In this post Tate goes on a brief rant about the expectations placed on names, and their inability to live up to them.

We don't care who develops, creates, brainstorms, or otherwise selects a name for anything, we can absolutely promise you that it ain't perfect.  That includes names developed by us. 

It's not that the creators are being mean, it's that it isn't possible to deliver.

The main reason why names can't be perfect (in my opinion) is that the criteria we use to measure names sets us up for failure.  We frequently get requests for names that are short, descriptive, intuitive, emotionally connected and completely unique.  While these are for the most part admirable qualities to pursue in a name, in many cases the strength of a name in one category will have a negative effect on others. 

Consider:

• Length vs. Descriptiveness
• Descriptiveness vs. Uniqueness
• Emotionality vs. Descriptiveness
• Intuitiveness vs. Uniqueness
• Length vs. Uniqueness

Taking the second example, The moment we describe what the thing to be named is (e.g., "Aluminum Cleanser") in a way that perfectly captures its function (or perhaps some other aspect we could describe) we lose the ability to easily distinguish our name from all the other products that do the same thing, thus making the name non-unique.  Also, the more descriptive we are the harder it becomes to remain concise. 

You might be able to find a name that perfectly meets a single measurement criterion - but you can't get one that will ace every one of them.

Florence Webb - our resident PhD (and primary process guru around these parts) was able to add yet another reason why names can't be perfect - this one relating to our expectations of what names can do for a brand.

We always ask what people want out of the name - and the lists are often huge.  We've had some lists go over fifty items.  Among the recent requests we seen are:

• Increase sales
• Increase profits
• Distance firm from bad press or scandal
• Increase brand loyalty
• Increase employee retention
  

These are all things that are good for organizations to want, right?  Given all the tools available to a business to reach these goals - is the name the best one to leverage for any of them? 

We say no.  The name can help, but it shouldn't be the first option.

• Increase sales --> Find effective promotions
  
• Increase profits --> Reduce Cost of Goods Sold
• Distance from Scandal --> Focus on public relations and changes in business practices
• Increase brand loyalty --> Improve the sales funnel, buying experience, or customer care
• Increase employee retention --> Stop beating your employees.

Your name can do all sorts of things better than other tools or methods.  It can impart a great first impression, it can bring you into legal compliance, it can make your firm easy to remember...  But it should never be the only tool you use, and you shouldn't try to use it where other solutions are more effective.   

Great names are great because of how they work with the rest of the aspects affecting the brand, not because they are in and of themselves the picture of perfection.

Anyone out there think there's a perfect name and I'm just missing it?

 

You might think that namers spend all day every day naming stuff.  Sadly that isn't the case.  A large portion of our time is spent explaining how we name stuff and why our method rocks.  About ten percent of my time is spent responding to requests for proposals.  This past week it was about 150% of my time.

A security firm was looking for help.  Our mission, if we chose to accept it, was to show 'em how we roll and why we're worth selecting.  We accepted, and wrote what we hope is a compelling case...

We might have spent a little time on the packaging, too.  (Apologies for the anonymized images, but it's gotta be that way...)

First, the proposal folder (note the quarter for size reference... this ain't no regular matchbook.)  This is part of the award winning package the team at Compass 360 designed for us.  You can click the photos for massive shots of these pics.


Next, the cover page for the rebrand proposal (inside the matchbook above.)  The layout and document design are ours.

These guys seem to be doing just fine - even though their name is has had a homonymic relationship with a rather undesirable term. 

It might not score well using the FAINTS system, but at least it's got some very strong emotional connections and a heaping dose of risk.

Some may think that the company name (from 1947) predates the term "whore" but they'd be wrong.  The term has been traced back to the thirteenth century.  It must've taken a lot of guts to select the name to begin with - or the namers led an incredibly sheltered life...

Does this company succeed because of their name or in spite of it?

Who knew making graphs could be so fun - and reading them so educational?


more graph humor and song chart memes

I'm tempted to start a naming contest for the first two... Poor Bono and horsey...

In terms of brand image, Segway has a lot of room for improvement.  Sure, it is cool technology, and it can make trekking around a tourist trap like Washington DC a bit easier on the feet... but the fact that almost everyone riding one (or is it driving... or steering... or whatever...) is also wearing a fanny-pack, huge helmet, and about 45 pounds of extra body-fat really doesn't help things. 

Segways are Geek-mobiles.  (This is reinforced by the naming verbal play a techie might come up with - Segue = Segway.  Few people can connect with a name that feels like you have to wink when you say it.)

All of this is about to become irrelevant.  Or perhaps it already has. 

The Chinese are helping Segways grow a pair.

A Stokefire relative - Darcy Burner - had her house burn down yesterday in Redmond, Washington.  She and her family got out with their lives and their dog, but little else.  Darcy is running for Congress in Washington's 8th district.  (That's her with the soot on her face - standing in front of her home below.)


This is not a call for donations to her campaign, nor is it a request for personal support for her family.  Instead it is a suggestion that you take a moment and write a small check to your local volunteer fire department.  In Darcy's case the firefighters were able to save her family, her family pet and they prevented the fire from spreading to the neighbors homes just a few yards away. 

We at Stokefire relish the imagery and attitude our name represents, but understand that in the real world there are fires we don't want to stoke.  We support our local volunteer fire station and encourage you readers to do the same. 

Where would we be if there weren't people in this world willing to put their lives on the line every day for people (and pets) they've never met - without compensation? 

Don't be the person that relies on everyone else to fund the services that save your own life.  Don't wait for that call from a fundraising company asking for you to fund the local department (while they take a large percentage of the donation.) 

Here's what you need to do:

1. Google your local fire department address.
2. Find your checkbook.
3. Get in your car (or on your bike... or put on your shoes...)
4. Go visit your local fire department.
5. Tell the first person you see  on-site that you appreciate their work - and you'd like to make a small donation to support their efforts.  Hugs optional.
6. Write check.
7. Feel just a little better about yourself, and just a bit safer too...
   

That's it.

Stay safe, everyone.

Ever been frustrated by the fact that all the good (or great) potential names are already squatted on the internet?  Any time you want to start a website there's someone who either already is running a business on the address or has reserved it and may be willing to sell it for a steep price.  If you're a namer then chances are excellent (actually beyond excellent) that you have been. 

That may be about to change. 

ICANN.ORG recently announced that they're giving the green light to customized Top Level Domains (TLDs).  This means that we may soon see alternatives to .NET, .ORG, and .COM (and the handful of other options.)

We at Stokefire see this as a complex change, but one that may actually lead to some very positive happenings in the business world.  Today many of the most favorable addresses on Top Level Domains are held hostage by domain squatters asking for thousands (or even millions) of dollars.  Given that the new environment will allow for nearly unlimited TLDs it will reduce the amount that squatters can charge since there will always be another TLD on which the desired name is available.

I personally don't worry much about the legal issues many are raising.  I believe that ICANN already has a process for defending ones rightful trademark.  Companies already have lawyers screening new domains - and this would dovetail with existing processes.  As long as there is a central repository or clearing house for checking domains it seems that it would work well. 

If this does indeed come to pass I predict it will bring about the end of typed-in URLs.  Since there will be a lot of variability in the TLDs it will become more difficult to remember the full address.  We're already seeing a migration away from typing in addresses after the "http://" in browsers.  Firefox and others have already promoted the search tool to the top of the window - it is but a slight adjustment to make it the primary way we navigate.  I have every confidence that Google can make this happen.

As for the post title - the reference comes from Saturday Night Live - and the video is below.  Enjoy!

We're on record as being against naming contests, but this one looks promising.  The Burj Dubai Lake Fountain is basically a pure-play publicity machine.  It's eye candy - being built to get people to come visit. 
This is exactly the sort of thing that a naming contest is made for. 

You can enter the contest here.

Naming contests are great for PR - and this fountain is basically a long-term PR campaign.  They're getting buzz around the world for a (rather sizable) fountain in the middle of a lake that might otherwise be ignored.  The name may or may not get publicity a few months after launch, but the job of the naming contest will have been done.

They certainly wouldn't be getting coverage here without it...

I'll have to check on re-publication rights, but those of you who are members of ASAE can view my article, "When Good Project Pitches Go Bad."  If I can republish the text here I'll do so shortly so all of you non association execs can check it out as well. 

The essence of the article is that it is much harder to force consensus than it is to allow it to happen through questioning and exploration.  This may seem irrelevant to those of you who have been reading this blog for a while - since I often say that consensus itself kills great brands.  I still believe that it does... however... if you want to actually gain approval to start the rebranding process you'll likely need to have consensus to do it.  Few organizations will just let staffers begin a hundred-thousand dollar (or larger) project without having the chance to review what it is supposed to do.

Remember... You need consensus on the goals of the project and whether or not the creative work meets those goals.  You do not need consensus on the other aspects of the creative work.  In fact, the less consensus you have the more likely you are to gain attention with it. 

Last - for associations there are often bylaws that state consensus must be reached.  In those situations you just have to muddle through it and hope for the best.  The process I lay out in the article provides a good chance of getting through a challenging decision without abandoning the soul of the organization and the people who work for it.

Hope to post the full contents of the article soon...

Getty Images has come up with a nifty tool that creative types might be able to put to a use other than buying Getty Images.  They call it a Moodstream - and it allows you to view video clips and images in tandem with music that fits the criteria you select.