Why a checklist helps
Teams often compare names using inconsistent arguments: one person discusses sound, another checks domains and someone else simply likes a story. Define criteria before the favourites emerge. Score independently, then discuss the reasons behind large differences.
The twelve tests
- Relevant: supports the intended position or promise.
- Distinctive: does not disappear among category conventions.
- Pronounceable: intended audiences can say it confidently.
- Spellable: people can search or type it after hearing it.
- Memorable: remains recognisable after a delay.
- Concise: works in conversation and small layouts.
- Flexible: can accommodate realistic future offers.
- Culturally appropriate: avoids unwanted meanings in key languages.
- Visually useful: creates a workable word shape for identity design.
- Digitally practical: has acceptable domain and profile options.
- Legally researchable: is not obviously crowded in relevant classes.
- True to the brand: feels credible when spoken by the organisation.
Score with evidence: a low pronunciation score should include the word people misread; a low availability score should list the conflicting result.
A simple scorecard
| Criterion | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Distinctiveness | 1–5 | Closest category names |
| Pronunciation | 1–5 | Results from listening test |
| Flexibility | 1–5 | Future offer examples |
| Availability | 1–5 | Searches completed |
Do not average away a fatal problem
A high overall score cannot compensate for a serious legal conflict, offensive meaning or impossible pronunciation in the primary market. Mark non-negotiable criteria separately. Candidates that fail them leave the shortlist.
Use the checklist twice
Run an early version to reduce the longlist, then repeat after research and audience testing. Scores should change when new evidence appears. The method is valuable because it records why the team changed its mind.