---
name: business-naming
description: >-
  Generate and evaluate names for companies, products, brands, and features
  using a structured three-phase process (Identify, Invent, Implement) based on
  David Placek's Lexicon Branding methodology. Use when a user asks to name a
  company, name a product, brainstorm brand names, evaluate a shortlist of
  names, rename something, build a creative brief for naming, or find a name
  for a startup, app, or service. Accepts a description of the business,
  product, or brand to be named.
---

# Business Naming

Generate and evaluate names using a structured three-phase process: **Identify**
(set the framework), **Invent** (generate and filter), **Implement** (test and
select). Aim for names that are **distinctive**, grounded in **behavior and
experience**, and that **start a story**.

## Input Handling

Determine what the user needs and gather context accordingly:

1. **New name** -- User describes a business, product, or brand that needs a
   name. Run all three phases.
2. **Shortlist evaluation** -- User provides candidate names to evaluate.
   Skip to Phase 3 (Implement), but run a quick Phase 1 (Identify) to
   establish the framework for evaluation.
3. **Brief creation** -- User wants a creative brief for naming. Run Phase 1
   (Identify) and deliver the brief as the output.
4. **Rename** -- Existing name needs replacing. Run all three phases, adding
   the current name and its problems to the landscape analysis.

If the user provides minimal context, ask targeted questions to fill gaps.
At minimum you need: what is being named, who it serves, and what makes it
different.

## Naming Process

Execute these phases in order.

### Phase 1: Identify -- Set the Framework

**Focus on behavior and experience, not mission statements.**

Read [references/diamond-exercise.md](references/diamond-exercise.md) before
this phase.

#### 1a. Analyze Behavior

Establish three perspectives:

- **Current behavior** -- How does the company/product behave today? How do
  users interact with it? What is the experience?
- **Desired behavior** -- How should it behave? What experience should users
  have?
- **Market response** -- How does the market currently perceive the category?
  What language and expectations exist?

#### 1b. Map the Landscape

Study the competitive naming landscape:

- List competitor names and the language patterns they use (e.g., real estate:
  Home, Find, Key, Nest, Roof, Door).
- Identify the cliches and overused words in the category.
- Define what the name must **not** sound like. A name that blends in with
  competitors is "a form of suicide."

#### 1c. Creative Framework

Create a "metaphorical window" -- a short phrase that opens creative
possibilities without locking in narrow objectives.

Format: **[Core feeling] + [Action/arrival] + [Defining moment]**

Example: "Clarity + arrival + the moment you know" (for a real estate site).

#### 1d. Diamond Exercise

For startups or when context is limited, define what the name must achieve
using the Diamond:

| Corner | Question |
|--------|----------|
| **Win** | What does winning look like for the company? |
| **What you have to win** | Current assets and strengths |
| **What you need to win** | Gaps and resources needed |
| **What you have to say** | The one thing the market must hear |

Use the Diamond as the naming brief, not a generic mission statement.

### Phase 2: Invent -- Generate and Filter

**Volume first, then filter ruthlessly.**

Read [references/sound-symbolism.md](references/sound-symbolism.md) and
[references/forced-synchronicity.md](references/forced-synchronicity.md)
before this phase.

#### 2a. Sound Symbolism

Select target letter/sound associations that match the desired behavior:

| Letter/Sound | Association | Use when you want... |
|--------------|-------------|----------------------|
| **V** | Alive, vibrant | Energy, movement, life |
| **B** | Reliable, solid | Trust, dependability |
| **Z**, **S** | Signal, sharp | Clarity, precision, cutting through noise |
| **K**, hard **C** | Crisp, strong | Authority, impact |
| **L** | Smooth, light | Elegance, ease |
| **R** | Action, force | Power, motion |
| **M**, **N** | Warm, grounded | Comfort, familiarity |
| **T** | Precise, tight | Efficiency, sharpness |
| **P** | Punchy, ready | Energy, pop |

Use as a lens for filtering, not a rigid rule.

#### 2b. Three-Brief Strategy

Generate names from three different angles to escape category thinking:

- **Brief A (Real)** -- The actual brief from Phase 1. Generate names that
  directly address the behavior, framework, and Diamond.
- **Brief B (Competitor)** -- Imagine you are naming for a major competitor.
  What names would you generate for them? This produces names the category
  expects but may surface strong options.
- **Brief C (Unrelated)** -- Imagine you are naming something completely
  unrelated (a bicycle, a restaurant, a sailing company). This breaks
  category cliches and produces the freshest candidates.

#### 2c. Forced Synchronicity

Mine 2-3 domains unrelated to the category for unexpected metaphors:

- Browse their language, visuals, and naming patterns.
- Note words, phrases, or metaphors that map onto the brand's behavior.
- Use these as seeds so names don't sound like the category.

Example: For a trades automation tool, borrow from music (cadence, tempo),
sailing (bearing, trim), and sports (relay, baton).

#### 2d. Generate at Volume

Produce a large number of candidates (aim for breadth, not perfection):

- Mix real words, metaphors, compounds, coined words, and borrowed terms.
- Vary length (1-3 syllables preferred for recall).
- Include unexpected directions from Brief C and forced synchronicity.

#### 2e. Filter

Apply these filters in order:

1. **Distinctiveness** -- Does it stand apart from the competitive landscape?
   Remove anything that sounds like the category.
2. **Story potential** -- Does it invite a line of explanation? "We're called
   X because..." should feel natural and interesting.
3. **Sound check** -- Does the sound match the desired behavior? (Use the
   sound symbolism lens.)
4. **Practical screens** -- Is it pronounceable? Spellable? Free of negative
   associations in key markets? Short enough?

Note: Legal and trademark screening is for the user to do later. Flag obvious
conflicts but do not eliminate names solely on trademark speculation.

### Phase 3: Implement -- Test and Select

**Get the name into context; test what it makes people imagine.**

#### 3a. Present with Context

For each recommended name, provide:

- **The name**
- **Why it works** -- How it connects to the behavior and framework from
  Phase 1
- **Sound/metaphor** -- What sonic and metaphorical qualities it carries
- **In context** -- A sample tagline, headline, or usage ("Welcome to X",
  "Built on X", "X: [tagline]") so the user can feel the "lift"

#### 3b. Structure the Shortlist

Organize names into tiers:

- **Top recommendations** (5-10) -- Strongest candidates with full rationale
- **Strong alternatives** (5-10) -- Good options worth considering
- **Honorable mentions** -- Names with potential that didn't make the cut,
  with brief notes on why

#### 3c. Evaluation Guidance

If the user is testing names with others, advise:

- Ask: **"What does this name make you imagine about the product?"** This
  tests predisposition to consider, not subjective preference.
- Do **not** ask "Do you like it?" -- this produces unreliable data.
- **Embrace polarization** -- Mixed love/hate reactions are a strength.
  "No power in comfort." A name that everyone "kind of likes" is probably
  weak. A name that some love and some question has signal.

## Output Format

Structure the naming deliverable as follows:

### Brief

Summarize the framework from Phase 1: behavior (current, desired, market),
landscape to avoid, creative framework, and Diamond (if applicable). This
grounds the name recommendations.

### Sound Direction

State the target sound associations and forced synchronicity sources used.

### Shortlist

Present names in a table:

| Name | Why it works | Sound / metaphor |
|------|--------------|------------------|
| **Name** | Connection to behavior and framework | Sound associations and source metaphor |

Organize into **Top recommendations** and **Strong alternatives**.

For each top recommendation, include a sample usage line showing the name in
context (tagline, headline, or sentence).

### Principles Applied

Briefly confirm which naming principles drove the selections:

- Distinctive > comfortable
- Behavior and experience over abstract values
- Name starts the story
- Sound symbolism alignment

### Next Steps

Recommend concrete next steps:

1. **Prototype** -- Where to show the name (mock ad, app icon, business card,
   etc.)
2. **Research** -- The right question to ask ("What does this name make you
   imagine about the product?")
3. **Legal/trademark** -- Screen the shortlist
4. **Polarization** -- How to interpret mixed reactions

## Guidelines

- Ground every name in the behavior and experience established in Phase 1.
  Names should connect to how people act and feel, not abstract corporate
  values.
- Prioritize distinctiveness. If a name could belong to any competitor in the
  category, it is too generic. Challenge yourself to escape category language.
- Show your work. Walk the user through the framework, landscape, and
  creative decisions so they understand why each name was recommended.
- Generate with volume. Do not stop at 5 obvious names. Explore unexpected
  directions through forced synchronicity and the three-brief strategy.
- Present names in context. A name on its own is abstract; a name in a
  tagline, headline, or mock usage comes alive.
- When evaluating existing names, apply the same framework: Does it connect
  to behavior? Is it distinctive? Does it start a story?
- Treat polarization as signal, not noise. If the user reports mixed
  reactions, reframe that as a positive indicator of memorability and story
  potential.
- Flag obvious trademark conflicts but do not speculatively eliminate names.
  Legal screening is the user's responsibility.
- When uncertain about the business, market, or user intent, ask rather than
  assume. A good brief produces better names than a guessed brief.