TLDR
In the last Gitcoin Community Call of 2022, we had a community discussion around naming our protocols and the products weāre building on top of them (or, the dApps being integrated with them that will be used by program managers, builders/project owners, and donors. Now that we are gearing up to actually launch the protocols, itās time to give them final names, so weāre looking for feedback on our top contenders.
The presentation from this session can be found here - and has some helpful additional context
Why weāre here:
- As Gitcoin continues to evolve, weāre taking the opportunity to examine our brand (across different expressions (from visual to verbal to experiential).
- Weāre looking for feedback from the community on the work being done across workstreams and led by MMM. This post is about naming, and aims to gather feedback on final names being considered for:
- The set of dApps running on our protocols, working name Grants Suite, latest name Grants Stack
- Our protocol that enables groups to pool and allocate funds to support their collective goals, currently called Grants Protocol
- Our protocol that empowers project owners to build a project profile, grow their reputation and apply for funding, currently called Project Protocol
- So far, there have been three other posts in this series:
- An explanation of key definitions like Brand and Brand Strategy then walks through the foundational work leading up to the synthesis of the Brand Strategy, which can be found here.
- A post soliciting feedback on Brand Vision, Brand Mission and Brand Values, which can be found here.
- A post soliciting feedback on our Brand Personality, Voice & Tone, which can be found here.
Specifically, weād love your feedback on:
- Approach: How weāve approached the naming process and the philosophy behind naming selection
- Top Selects: The short list of names in the running for Grants Protocol and Project Protocol
- Anything Missing: Names you like that you think weāve missed
- And, if you have time, take a look at the current naming brainstorm here
- We are aiming to align on final names by end of next week, Jan 13 - although this is not a hard and fast deadline, weād greatly appreciate if you left feedback by EOD Jan 12!
Anything else?
- The current naming brainstorm can be found here and is open for input, but we ask that you please leave feedback on the governance forum
- In addition to discussion and feedback here, we welcome additional discussion feedback in the #brand-pod channel in the Discord.
Defining our Approach To Naming
What goes into developing a successful product naming strategy?
First and foremost, itās important to understand the target audience for the product. The name should appeal to and make sense for this group.
Itās also important to consider the productās positioning within the market and the overall brand.
In addition to considering the target audience, positioning, and overall brand image, itās also important to consider the brandās mission, vision, values, and personality when developing a product naming strategy - hence why naming has come as a later stage.
In summary, our criteria for deciding on a name looks like this:
- Audience Aligned: The name will resonate with the target audience.
- Value Prop Aligned: The name should effectively communicate the productās value proposition.
- Positioning Aligned: The name fits the overall product positioning within the market and within the overall brand (e.g., harmonizes/does not conflict with the brand name or other product names)
- Vision Aligned: The name should align with the brandās long-term goals and help to bring the vision to life
- Mission Aligned: The name should align with the brandās mission and purpose
- Values Aligned: The name should reflect the brandās beliefs and principles, and should appeal to people who share those values.
- Personality Aligned: The name should fit within the overall tone and aesthetic of the brand, and should effectively communicate the brandās personality.
We also outlined some secondary creative considerations to gut check ourselves once we landed on top names, which included:
- Cohesiveness: Names that feel like a āset.ā
- Independence: Names that can standalone and feel just as strong as when used together
- Pronunciation: Easy across languages
- Ownable: Not infringing on names of other products/protocols in our space
And specifically, one more consideration for the protocols:
- Openness: Protocol names that give a sense of flexibility, customizability, and possibility
- No Use of Protocol: Protocol names that donāt need to have āProtocolā in them or following them (e.g., we call Lens, Lens - not always Lens Protocol)
Types of Names
There are several different types of names to consider when naming a product.
- Descriptive names clearly and directly describe the product and its function, such as āSunscreen Lotionā or āQuick-Dry Towel.ā These types of names can be useful for new and innovative products, as they help the consumer understand what the product does right away. However, they can be limiting and may not allow for much brand personality.
- On the other end of the spectrum are invented or abstract names, which are more creative and memorable but may be harder for the consumer to understand. Examples include āNikeā and āApple.ā These types of names allow for more brand personality and can be effective for established brands, but may not be as effective for new products as they may be harder for the consumer to understand.
- Another option is to use a combination of both, such as āHair Foodā or āLife Water.ā These types of names provide a hint at the productās function while also allowing for some creative branding.
Other Considerations
Product vs. Brand Name: Another important consideration when developing a product naming strategy is how the brand and product names fit together. A strong brand name can be a powerful asset, and the product name should complement and support the brand name rather than overshadowing it.
For example, if the brand name is more evocative and memorable, the product name may be more functional and descriptive to clearly communicate the productās value and purpose. On the other hand, if the brand name is more functional and descriptive, the product name may be more creative and memorable to add personality and stand out in the market.
Itās also important to consider how the product name will fit within the overall brand name and product portfolio. The product name should fit within the naming system and structure established by the brand, and should not conflict with any other products within the portfolio.
Itās also important to consider the productās potential expansion and how the name will fit within the brandās overall product portfolio. The name should fit within the brandās overall messaging and aesthetic, and should not conflict with any other products within the portfolio.
This is where brand and product architecture come into play. A strong brand architecture helps to clearly define the relationship between products within a portfolio and how they fit within the overall brand. This can include creating a naming system, such as using a specific word or phrase in all product names, or using a specific naming structure (e.g. all names starting with the letter āSā).
Naming Grants Stack, formerly known as Grants Suite
This brings us to our first name: The set of dApps running on our protocols, working name Grants Suite.
Grants Stack is the first-ever solution connecting grants program managers, donors, and project owners to launch, participate, and scale community-powered grants programs. It enables a streamlined process from program deployment to application management to funds allocation, encourages donor discovery and support of projects, and empowers builder participation and reputation building.
Most recently, we began socializing Grants Stack as the new and updated name. Why? Letās check against our criteria.
- Audience Aligned: The name will resonate with the target audience - CHECK
- Value Prop Aligned: The name should effectively communicate the productās value proposition. - CHECK
- Positioning Aligned: The name fits the overall product positioning within the market and within the overall brand (e.g., harmonizes/does not conflict with the brand name or other product names) - CHECK
- Vision Aligned: The name should align with the brandās long-term goals and help to bring the vision to life - CHECK
- Mission Aligned: The name should align with the brandās mission and purpose - CHECK
- Values Aligned: The name should reflect the brandās beliefs and principles, and should appeal to people who share those values. - CHECK
- Personality Aligned: The name should fit within the overall tone and aesthetic of the brand, and should effectively communicate the brandās personality. - CHECK
- Pronunciation: Easy - CHECK
- Ownable: No one else in our space currently using it; while itās not trademarkable, itās highly descriptive, so less important here - CHECK
For the first half of these, hereās what we looked at:
- Audience: Our primary target audience for this set of tools is program managers; the tools will also be used by builders/project owners and donors, but the program managers will be a main driver in getting them to use - thus keeping GRANTS in the name is valuable
- Value Prop: The value proposition for this set of tools of course varies by audience, but for our core audience, program managers, the value is that this is the first comprehensive solution that enables them to create and scale a program, plus engage/encourage donors and empower project leaders - thus STACK makes sense as a descriptor for these tools
- Positioning: Similar to the value proposition, weāre positioning this as the only end to end solution, and this name signals the comprehensiveness of this set of tools; we also want this name to signal intuitiveness, reliability, impact, so keeping the name direct and descriptive helps us achieve this
For more reasoning on the second half, take a look back at past posts about Mission, Vision, Values and Personality and youāll see how this name fits with those as well.
You may be wondering what happened to previous names: Grants Manager, Grants Explorer, and Grants Hub. Grants Stack is comprised of several dApps built on top of our new protocols plus the Passport integration. These names were for those individual dApps. For now, weāve aligned to not name the individual dApps, but instead speak to their functionality in the context of the Grants Stack (Manager, Explorer and Builder.) We will no longer be referring to the individual dApp names (although itās likely just out of habit those names will continue to come up - but weāll be socializing a robust glossary soon that will reinforce the transition away from these.)
You might also be wondering why we donāt mention our new protocols - or why they arenāt part of the naming of the Grants Stack. Weāve aligned on not going too far into the underlying tech powering these dApps, as that will be part of the protocol marketing strategy, which is more focused on ecosystem partners and developers at this stage. For this reason, we are thinking about the Grants Stack name separately from the protocol names.
More will be shared around this thinking in a very near future governance post about Grants Stack Marketing.
Again, weāre encouraging feedback here - would love all thoughts on the Grants Stack name.
Naming Grants Protocol
This brings us to our second name: our protocol that enables groups to pool and allocate funds to support their collective goals, currently called Grants Protocol.
As a reminder, this protocol is an open, permissionless protocol that enables and scales community-led funding systems by allowing groups to pool resources and build funding mechanisms that are uniquely tailored to their needs. It will allow for more efficient, democratic distribution of funds through a variety of mechanisms in the long term. For now, our primary audience is developers who want to build on the protocol. Grants Protocol powers two main functions of the Grants Stack - the Manager and Explorer functions.
We kicked off the naming process with a cross-workstream brainstorming session, which looked like this:
We then opened up additional brainstorming prior to our Community Call naming session.
Over the holidays, we gave community members the opportunity to add to this brainstorm here, and then cast a vote.
The short list of names for Grants Protocol came down to:
- Alo Protocol: Evocative; Alo means feed, rear, cherish, educate, sustain in Latin and is also short for āallocateā
- Allocate Protocol: Descriptive; tied to core functionality of the protocol which is helping to allocate funds to communities building shared needs
- Stream Protocol: Evocative; stream suggests a flow of capital but also ties into the more nature-inspired elements of our brands like biomimicry and mycelial networks
- Pollen Protocol: Evocative; similar to stream, pollen suggest pollination, essential to germination and growth similar to funding for community projects and also ties to the nature-inspired elements of our brand
- Plurality Protocol: A blend between descriptive and evocative; helps describe our pluralistic tool that is the protocol and simultaneously signals our intention to showcase many and ties into our overall mission and vision
To be clear, there were not an overwhelming number of votes. But itās time to name these protocols, because they are launching.
So here, I encourage you to go back to our criteria and evaluate these names against those for yourself.
At first glance, most pass the criteria. The key concerns I have are:
- Alo being latin vs. just using Allo which comes from the English
- Allocate being too on the nose
- Stream sounding like it relates to a streaming/music service
- Pollen already being used for a DeFi protocol
- Plurality losing its impact if not paired with Protocol after it
- Descriptive vs. Evocative naming in general - is one better than the other for encouraging devs to build? There are certainly different opinions
Given that Alo has the most votes, I am encouraging us to consider Alo vs. Allo.
I also encourage you to consider this as part the Gitcoin protocol portfolio, which includes Passport and will also include whatever we name Project Protocol.
Rather than running down the list of criteria and evaluation here, will let you do that on your own and leave feedback in the comments section.
Naming Project Protocol
This brings us to our third name: our protocol that empowers project owners to build a project profile, grow their reputation and apply for funding, currently called Project Protocol
As a reminder, this a decentralized registry of projects designed to empower project owners to grow their online reputation, demonstrate impact and connect with funding to bring their vision to life - all with sovereign ownership of their data. It acts as a projectās single home where project owners can integrate their most up-to-date information to easily access resources they need to thrive. Concurrently, the protocol can act as a repository in which funders can source and validate trustworthy, impactful projects that will help grow their ecosystem. For now, our primary audience is developers who want to build on the protocol. Grants Protocol powers a main function of the Grants Stack - the Builder function (previously known as Grants Hub.)
Project Protocol was part of the same process.
The short list of names for Project Protocol came down to:
- Node [Protocol]: Evocative; In botany, the part of a plant stem from which one or more leaves emerge; in tech, a point at which lines or pathways intersect or branch; a central or connecting point; alludes to the protocol proposition as this being a hub empowering project owners to create a single profile they can then use to establish reputation
- Seed [Protocol]: Evocative; in botany, the embryonic stage of the plant life cycle, suggesting a starting point from which everything blooms; alludes to the value proposition of being an essential starting point for project growth
- Base [Protocol]: Descriptive: a conceptual structure or entity on which something draws or depends, a foundational structure; ties into the core functionality of the protocol serving as a hub for projects
Interestingly, none of these were originally followed with āProtocolā in the original brainstorm. There were also many other descriptive names that had a couple of votes, like Project Hub Protocol and Project Registry.
Again, I encourage you to go back to our criteria and evaluate these names against those for yourself.
At first glance, most pass the criteria. The key concern I have is Seed being owned by our friends at Seed Club. Additionally, considering the common association between seed and capital (e.g., seed funding), it feels to me like a better fit for our Grants Protocol. But regardless, Iād worry about us using it. As with Grants Protocol, Iām also still wondering about the Descriptive vs. Evocative question.
Here it again becomes important to consider this name alongside our other protocols, and to consider the aforementioned proposed names for Grants Protocol as well as our existing Passport.
As before, rather than running down the list of criteria and evaluation here, will let you do that on your own and leave feedback in the comments section.
Next Steps
Are the names here? Iām not sure. Personally, I would love to see more options and a robust discussion here. We already have Passport - itās simultaneously evocative and descriptive. Itās not a literal passport - but the name alludes to what it does, while also describing it as a tool.
Does Allo do that? Does Node do that? No. Names that would align with Passport would be things like Wallet or Bank, Hub or Home.
If we go with a latin name for one, should they all be Latin? Honestly, it probably doesnāt matter - we donāt need to be rigid.
The point of this post is to lay out the considerations and the criteria so you can evaluate and give feedback for us to consider as we evaluate next steps. We will likely not have a vote here on the forum, but again, feedback here will help determine that.
We are aiming to align on final names by end of next week, Jan 13 - although this is not a hard and fast deadline, weād greatly appreciate if you left feedback by EOD Jan 12!
ALSO! You might be wondering when weāll be sharing the most up to date information on Grants Stack and the other protocols - this will be shared in forthcoming governance posts in the next week.
Share your feedback!
We are aiming to align on final names by end of next week, Jan 13 - although this is not a hard and fast deadline, weād greatly appreciate if you left feedback by EOD Jan 12!
Looking for additional context? Hereās a quick reminder of how we got here and our objectives of this work
After months of foundational work that included reviewing past iterations of our mission and vision, speaking with different community members and thought leaders, surveying stakeholder audiences completed, and coming back together to synthesize, we started to distill key pieces of our Brand Strategy (as a reminder, you can learn more about Brand and Brand Strategy in the last governance post in this series, here.)
The Brand Strategy is not meant to be overly prescriptive. Rather, it aims to offer a framework as well as a set of tools that should give contributors and the community a clear sense of direction. It also helps to inform design development and decisions.
Our intent is to develop a Brand Strategy that builds upon our existing Brand Purpose, creating a cohesive Brand Narrative - giving us more clarity around key strategic elements and considerations that can inform the evolution of our visual identity.
In its entirety, the Brand Strategy will define vision, mission, core principles, and strategic approaches for the foreseeable future (until another revision is deemed necessary by the community). The aim is to align the DAO around a set of common values and objectives so we can collectively do a better job in allocating resources, setting priorities, executing, and evolving towards a shared āNorth Star.ā
To better understand how we reached the below, and to understand it more comprehensively, visit our Brand Evolution Board as well as the original Brand Attributes Workshop, which kicked off this work. Weāve referenced our communityās past work - including the Other Internet work and the Mission and Vision work