What comes first: brand strategy or the name?

BRAND STRATEGY!!!

If you read the book "The Hero and the Outlaw" by Marks/Pearson, you'll see that brand strategy development is always best if based on a DEEP, powerful, emotion (e.g. Nike; Olympic achievement/heroism or Microsoft; dominance/ruler-like  or Chanel; Passion/Romance).

 If you don't establish the emotional connection first, then the decisions you make in ALL business development may be (potentially) less powerful than you had hoped.

This is NOT to say that you can't build a powerful brand with an existing corporate name.  For example "McDonalds", as a name, doesn't really exude anything emotional... but they've effectively built a powerhouse brand around the emotions of "safe, clean, predictable, family, fun food".

If you DO have the luxury of establishing the brand strategy first, then coming up with a name that's "in brand" is a huge boost to the strength of the connection to your audience.

 Hope this helps.

Kevin Skarritt, Chief Nut, www.AcornCreative.com

I second what Kevin says.

In the same way that an advertising brief comes before the ad tagline is created, then the strategy should come before the name.

However, I believe that good marketing people might end up thinking of the name first because there is something special about the name. I also think that good marketing people will unknowingly incorporate strategic development into the process of selecting their name.

But because similar strategic development can result in products or companies that should have different names (for example, a restaurant vs. a catoring business OR the same product targeted at business buyers instead of consumers), then it's best to develop the brand structure and strategy first.

Good luck, Lemino!

The name of a company is a meaningless conduit until a dialog opens through it directly to the consumer.  I say meaningless from the standpoint of the target market, who is going to base an opinion on that much anticipated first impression.

If you don't own the name of your company then it's open season for anyone else brand it how they see fit.  And that just boils down to corporate irresponsibility.

The brand strategy will drop a stake in the ground.  If a company ties them self to it ... it will act as a point of reference so that they don't get lost as they venture out in the ether.

As I don't think dogma is healthy, I do believe working a brand strategy and the name can be done at the same time.  Mainly because I've noticed that working the brand strategy boosts creative juices.  However, the strategy should never be an afterthought in the naming process.  The name should inspire people inside the company to enable the brand (especially now in the age of transparency).  Hard to do if a brand isn't flushed out.

Speaking of naming, Seth Godin has a very good article found here:The New Rules of Naming