It is no different in business, especially in industrial or business to business companies. The name of the company reflects what it stands for. Consider the Shell brand. If Shell had been named Husk when it was first created, would the company and its businesses be now smaller or larger or otherwise significantly different? Probably not. If Shell now changed its name to Husk the effect could be dramatic but this reflects that over the years, awareness and perceptions of the Shell brand have become a major part of the company.
So does it matter what a company calls itself? Rentokil is about as bad a name as you could devise for a company with a prominent position in the health care market. At the time of formation the name may have invoked real purpose as an exterminator of vermin. And, since this was well before the time of terrorism, there was no adverse association that led people to believe it was a bunch of assassins for hire. Today, the company believes that the name is bandied around without unravelling the cryptic meaning each time it is used. The high levels of recall and reputation are more than adequate compensation for any possible weaknesses in the name.
If a company has a poor name, it can still be successful but it is easier if the name is a good one. Think about people you know. Their names are their brands according to Al Ries & Jack Trout in their book Positioning: The Battle For Your Mind. Ries and Trout reported on a survey in American schools which showed that children with off-beat and not so popular names suffered worse in exam results than those with popular ones. When the marking of scripts was carried out blind, there appeared to be no differences which could be attributed to the names. I read recently in the Financial Times that Brenda Cooper was unsuccessful for 25 years as a composer until she changed her name to BB Cooper and suddenly her career took off. There is a clear implication that the names we are saddled with from birth, act to shape us as does the name of any brand and company.
Choosing a company name
Choosing the name of a company is often unscientific. Since most companies start small with the emphasis on the idea for the product or service rather than the brand, the name arises as an afterthought. There is a strong likelihood that the name will be chosen on emotive grounds rather than because it has been well researched to ensure suitability for the target market. Since every company needs a name and because one name is just as good as another, why not pluck it out of the air? And often it is.
A name which projects positive values and has a good sound to it must be an advantage to a new company. In certain circumstances a wacky name, even an irreverent name can work too but there are limits. Perhaps in some fashion markets, a name which pokes fun at itself (eg FCUK) may work but not in sober industrial markets. Clearly you should not select a name that suggests deficiencies in the product (the Crumbling Brick Company would hardly do for a brick manufacturer but may be possible for a demolition business) or implies some negative values (the Inaccurate Bookkeeping Company) but generally these sort of pitfalls are fairly obvious. However, there are also names which although not outright disasters may have drawbacks which only become apparent in time.
There are also the potential translation dangers if the brand is to be used outside the domestic market. An innocuous English name may mean something very different written or spoken in French, German or some other language.
Choosing a name is a very personal thing. Anyone who has named their offspring will have gone through a questioning process which could just as reasonably be applied to that of a company:
- Is it a name which will last?
- Is it a name which is too fashionable?
- Will it fit their personality?
- Does it have `the right' connotations? Are the brand values projected - young and vibrant, large and well established, localised or international, a specialist etc?
- Does it produce an acceptable acronym together with the other initials in the name?
- Is it a name which will be appropriate in all stages of life?
- Is it easy for everyone to pronounce?
- Will it be remembered?
- Will the name get shortened or altered to one that is acceptable?
Some criteria suggested by researchers as factors which affect the recall and recognition of names of companies are as follows:
Brand names should be simple so that they are easy to understand, pronounce and spell. Two words in the name should be considered the maximum.
Brand names should be vivid in imagery so that the mnemonics present strong memory cues. For example, it is said that names beginning with the letter K are easier to remember.
Brand names should be familiar sounding so that much of the information to which the name relates is already stored in the mind.
Brand names should be distinctive so that the word attracts attention and does not become confused with other brands.
These guidelines are not necessarily mutually compatible as it may be difficult to find names which are simple, vivid in imagery, familiar and distinctive. Also, there is some evidence to suggest that if the mind has to work harder to understand and recognise the name, it will be more likely to be retained in the longer lasting memory than a familiar name which fails to become lodged. Familiar words may facilitate brand recall but distinctive words work better at building brand recognition.
One or all of these bases of names may lead to a list of possible names for a new brand. Again a brainstorming session, but in this case not necessarily just made up of the management team, is likely to be a fruitful method - a good leader is needed, including to suggest the various basis for name suggestions. The outcome of such as session is likely to be a shortlist which will need legal checking and which may then be tested through market research.
