between popularity stereotypes in high school and successful branding in business. Despite the fact that many companies seem like they will do anything to be associated with the “cool brands,” the marketplace is wonderfully voracious at sniffing out impostors. Disingenuousness is balked at – unlike the popular kids in high school, who according to Psychology Today are also the most effective liars, deceit and falsehoods are punished in the marketplace.

There are countless examples of brands which either intentionally or unintentionally have tried to be something that they just aren’t. In 1953, Ford Motor released the Edsel, a car promised to be unlike anything consumers had seen before. It was a marketing and sales disaster (amounting to a $350 million loss): what consumers got was a car that was just like all the rest, except uglier. It couldn’t live up to the hype. More currently, brands like Diesel Jeans have taken raunchy and borderline approaches to brand building. Unfortunately, while shock and awe may capture some attention, this is not a sustainable branding strategy. Quickly, it becomes overdone, or as is the case with Diesel, it fails to resonate with their target market (the whole point of any advertising campaign). Other companies like GE and Xerox have tried to sell computers over the years, but are simply unsuccessful because they deviate too far from their core competencies, their business offerings, and their brand scope and focus.

So, if trying to be something you aren’t ruins your street cred, how do you strengthen it? Starting with a memorable name that you can position well is a serious leg-up. Sustaining that edge amounts to reliably and consistently putting your company’s true colors out for display. Social Media Examiner recently published an article about 21 Ways Non-Profits Can Leverage Social Media. There are two overarching ideas from the article that could significantly impact for-profits’ branding strategy. First, a brand should really tell a story. People identify with stories they can relate to, stories are more memorable when there are characters and roles we can recount to one another, and finally throughout history humans have used stories as one of the predominant methods of communicating. If your brand communicates or at least supports its story through just its name, that leads to intuitively strong street cred.

The second idea was to create an intentional community. Social Media is the perfect tool for customers to feel like they can really get the inside scoop about a company. They can interact with real people and develop relationships, and that often proves to be a significant competitive advantage. Nine times out of ten people will choose to be loyal to those they have personal relationships with – if you’ve ever seen the reality television show Bachelor Pad, you know exactly what I’m talking about. Despite the raunchiness and selfishness pervasive on the show, like most reality television shows, there is a progression of advancement where members vote other people off, make packs, and build loyalties. None of that is new. What is fascinating is that in the final rounds, when push comes to shove and contestants have to choose between people they have business relationships and “packs” with and those they had romantic relationships with, not one person was loyal to their business relationship or “pack.” Personal relationships always trumped business ones, and that is a testament to the emphasis businesses should put on maintaining them.

So, the good news is that strong brand strategies should put no more emphasis on being part of the “popular clique” than high school kids should. Being authentic, consistent, and forming strong relationships is simply the foolproof method to breeding successful brands.

The National Center for Conservation Science and Policy (NCCSP) faced this type of challenge. As a non-profit organization out of Ashland, Oregon, it already had a presence in natural resource policy making in Washington, D.C., but was known primarily for its northwest focus. Its “alphabet-soup” NCCSP moniker also didn’t help in a city where faceless acronyms were the norm. NCCSP needed a strong, distinctive identity that would help them command attention as they spanned the nation and ultimately the globe.

After several rounds of creative, GEOS was selected as the new name. It was short and punchy and came from the Greek word for “earth” which connected nicely to the NCCSP’s expanded mission. It was simple to spell, easily remembered, and conveyed a sense of gravitas and seriousness that fit the organization’s “solid science” reputation. Additionally, it was the antithesis of a regional name – by default the “earth” affects everyone no matter where they may live.

The GEOS Institute will continue to expand its influence on policy making in Washington, D.C. under its new moniker. Its stature and mission will be easier to articulate to advocacy groups and politicians because of its new name. GEOS stepped outside the comfort zone for scientifically-oriented organization branding with a short, snappy identity that ties back to its mission, its science and its passion.

Some branding pundits argue that “masterbranding” is where it is at today.  That is, instead of developing new names for your major new offerings, just extend your existing brand name and leverage all of those brand building dollars that you have invested over the years.

While the masterbrand strategy has increased in popularity, it is certainly not a cure-all and often creates more problems than it solves.  Why you ask?  Because it ignores one of the fundamental laws of brand naming: “the strength of your brand name is inversely proportional to its scope.” Or said another way, the wider variety of  stuff you plaster your brand name on, the more you dilute it, the less control you have over it and the less clarity and focus it has in the marketplace.

But instead of taking you through examples of masterbrand strategies that are ridiculous (and there are countless examples), let’s talk about a company that got it right with a rifle-shot, focused brand name. Cerqa, a division of Nationwide Graphics, needed a name for a new web-based printing business they were launching.  Instead of trying to extend Cerqa or Nationwide Graphics, they decided they needed something that directly supported their core brand proposition. And they were able to coalesce that brand proposition down to one word: “simplicity.”  That is, they wanted to offer the simplest, most convenient way to get all kinds of things printed … quickly and easily, without the many hassles traditionally associated with print jobs.

We met with some of their key team members in their offices and, after a couple rounds of creative, helped them select a name and tagline … “Snapio: Printing Made Easy.”  The Snapio name was short and punchy, directly related to simplicity and convenience, and when coupled with our tagline suggestion, directly conveyed the essence of their brand.  We also owned the dot-com and transferred it to them at no additional fee.  So, for a total cost of less than $12,000, they ended up with a name, tag line and ready made dot-com.  To see how they are doing today, go take a peek at their website: www.snapio.com and ask yourself, would they have been better off implementing a masterbrand strategy by extending Cerqa or Nationwide Graphics, or do you think: “Snapio … Printing Made Easy” might serve them better?

She gave a speech at Idea City (the Canadian equivalent of the annual TED Conference held in the U.S.’s Silicon Valley) titled “How We Can Apply What We Learned from the Teen Girls of the ‘90s (More Specifically, Those Who Read/Interned at/Worked for Sassy Magazine) to Create a Good Magazine for Teen Girls Today, Also, This Is a Really Long Title.” The speech received a standing ovation. All I’ve got to say is it’s a good thing no marketer got a hold of that title.

Being relatively apathetic towards fashion, I don’t understand the implication of 90% of that title. However, the comedy behind “…Also, This Is a Really Long Title” is priceless. It provides context. It gives me an emotion I can recognize. It taps into the right side of my brain.

Sometimes we need more.

Branding Strategy Insider published an article this week about the advantages inherent in longer, emotional slogans because they appeal to the right side of our brains. Their shining example was Federal Express which, early in its history, spent 3 years losing $29 million trying to compete head-to-head with then air-cargo leader Emery Air Freight. FedEx finally decided to focus on the overnight piece of the air freight business, but not with a generic-sounding slogan like: “the overnight company.”  Rather, it went with something longer but much more compelling, “When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight.”  And, of course, the rest is history.

Sometimes, shorter taglines, and shorter more generic names for that matter, are less memorable and paint a hazier picture for potential customers. Take Ford’s “Drive one” or Hertz’s “Journey on” slogans for example. What do they urge me to do? They don’t forge a personal memory or connect with any of my past ones – they’re vague to the point of being dismissed and forgotten.

Countless studies address how names that tap into a storyline or address experiences that customers can relate to are powerful ways to build a meaningful brand. A study published at Yale in the field of cognitive psychology discusses the propensity humans have to “index prior experience.” It discusses how all people reason from experience, and that the difference between various reasoners depends on how they have subconsciously organized their previous experiences. Basically, we do not all think of the same things at the same time.

So, when dealing with disparate people who have unique experiences, as marketers, perhaps the best way we can build a brand is to give it more context – even if this means a 12 word tagline as opposed to a 2 word one. Take the Twisted Tea brand for example. Twisted Tea makes hard alcoholic beverages that taste like tea – from my perspective, when competing with common brands of liquor that people know they like, it takes a big leap of faith or a really good selling point to get people to use their disposable income to switch or try something new. The makers of Twisted Tea took the bull by the horns – on every bottle they print a picture of someone and the story of how much they enjoyed the drink. They also include details with both the people’s names and locations. This gives the brand a story – rather than relying on the salesperson at the local market to pitch the brand. They pitch the brand on the packaging. 100 words from customers sometimes make much more of an impact than a 2 or 3 word tagline or slogan.

The researchers from Yale and Northwestern wrote, “Inaccessible information is not information at all. Memory, in order to be effective, must contain both specific experiences and labels for those experiences” so we can find them again. Often, if we can’t remember the story, then the name, slogan and brand has missed the mark.

“When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight;” I can identify with that sentiment from Federal Express. How many times have I bitten my nails, unsure if work-related packages were going to arrive by their deadlines? The title of Tavi’s talk: incredibly longwinded (people won’t forget that) but she uses her final words to recognize that fact and make fun of it. When people remember your 12 word slogan or 4 word name because they elicit stronger emotions, you achieve more than a 1 or 2 syllable name ever could. More is sometimes just that – more.