Comments on: (Don’t) Make a Name for Yourself

By: Texas Law Firm

Texas Law Firm — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:45:38 +0000

Guilty as charged. It is the first impulse of a law firm to use their name as their brand and the trend doesn’t seem to be breaking any time soon. I look back now and wish I would have thought it through a little bit more but there is nothing to be done about it now.

By: Elizabeth Lewis

Elizabeth Lewis — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 23:53:28 +0000

I am pretty sure that regulation of law firm names are controlled in each state (and may even be different in each one, I just don’t know). In Colorado, there are several Rules of Professional Conduct that determine what you can be called. I don’t think that you can call yourself “The Best Law Firm in Denver” nor can you advertise that you have the cheapest rates in Denver (unless somehow you can prove it is true). With the exception of organizations that provide legal services (typically non-profit), I can’t think of a single law firm that isn’t one or more names so there must be more requirements that I just don’t know about.
This seems to make it more difficult to create a brand image for lawyers. With the exceptions of the ones that advertise at 3am or have business cards at liquor stores, I can’t think of a law firm that has create a brand…

By: Steve Woodruff

Steve Woodruff — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:52:35 +0000

@scott: good question. My main revenue-generating business, as a consultant, is named Impactiviti – a more serious-sounding (& meaningful) word. I enjoy branding/marketing, blog about it, and hope in time to do actual work in the field, so I was more concerned, when coming up with the name StickyFigure, to simply have a “handle” that was more cute and memorable…so, to answer your question, I think I tried to both have my cake and eat it too!

By: Scott Gray

Scott Gray — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:01:13 +0000

Steve, Great article, even if it is something of a statement of the obvious. Just curious, though: How exactly did you come up with the name for your firm and aren’t you a bit concerned that it’s so cute and so clever that instead of drawing someone’s attention that they’re apt to move on to another firm with a name that’s a bit more serious and, in their minds, more professional? In other words, how do you balance clever (and I really like the name of your firm) with something maybe more seemingly solid?

By: Steve Woodruff

Steve Woodruff — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:01:45 +0000

@Levon – great example with Jack Daniels, where the product and the mythos become transcendent.
@alan – in the case of Amazon and eBay (and other web-type companies), while the names themselves are meaningless to begin with, they give a fresh canvas to paint on. If the company and product is strong enough, then (like Google), then the brand can self-define. Of course, then there’s boo.com…!
@Elizabeth – I’m not familiar with the intricacies of naming conventions for law firms, though they are a classic example of XXXX & YYYY & ZZZZ naming schemes. Would enjoy your commentary on what IS possible outside of that convention…

By: Harry Hallman

Harry Hallman — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:25:30 +0000

Your points make some sense for certain type of companies. I would say, however, the fashion business has done well using the owner or designers name. Other that do well with the owners names include Lawyers, Doctors and many ad agencies have done well with the owners name.
The point about having to have a name that is descriptive of what you do is a good one, but it doesn’t always work that way. When an idea is unique or powerful, it doesn’t mater what the name is. Examples; Google, Apple, and YaHoo.

By: Elizabeth Lewis

Elizabeth Lewis — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:09:10 +0000

Great article. However, I would be interested in what you would recommend law firms or other businesses that are required to have a certain naming scheme do to make sure they promote the type of business they do without breaking any ethical rules?
Elizabeth C. Lewis
Attorney and Counselor at Law
http://www.eclewis.com

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:32:37 +0000

Your point is well taken– the better the name, the easier it is to build a brand around it.
On the other hand, Amazon and (particularly) eBay are both kind of silly names that signify nothing.
And would you trust a law firm called “Justicity” ?
I’m always floored by how much money companies give to the giant branding/naming shops, only to wind up with something like “Accenture.”

By: Levon

Levon — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:29:37 +0000

Some good points in today’s post. However, it makes me wonder when it will become fashionable again to name a company after a founder after these web 2.0 names become boring and saturate the market. The point is to stand out right?
Jack Daniels was like this personality. He was a story in a really good movie and people wanted to be part of it (experiential). I wonder when marketers will become story tellers again?

By: Steve Woodruff

Steve Woodruff — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:26:29 +0000

Paul,
I ABSOLUTELY agree. I had to spend a lot of time creating my new company name (Impactiviti), and that required a lot of on-line searching. Nonetheless, I’d rather invest that time than commit to a name like “ABC Enterprises”!

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:13:45 +0000

Steve, I’ll agree with you on almost every point. I will say however, with the lack of naming real estate in the webworld (domains), it’s getting harder and harder to have a creative name that’s descriptive regarding the value prop of a company. Doesn’t mean it cannot be done, it’s just really hard work.