Naming is hard—really hard.
It’s highly subjective, which makes it nearly impossible to get decision-makers aligned. Trademark searches almost always turn up conflicts, and usable domain names are tough to come by.
Over the past decade, I’ve worked through all kinds of naming projects using a range of approaches. Some turned out great. Others… not so much.
One of my more successful experiences came while naming a high-growth software company. Their corporate identity had been tied to their original product, but with more products in the pipeline, they needed a broader brand. We were clear on the company’s direction, so defining what that brand should represent came quickly.
We also had the luxury of budget. That meant we could bring in experts—and we did. We talked to multiple agencies, including Igor, known for its strong naming work and smart Twitter presence.
While exploring those options, I also asked friends for input. One, Sara, remembered working with a naming specialist. She sent me his name: Anthony. I found his blog. We never connected directly, but one of his posts on using “cloaked briefs” changed everything for us.
The Cloaked Brief
Start by identifying the core attributes of the company you’re naming. I don’t remember our exact list, but it probably included things like fast, powerful and modern. Whatever your list looks like, this step matters. Get it wrong, and everything downstream gets fuzzier.
Next, find a category of things—anything at all—that share those qualities. Baseball teams. Space shuttles. Racehorses. Restaurants. The key is that it’s unrelated to your company or product. The more distance, the better.
We landed on a new high-tech spaceship. From there, we wrote a brief as if we were naming that ship. What made it different from other spaceships? What was its competitive edge?
Then we handed that brief to the team.
A Company-Wide Brainstorm
We decided to include the entire company in the exercise. Not one person on the team was a branding expert or marketer. Most were highly technical—smart, thoughtful people, but not particularly experienced with naming.
We walked the team through a quick deck outlining the process and posted the brief. A dedicated Slack channel gave everyone a space to contribute ideas over the next 7–10 days.
The first few hours were a flood—like rain at a Seattle baseball game in April. Then it dried up. I started a spreadsheet to organize and score the early contenders. A few were promising. None stood out. I began doing early trademark checks and domain lookups.
A few days later, ideas started popping again. One person would drop a spark, and a flurry of follow-on suggestions would follow. That’s when the good stuff started to emerge. It turned out our best names came from subconscious processing—not instant inspiration, but background work, quietly churning away.
The Decision Process
New ideas got prioritized, checked for conflicts and tested for domain availability. After a week, we had a clear top three.
What your list might look like:
| Name | Brand Fit | Legal Risk | Domain |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lumari | 5 | ⚠️ | ✔️ |
| Nexora | 4 | ✔️ | ⚠️ |
| Vintiq | 3 | ✖️ | ✔️ |
Choosing among them was the hardest part. Ranking names is subjective. The one that scored best was a little edgy. One of the main decision-makers wasn’t sure.
Meanwhile, the legal review had begun. Trademark law is messy. Each of our top picks had potential conflicts. Bringing in a lawyer felt like a buzzkill, but skipping that step would’ve been riskier in the long run.
Then came the domain name challenge. Clean .com domains are expensive—unless you’re willing to get really creative. Some alternatives (like other TLDs or clever hacks) can feel awkward or age poorly. You usually end up picking the least-bad option.
In our case, we got lucky. We chose one of our top three, and it checked every box. It captured the brand perfectly, was just edgy enough and passed the legal review. Most importantly, we secured the clean .com for a price we could afford.
The winning name? It came from a senior developer—someone you wouldn’t peg as your go-to for creative work. That’s part of what made this process so effective. It unlocked ideas from corners of the org that wouldn’t have been heard otherwise.
Key Takeaways
- You don’t need a big budget to generate great naming ideas, but a clear process helps
- Cloaked briefs give teams permission to think creatively without the baggage of company politics
- The best names often come from unexpected places or people
- Legal and domain name constraints are real, and you should factor them in early
If you don’t have the budget to hire a naming agency, I strongly recommend reading Anthony Shore’s blog and giving the cloaked brief approach a try.
Sources and further reading
- “Cloaked Briefs” – Anthony Shore, Opera Naming
- Why Good Brand Names Are Rare – Marty Neumeier, Liquid Agency
