I’ve been thinking about brands a lot this week. Not that surprising for someone who’s essentially a “brand-guy” ‘cause I usually think a lot about brands. But in this instance, one brand in particular, and specifically the aspect of naming a brand.
The classic quotation to ease into a brand naming discussion would likely be Shakespeare’s “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Classic, right? A more esoteric way to go would be to opt for Cervantes’, “Words have meaning, but names have power.” Every brand aspires to be a “Power Brand” don’t they? Or a more rational way to wade into the topic might be to quote from every marketing textbook ever written; “Brand names are crucial marketing elements.”
Their raison d’etre? Well, awareness, sure. Recognition. Create a personality and purpose and, hopefully, differentiate yourself from the competition. But to distinguish an Identity. To build trust and establish an emotional connection that leads to trust and loyalty. Engage consumers. Create value and facilitate marketing efforts and brand expansion. 
The concept of branding is an old established practice, traced back to ancient civilizations. Think 2,700 BCE when craftsmen stamped their name or a symbol on their goods to indicate, well, it was theirs. The first officially registered brand name is believed to be Bass & Co.’s red triangle for Bass Pale Ale, registered in 1876. Branding and brand names, powered by the industrial revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries and a shift towards mass production made product differentiation more difficult. And desirable. Brand names made it a bit easier.
As markets (and consumers) developed, you had the normal brand naming exercises. “Brads Drink,” became “Pepsi Cola.” Tokyo Telecommunication Engineering Corporation changed their name to “Sony.” Haloid ultimately changed its name to “Xerox.” And Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company, ended up as “IBM.” We’ve lived through a couple of decades where brands have looked to modernize and update their brand by shortening their names. There’s usually a logic to that.
Some brands have been forced by circumstances to change, some by corporate mergers. But more-and-more changes take place to strengthen visual identities for multiple platforms, particularly mobile. That’s of particular interest (and import) to brands given 90% of consumers have a smartphone and more than 50% of them use their phone to shop. So, an attractive, engaging brand name isn’t an opportunity to be missed. But the digital world notwithstanding, it’s not a new tactic and is a strategy that’s been in practice since modern advertising began.
It was Somerset Maugham who noted, “The most useful thing about a principle is that it can always be sacrificed to expediency,” and expediency has been a most powerful reason of all for a brand to change its name. Kentucky Fried Chicken went to “KFC” partly because consumers were already calling it that, but mostly to put some space between themselves and the word “fried,” which had taken on unhealthy connotations.
Phillip Morris moved to “Altria,” to distance itself from the deadly business of selling tobacco. Smith and Wesson changed to the “American Outdoor Brand Corporation” to – according to them – reflect their “many brands and products and growth strategy.” Feel free to assume, this had nothing to do with increased gun violence, if you are so moved. (I was not.)
Uncle Ben’s became “Ben’s Original” as part of the 2020 cultural renaissance, with companies forced to confront racial stereotypes. The company dropped the name and the image they had used since 1947, that of an elderly African American man in a bow tie. The company said it wanted to “be more equitable.”
Some brand name changes have been made in reaction to consumer preferences, behavior-trends, and have been driven by increased access to search data. With everything going online, the competition for attention and engagement has increased and name changes are often thought to help. So, brands have looked to simplify and shorten names to accomplish those goals.
Kraft was originally “Kraft Foods.” Uber Cab became “Uber.” Weight Watchers was changed to “WW.” Restoration Hardware became “RH.” Sometimes dropping individual words were thought to help a brand better connect with consumers. J.C. Penney dropped “Department Stores” from its name. Tesla dropped “Motors” from their name. Dominos dropped “Pizza” and Dunkin’ dropped “Donuts.” North Face dropped the “The” in their original name. As did Facebook (previously known as “TheFacebook,” currently “Meta” although thatchange came quickly after the release of thousands of internal documents indicating Facebook knew they were causing teenage mental health problems and had failed to act against posts by human traffickers, drug cartels, and conspiracy theorists, choosing profits over safety. Feel free to move this paragraph to the expediency grouping above if you like.) But, OK, some marketers suggest dropping certain names can reflect a broader range of product and service offerings.
So yeah, there are reasons and “reasons,” some of them having nothing to do with marketing. But for the moment let’s go with wanting to be more accessible to consumers and being more representative of a brand’s diversified offerings and, perhaps, a broader focus in the changing marketplace. Let’s go with that.
Which is what the 155-year-old Campbell’s Soup Company is doing. They’re dropping “soup” from their corporate name, becoming “The Campbell’s Company.”
Now if you (like me) are asking 1) Why would a company walk away from a brand name that’s become part-and-parcel of the fabric of American products and an icon in the classic-legacy brand firmament? 2) Does it change things very much or align with a strategy to emphasize their diverse offerings (all of which, as you’ll see, with their own extraordinarily well known and respected brand names)? 3) Do you really think consumers aren’t aware that major companies have diversified brand holdings (even if they can’t name all of them)? and 4) Did you know (or care) that The Campbell’s Soup Company also owns Goldfish, Milano Cookies, Pepperidge Farms, Snyder’s of Hanover pretzels, Cape Cod Potato chips, Prego and Rao’s pasta sauces, V8, and Swansons brands too? Their CEO, Mark Clouse, said, “We will always love soup, and we’ll never take our eye off this critical business. But today, we’re so much more than soup.” For comment and thoughts, I refer you to point #4 above.
Legacy food companies like Campbell’s have been acquiring more brands to help them pivot towards and compete for a larger share of the snack market, which (no surprise) has been growing at a faster rate than the ready-to-serve soup segment. This current Campbell’s name change is supposed to make that easier. Feel free to add a question mark to the end of that last sentence if you feel it’s appropriate.
I began this with classic, esoteric, and rational option-insights into names as an introduction. If you’d like something more poetic as a conclusion, let’s go with Ralph Waldo Emerson. He wrote “We do what we must and call it by the best of names.”
When it comes to the Campbell’s change, I’ll let you be the judge.
Photo by Ben Lolli on Unsplash
Editor’s Note: Speaking of brands and brand folly … You may have noticed a new wrapper around Robert Passikoff’s latest piece. What you’re seeing is something of a work in progress but also the result of a months-long evaluation of our own brand. More on that here and here.
