Nobody ever likes a company name change. Why?

Seems like one thing everyone can agree on is panning a company name change.

Think back to that announcement: a fading but still widely used social network changes its name. Kudos! A streaming service launches, merges, separates and changes its name. Everybody cheers! A product you've used since you were a child suddenly appears under an unrecognizable logo. We are thrilled for these companies and the journeys they're on!... No? That's not how you remember it?

That's not how I remember it going down, either. Instead, head scratching, hand wringing, endless unpacking—a fraction of it positive. Spokespeople stick to the script. The public - consumers - either never adopt the name, and refer to the entity as “______ the entity formerly known as _____”, or, even worse, ignore the change and the inevitable march toward irrelevance begins.

But why do we reflexively pan a name change for these corporate giants?  Why do we even allot any attention span bandwidth to the change? Why are we so invested in these brand names?

Being heavily invested in naming a new baby makes a ton of sense. Carefully considering whether or not to change a name after getting married, or divorced, or adopted likewise has practical and emotional impact. A colleague recently changed his name…again (read about their process). These are all deeply personal events that directly impact our daily lives. It would be strange if these names weren’t a big deal to us!

Conversely, what would you do if someone asked you if you cared what your utility was named? In all likelihood, you would say the name doesn't matter as long as the service is dependable / affordable / some other “meaningful” measure of value. On the face of it, there are very few categories where there's an obvious reason for an emotional connection to a brand. My reflexive hypothesis would be that only those brands that offer the opportunity for what I'd like to believe is a meaningful experience and connection—an alma mater, a tattoo parlor, a sports team, the local mom-and-pop store for example—should warrant me investing any emotional energy.

Enter neuroscience

I won’t pretend to fully understand the science, but in my curiosity to understand why we do seem to care when commercial entities change their names, I learned a couple of interesting things.

It turns out that whether or not we are consciously investing when interacting with a brand name, if we're exposed to it on a repeated basis, our subconscious takes note. And then stores the name in a super-efficient way—think of it as shorthand notation versus writing out a full sentence. Then our brains put that brand name information in the “processed” file in remote storage. From that point on, our brains only need to use the very smallest bit of energy possible on that bank/grocery/bridge name, and is free to go about its important daily business of noticing and reacting to new things to keep us alive.

Fair enough. But what happens when that “processed” name in its neat, tidy file is suddenly replaced by a new name? Our brain now has to work hard to do several things: notice and process the new name, connect the new name to the old name and take a trip to the remote storage to remove the old name from the file. And then realize there might be copies of that name connected to a couple of other files. Like it or not, now we’re forced to invest mental energy. That brand has thoughtlessly made us do extra work by changing its name — how dare they? No wonder we get grumpy and are inclined to complain!

But surely there are exceptions?

Satisfied by the neuroscience behind the ire around brand name changes that seem superficial to the consumer, I was still curious. What about obviously necessary name changes? They should be universally applauded, no? Surely that must be smooth sailing for the well-intentioned brand?  

Not so fast. There are many valid reasons for changing a company name related to structural or mission changes.  But the stakes are high. Even brands that change their names in response to widely visible triggering events are rarely applauded. There's a fascinating bit of research around the 2021 Aunt Jemima pancake mix name change to Pearl Milling Company. It concludes that even when consumers were aware that the change was made to address racism, there was still a stinging drop in the likelihood of purchase. That neural muscle memory is strong.

Stadium naming rights give us another glimpse into the staying power of a name. Stadium name hangover is a common challenge for sponsors, leading to diminishing value of the naming rights for second and succeeding holders. So much emotion and history is tied up in the fan experience, the sponsor name can in some cases become nearly inextricable from the building itself. 

A look back on articles about naming changes is telling in tone: There’s the incredulous “Why’d they do that?” flavor, and the histrionic “Identity Crisis: When 5 Companies Changed Their Brand Names”

Is renaming a company a no-win prospect?

Does this mean that brands shouldn’t change their names? Of course not! A name change is absolutely the right move in many scenarios. A legacy name that isn’t culturally acceptable, a merger, acquisition or divestiture, or a change of mission are all among good reasons to change a brand’s name. But brands should approach the process thoughtfully and be prepared to confidently message their change through what could initially be some rough waters. Clarity and conviction in a new name and what it stands for will help a brand stay the course.  And, given that the name change may make some neural pathways work a little harder,  it might just be worth considering a PR strategy that rewards consumers for their effort.

Talk to us if you’re considering a name change.