Gamification Engages Kids In Test Prep

“Zeos is a whole new world of standards mastery that prepares students with the skills they need to succeed on high-stakes assessments from inside a practice environment that’s anything but boring.”  Zeos prepares students in grades 3 through 10 to meet the requirements of your state and Common Core State Standards in reading/language arts and mathematics by immersing them in a standards practice environment they actually want to use.”

We applaud Pearson in continuing to make learning fun and enjoyable for students. For more information on Zeos, go to: www.pearsonschool.com/zeos

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).

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.

Our international or domestic clients with larger brand building budgets tend towards empty bucket names.  Our smaller, US-focused clients or larger clients with limited budgets tend towards the more full bucket style of name.  Which name is best for you? You decide. Let’s first talk about EMPTY BUCKET names:

1. They have less inherent meaning, which gives you an opportunity to define exactly what they mean and then own that meaning in the marketplace (e.g., Mondera).
2. They tend to be short and relatively easy to say spell (e.g. Lexus).
3. They tend to be made up words rather than real English words (e.g., Neova) which often makes them easier to register as trademarks both in the U.S. and globally.

BUT … empty bucket names’ biggest weakness is that they tend to require more of an initial investment, both in terms of time and money, to establish.  SO … let’s describe a FULL BUCKET name:

1. They tend to be either real English words or constructed from common roots that have a more explict meaning (e.g. Symmetry, Carmax).
2. They tend to convey more of a specific benefit or imply more of what they actually are (e.g., CholestOff, Endless Shrimp).
3. They often fall into what TM attorneys call the suggestive or pseudo-descriptive class of names.  These names are more difficult to register as trademarks because they tend to incorporate words and roots already used in many other marks.

In general, we recommend going with a more empty bucket name that has some relevancy to what it is you are naming.  This may be a subtle meaning (e.g., Puron for a new green replacement for Freon), a particular sound (e.g., FlixMix for a movie related web site), or a relevant flow or “mouth feel” when the name is spoken (e.b., Cabrizi for a new line of shoes).

For more of our thoughts regarding what name is right for you, call us at 512-267-1814 or email Mike Carr, one of our founders, at mike@namestormers.com.