product-naming

Core Principles

• Figure it out before naming — Never list candidate names without understanding the soul of the product
• Names are derived, not pieced together — Naturally derive from product positioning, user portraits, and brand temperament
• Provide routes, not lists — Let users choose the naming direction first, then brainstorm specific names within the direction
• Validate intuition with data — Research naming patterns of products in the same track to avoid working behind closed doors
• No rushing — Names are the foundation of a brand, and it's worth taking time to get them right

Workflow

Step 1: Product Soul Mining (No Naming Involved)

1. Who are the users? — Who is using it? In what scenarios? How often?
2. Product essence — Describe what this product is in one sentence? (Not a feature list, but a role/positioning/metaphor)
3. Product boundaries — What does it do, what doesn't it do, and which direction will it develop in the future?
4. Brand temperament — What first impression should users get when they see this name? (Professional/approachable/geeky/lighthearted/...)
5. Hard constraints — Language preferences? Length limits? Words to avoid?

• Start listing names right after reading the project documents
• Think one question is enough; all the above questions must be covered
• Throw these questions at the user as a form all at once; it should be a natural conversation

Step 2: Naming Constraint Extraction

1. Keywords — Refine core morphemes from the user's description (e.g., programming, assistant, partner, tool, management)
2. Identify tensions — Are there contradictions between the user's multiple demands? (e.g., "needs to be warm like a person's name" vs "needs to be immediately recognizable as related to programming")
3. Clarify priorities — If there are tensions, which demand takes priority?

Example:
Your core demands:
- ✅ Let people know it's related to team collaboration
- ✅ Lighthearted and not serious, unlike enterprise software
- ⚡ These two are in tension: Collaboration-related names tend to feel "corporate", while lighthearted names often fail to indicate usage

My judgment is that "lightheartedness" takes priority, because you are competing with Slack/DingTalk on experience rather than features. Is that correct?

Step 3: Route Diversification

• Route Name — A one-sentence summary of the idea behind this route
• 2-3 illustrative names — Let users feel the vibe of this direction
• Pros and cons — Honestly explain the advantages and disadvantages of each route

Example:
Route A: Onomatopoeia/Action Words
Illustrations: Ping, Holler, Nudge
✅ Light, vivid imagery
❌ Not directly related to the "standup" scenario

Route B: Time/Rhythm Metaphors
Illustrations: DayBeat, MorningSync, Cadence
✅ Implies daily rhythm, fits standup frequency
❌ Relatively long, strong sense of combination

Route C: Abbreviations/Coined Words
Illustrations: Stanly（standup + daily）、Asynco（async + co）
✅ Unique and easy to register
❌ Requires explanation of meaning

• Only provide one route
• Routes are too similar
• Only mention advantages, not disadvantages
• List more than 5 specific names/routes in this step (let users choose the direction, not the name)

Step 4: User Direction Selection

• Directly select one route
• Combine elements from multiple routes ("The directness of C + the warmth of A")
• Reject all and supplement new directions → Return to Step 3

Step 5: Competitor Validation + Naming Strategy

5a. Competitor Naming Research

• Are most pure English, dual Chinese-English brands, or pure Chinese?
• Name length? Number of syllables?
• Is there a risk of name collision?

5b. Naming Strategy Confirmation

• How many names are needed? (English name + Chinese name? Or just one?)
• Do we need a slogan?
• What's the reason?

Example:
Research found that Geekbot, Range, and Standuply, which are in the same track, all use only one English name.
Suggestion: Use only Ping, no separate Chinese name.
Reason: Users are development teams who already use English tools in daily communication; one syllable is easiest to remember.
If a Chinese scenario is needed, add a slogan: "Ping — Tap once, standup done"

Step 6: Final Confirmation

📌 Product Name: Ping
📌 Slogan: Tap once, standup done
📌 Naming Strategy: Single pure English brand
📌 Decision Basis:
   - User Portrait: Remote development team
   - Product Positioning: Asynchronous synchronization tool replacing daily standups
   - Core Constraint: Lighthearted and not serious, looks inviting to use
   - Competitor Practice: Mainstream in the same track is short pure English names

Communication Specifications

Must ask users

No need to ask users

What AI should never do

• Throw a list of names right after reading the project documents
• Start naming without understanding the product essence
• Evaluate names only from the perspective of "sound good" instead of brand strategy
• Replace with a new batch of names when the user says "no" instead of reflecting on where the process went wrong
• List too many options to appear professional, causing decision paralysis
• Rush the user to make a decision