What’s in a name?

Shakespeare, Brecon Beacons, Snickers and Consignia - what can they teach us?

“What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”. So speaks Juliet in Shakespeare’s famous play. But what would he have made of last week’s news about the Brecon Beacons? In order to modernize itself, the national park dropped its English language name and scrapped its logo of a noxious greenhouse gas-emitting beacon.  It will now be known by its Welsh name, Bannau Brycheiniog. 

It is not uncommon to see companies change the names of their products, services, or even their corporate entities. Companies embark on this journey of rebranding for a myriad reasons, so when is it a good idea and what are the pitfalls?

I have had two experiences of a significant name change. My first was at lastminute.com. When we started the business, a German man owned the domain name and so we registered lastminutenetwork.com as our brand and we had convinced ourselves that this would be an acceptable second choice. Thank god, my co-founder, Brent Hoberman managed to negotiate with him for the web address (at, ironically enough, the last minute) and we were able to launch with a name that people were actually able to spell and understand. I have no doubt the trajectory of the company would have been wildly different if we had been stuck with that substandard other name.

My second was moving the UK government from the domain name directgov.uk to gov.uk in my role as UK digital champion in 2010. This might sound relatively minor but it was a big undertaking. Government departments become wedded to things and even though the directgov website was extremely hard to use, it was difficult to unwind the name, let alone the associated teams. Gov.uk was much more authoritative, digital and crucially, as with  lastminute.com, easier to type!

The demise of the directgov name simplified citizens' experiences of government online with a cleaner, more memorable site, but it  also indicated a strategic shift in direction.  Companies sometimes go even further and use a new name to distance themselves  from a controversy or negative public perception. This is perhaps best exemplified by Meta which magically distanced itself from the unpopularity of Facebook by leaping into the alternative reality of their new name. It seems to have gone down well with shareholders and the media.

Another reason for a name change is to better align with a global consumer base. As companies expand their horizons, they may choose a new name that resonates more powerfully with diverse audiences or simplifies pronunciation, transcending linguistic and cultural barriers. I show my age with this example but who doesn’t remember the uproar in the UK when Marathon bars became Snickers bars.

Snickers, already well-known and beloved in the United States and other countries, shared the same recipe, ingredients, and packaging design as the UK's Marathon bar. Both consisted of nougat, caramel, and peanuts, all coated in milk chocolate. The rationale behind the name change was to create consistency in branding and marketing across different regions. It made it easier to promote the product on a global scale.

Despite initial skepticism and a great deal of jokes about underwear, the chocolate bar maintained its popularity. The transition was accompanied by an extensive communications campaign and the Snickers brand eventually became well established.

In contrast, Royal Mail, with a history stretching back over 500 years, decided to embark on a rebranding exercise to evolve and adapt for the digital era. So in 2001, the organization rebranded itself as "Consignia".

It proved to be a costly mistake, and one that would leave a mark on the organization for years to come. The new name was received with confusion and bewilderment. It lacked the clarity, warmth, and historical resonance that had long been associated with the Royal Mail brand. The term "Consignia" proved to be an enigma to the British public, who struggled to relate to the unfamiliar moniker.

The renaming also contributed to the significant financial losses of the organization during that period. There was a £1.1 billion deficit and over 30,000 job cuts. This humbling experience forced the organization to reevaluate its priorities and led to the eventual reinstatement of the Royal Mail name in 2002. 

Changing a name is a delicate balancing act. While a new name can offer businesses the chance to shed outdated associations, it is crucial to retain the essence of your identity, ensuring that the heart and soul of your organization remains intact. The debacle at the Royal Mail serves as a cautionary tale for what can go wrong.

At the risk of a different kind of name drop, one of the highlights of my life was meeting the playwright Arthur Miller. If you are weighing up a business rename I think that  it is worth bearing in mind the powerful words of John procter, the protagonist of his play The Crucible. He gives us a different take to Shakespeare’s Juliet.

 “Because it is my name! Because I cannot have another in my life!…How may I live without my name? I have given you my soul; leave me my name!"

As an addendum to this, one of my best friends, Hannah sent me this exchange from the transcript of the movie of Tina Turners life. It in turn was based on the real life court case. I hope you enjoy it.

Ike Turner, Sr. : $750,000 she's gonna cost me. What I got left, I got... I got... I got... I got some clothes, I got some jewelry. Uh, the rest I got tied up in investments. I ain't got nothing else.

[Ike puts on his sunglasses in the courtroom]

Judge : Please instruct your client to remove his sunglasses. This is a courtroom.

Ike Turner, Sr. : Well, hold on, you don't got to instruct me to do nothing.

[Ike removes his sunglasses]

Anna's Lawyer : Your Honor, in order to expedite this matter, my client would like to make an oral motion amending her petition for divorce, revoking any financial claims.

Judge : I want you to be very sure about this. It means you're going to walk out of here with absolutely nothing.

Tina Turner : Except my name. I'll give up all that other stuff, but only if I get to keep my name. I've worked too hard for it, your Honor.

Ike Turner, Sr. : The name is mine! The name got my daddy's blood on it! If she wanna go, she can go wherever she wanna go, but the name belongs to me!

Judge : Mr. Turner!

Ike Turner, Sr. : No, no, no... look here now!

[Bailiff puts his hand on Ike's shoulder]

Ike Turner, Sr. : Hey, hey, hey... get your hand off me, man!

Judge : Mr. Turner...

Ike Turner, Sr. : Now look, she want to go, she can go! That's fine! She can go, but the name stays home!

[Judge bangs the gavel]

Ike Turner, Sr. : The name stays home!

Judge : As Mrs. Turner has decided to drop all claims, I hereby grant her divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences. Mr. Turner will retain all publishing rights, royalties, all real property, clothing, jewelry, and all other assets. Mrs. Turner will retain the use of her stage name.

[Judge bangs the gavel]