The investment company now known as Abrdn (previously Aberdeen Asset Managers) found itself the subject of what felt like a Fleet Street comedy show when journalists from a range of titles vied to come up with the most hilarious headline for the company’s poorly received rebrand back in 2021. Entrants include: “ABRDN cries vowel” as well as reference to “dropping Es” and “irritable vowel syndrome”.
Things got so bad that Chief investment officer Peter Branner recently complained that the press’s “childish” jokes about the change were “corporate bullying”. Little good that did. The Financial Times responded with “Lv Abrdn aln” (Leave Abrdn alone), while City AM ran a front page that read “Abrdn: an apology – sry we kp tkng th pss ot of yr mssng vwls”!
Undeterred by Abrdn’s experience, MoneySupermarket (owner of the Moneysaving expert) announced last month that it is becoming MONY; it will be interesting to see if this rebrand is better received.
Is there such a thing as bad publicity?
While some might consider that there is no such thing as bad publicity, becoming the butt of an ongoing media joke isn’t great PR, it distracts from other positive stories and ridicule generally doesn’t help build trust with your customers or potential employees!
The legal sector is used to its fair share of mergers and take-overs, and this is often the moment for a law firm to change or tweak its name and undergo a rebrand
, but it needs to be approached very carefully to avoid the process becoming a talking point for all the wrong reasons.
What can law firms learn?
Many law firms have traditionally had rather long names formed from the amalgamation of the names of historical partners, often those who founded the firm. These have come to look old fashioned and just aren’t designed for the social media age which needs names that stand out and are easily and quickly readable. There is also the issue of continuity when partners leave and the practicalities when two firms with long names merge.
There are various examples of law firms dropping multiple names to simply be referred to by a single, less unwieldy name e.g. Linklaters & Paines became Linklaters and Lovell White Durrant became Lovells.
Shorter names are generally thought to be “stickier” because they are easier to remember, and easier to pronounce. As many law firms are now global businesses, a simple, single name is potentially an advantage as it more easily crosses borders.
A single name also allows for more stylised brand designs which can better enhance marketing materials.
Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water!
A law firm’s existing name contains the goodwill of the business and as such is a valuable asset. Changing it is not a decision that should be taken lightly; the history, legacy and trust of the firm is bound-up in its name.
While there may be a good reason for change and now may be the right time to implement it, but a considered and strategic approach will be the key to success. Thorough market research and testing should be undertaken (for example, if your firm operates in other countries does your chosen name have a different meaning there?) and a comprehensive branding and marketing strategy put in place.
As the case of Abrdn shows, getting it wrong is no laughing matter.
Recent Posts
Time for an update? Five simple ways to improve your law firm’s website
Joining up the dots to develop more clients and win more new business
An introvert’s guide to networking
Three ways to win clients for your law firm in 2024
Need some help with PR? Feel free to drop me an email to arrange a 30 minute complimentary call or take a look at some of the packages I offer law firms, accountancy practices and other b2b businesses.