Name Types and their Strengths and Weaknesses

You’re all in – having decided to embark on a name development process! Congratulations, you’ve reached what Winston Churchill might call ‘the end of the beginning.’

In that spirit, the next few posts will cover – as best one can – the creative process itself. Before we get to the how, which is so hard to describe that I’m putting it off a few weeks, let’s outline a structure that will help inform and perhaps narrow the work to come.

There are various name types – each with strengths and tradeoffs – and before you get to a specific name, it makes sense to consider which name type best fits your specific situation.

So, here’s a list of some leading name types – with examples of each and thoughts on situational applicability:

• ‘Neologism’ – a fancy (though real!) label for a newly created word

Examples: Verizon (‘true horizon’), Emplify (‘amplify empathy’), Spotify

Pros:

• Enables you to build your own story and make it mean what you want
• Thus, likely less noise in terms of legal availability

Tradeoffs:

• May not mean anything without support/explanation
• May sound odd or forced if not well-crafted

Best when:

• Budgets exist to use marketing to educate the target audience
• Your category is narrow enough that the sales team can help educate prospects
• You work to identify a neologism that is comprehensible – not like a pharmaceutical!

• Compound neologism – a new word, but formed by putting together existing words

Examples: SouthLight (a name we developed for a Latin American private equity firm to convey geographic focus and wisdom/momentum), YouTube, LinkedIn

Pros:

• More approachable than a straight neologism – uses familiar words, yet still can be proprietary and conducive to storytelling
• Two-syllable compound neologisms can have a sharp, crisp sound

Tradeoffs:

• By their very construction, names will be longer
• Slightly more legal/domain noise than neologisms – due to use of existing words

Best when:

• Category/budgets suggest need for something new, but there is benefit to using familiar words/concepts

• Metaphor – an existing word/concept used in a new or different way

Examples: Amazon (longest river in the world to convey selection), Dove (soft, tranquil), North Face (rugged, mountaineering)

Pros:

• Evocative yet approachable – enables a brand to tell a story or lean into a key attribute, yet uses a familiar word or concept to aid comprehension
• Endless creative possibilities – can draw on many inspirations

Tradeoffs:

• Name may not have comprehensible meaning or perceived relevance
• Metaphor must be tight/right – can have unintended consequences

Best when:

• The budget/comms plan depends on an approachable name, but you still seek a creative flourish

There are other name types and many gradations:

For example, Nike is technically a metaphor, but functioned as a neologism (‘Nike’ is the goddess of victory, but who knew that?).

Many use proper names – some real (Charles Schwab – it’s proprietary but takes a long time to build!) and some coined (Brandy Melville – it evokes a feel).

Some quest for hyper-descriptive names (E-Trade) – it’s immediately understandable, yet creates a difficult legal availability road and may deprive the company of something more distinctive.

I’ll stop there – the ‘right’ answer is situational and decision-making usually relies on the yield of a name development process. This will be our next stop as the naming blog series rolls on!