So, Colin, how did you decide which naming strategy to recommend?
What we found really helpful (and I’d advise anyone in a similar situation to try) is flipping the perspective – we looked in, instead of out.
I think the team had felt stuck for a long time. There was so much emotional attachment and equity in the Waterford Healing Arts Trust brand name – decades of incredible history. Losing or changing that in any way seemed unimaginable.
But equally, extending the name to cover the national work really wasn’t an option either. Having Waterford in the name would be too geographically limiting. They’d be viewed as too small a player.
What we did was step outside all those internal views. And instead started looking at the puzzle from the outside in.
We define a brand, quite simply as your reputation.
By stepping into the shoes of external audiences, we asked ourselves how many separate reputations were needed. And why?
And the right strategy suddenly became very, very clear. We quickly honed in on a hybrid structure – where a new brand and name would be created for the national body and all related national programmes.
The Waterford Healing Arts, minus the (legal) Trust part of the name, would then remain and be protected as an independent sub-brand under the new national parent brand’s remit – with its own completely unique reputation and agenda for delivering hands-on arts and health programmes in the region.
As would Arts + Health. It would sit under the national brand’s remit as a sub-brand and would continue to have its own complete editorial independence.