The new name is Microsoft Dynamics. The word “solutions” as been ineffectual white noise for some time now, and the word “business” brings very little to the table, so congratulations to Microsoft for finding a solutions solution. Accountingsoftware.com and PressPass bring us some details:
PressPass: Why is Microsoft Dynamics a good name for “Project Green” and Microsoft Business Solutions?
Reller [Tami Reller, corporate vice president of Microsoft’s Business Solutions Group]: We undertook and completed a significant research project that was amongst the most extensive naming research projects Microsoft has ever done. We conducted hundreds of interviews with business decision makers and IT decision makers in the U.S. and international markets. These interviews yielded a number of findings, including that our customers and partners strongly prefer a brand that is suggestive rather than merely descriptive or fanciful.
At least they spent a ton of money making sure of the obvious. And now, armed with a pricey PP presentation and reams of focus grope data, they boldly embrace the obvious. Their conclusion is correct however. Neither descriptive nor fanciful names are acceptable choices, and by “fanciful” we assume they mean “random”. With good intentions and a little knowledge, Microsoft pushes the name changes further, truncating the fanciful:
- Microsoft CRM becomes Microsoft Dynamics CRM.
- Microsoft Business Solutions-Great Plains becomes Microsoft Dynamics GP.
- Microsoft Business Solutions-Axapta® becomes Microsoft Dynamics AX.
- Microsoft Business Solutions-Navision becomes Microsoft Dynamics NAV.
- Microsoft Business Solutions-Solomon becomes Microsoft Dynamics SL.
The idea is right, Great Plains, Axapta and Navision are all worthless, random names (fanciful), with Solomon going to the relative head of the class on a bulbous curve. Those names rightly deserve the ax. But what is the point of replacing them with the equally ineffectual abbreviations GP, AV, NAV and SL, respectively? It is unimaginable, even for Microsoft, to believe these letter combos will summon the old ineffectual names in anyone’s mind, and even if they did, why call back to the bad “fanciful” names at all, given all the “research” and such?
Because this idea is so inane, and as much as it pains us, we have to give Microsoft the benefit of the out. We’re betting these initials are transitory, part of a strategy to phase these names out. It would be a solid strategy, as dropping them at the same time as renaming Business Solutions would be a confusing, brand equity hemorrhage. Looks like they understand the need for a transitional period, and if so, the entire effort is very well done.
Any bets?