We can't tell if this article from BNET
is simply misguided, or a thinly veiled pay-to-play piece.
If you're thinking of changing your product, company or organization name, please read the story's suggestions and quickly do the opposite. A few of the points to which we take issue:
- Rejecting names because they 'suck' indicates you're evaluating names against a subjective and personal set of criteria. What you should be doing is writing a brief laying out what the name needs to communicate, and evaluating candidates against that.
- Bomgar is short, unique, memorable and absolutely 100% meaningless. Not exactly the holy grail of naming.
- Interesting that the employee who suggests naming the company after its founder is 'clever'. Clever like a fox. It never hurts to flatter the boss, does it?
- You don't have to come up with a horrible name to unify your brand - you just have to be deliberate about constructing a logical brand architecture.
- "The company, which had revenues in excess of $22 million last year, has been on the Inc. 500 list for the last two years. Clearly, the name change paid off for Bomgar." $22 MILLION!?!? Maybe we should change our name to Bomgar! Sorry Ms. Fenn, but post hoc ergo propter hoc doesn't hold water.
If you're starting or in the midst of a naming effort, RUN DON'T WALK FROM THIS ADVICE