Your product team just shipped a major feature. It took six months to build. The engineering was brilliant. And they want to call it "Velocity Engine."
Nobody knows what that means.
This pattern repeats constantly in B2B software. Teams pick feature names that sound innovative or technical, then wonder why adoption is low. Customers don't use features they don't understand, and they don't understand features with names that require explanation.
I've worked on dozens of product launches where naming was the difference between 60% adoption and 15% adoption. The pattern is consistent: descriptive names win. Clever names confuse.
Here's how to name features so customers actually get it.
The Cleverness Trap
Product teams love clever names. They want something that sounds innovative. Different. Memorable.
So they create abstract names like "Copilot," "Catalyst," "Nexus," or "Orchestrator." These names might win awards internally, but they fail the customer test: someone seeing the feature for the first time has no idea what it does.
Clever names create friction at every stage:
- Discovery: Customers see it in your product but don't click because they don't know what it is
- Consideration: Sales has to explain what the name means before explaining what it does
- Adoption: Users avoid features they don't immediately understand
- Support: Every support conversation starts with "what is X?"
The cost is real. Features with unclear names get 40-60% lower adoption than features with descriptive names, even when the functionality is identical.
The Descriptive Naming Framework
The best feature names follow a simple pattern: they describe what the feature does in customer language.
Rule 1: Start with the customer job, not the technology
- Bad: "Smart Routing Engine"
- Good: "Automatic Lead Assignment"
The customer doesn't care about routing algorithms. They care about getting leads to the right rep automatically.
Rule 2: Use verbs that indicate action
- Bad: "Analytics Dashboard"
- Good: "Track Campaign Performance"
"Track" tells customers what they can do. "Dashboard" just describes the interface.
Rule 3: Include the object customers recognize
- Bad: "Workflow Accelerator"
- Good: "Approval Automation for Contracts"
"Contracts" grounds the feature in something customers already deal with daily.
Rule 4: Keep it under 5 words
- Bad: "Advanced Multi-Channel Campaign Orchestration Platform"
- Good: "Multi-Channel Campaign Manager"
Longer names don't get remembered. Three words is ideal. Four is acceptable. Five is maximum.
When to Use Category Names vs. Invented Names
Sometimes you can leverage existing category understanding instead of inventing new names.
Use category names when:
- The category is well-understood in your market
- You're implementing a standard capability
- Competitors use the same terminology
Examples: Email Builder, Calendar Integration, Two-Factor Authentication, API Documentation
These work because customers already know what these things are. Don't reinvent familiar concepts.
Invent new names when:
- You're doing something genuinely novel
- No existing category fits
- You need to differentiate from competitor implementations
But even then, make it descriptive. If you invented a new way to score leads that's genuinely different, call it "Predictive Lead Scoring," not "Einstein" or "IQ Engine."
Testing Feature Names Before Launch
Don't guess. Test names with actual customers.
The 5-second test: Show the feature name to someone unfamiliar with your product. Give them 5 seconds. Then ask: "What do you think this feature does?"
If they can't describe it reasonably accurately, the name fails.
The comparison test: Show customers 2-3 name options. Ask which one makes it clearest what the feature does.
Don't ask which they "like" better. Ask which is clearer. You're optimizing for understanding, not preference.
The support ticket test: Before launch, show the feature name to your support team. Ask: "How many support tickets will this name generate?"
If they groan or laugh, that's your answer.
Handling Internal Resistance
Product teams will resist descriptive names. They'll argue:
"It's boring." – Boring names that drive adoption beat clever names that don't.
"Competitors might copy it." – They can copy your features too. Compete on execution, not naming obscurity.
"It doesn't sound innovative." – Innovation is in what it does, not what you call it.
"Marketing wants something catchier." – Marketing wants what drives results. Descriptive names drive results.
The pattern I've seen work: let teams use code names internally during development. Switch to descriptive names for customer-facing launch. Everyone gets what they want.
Real Examples: Good vs. Bad
Slack's "Channels" ✅
Clear, descriptive, instantly understood. Everyone knows what a channel is for organized conversations.
Salesforce's "Einstein" ❌
Requires explanation. Most users don't know what Einstein does without reading documentation.
Stripe's "Payment Links" ✅
Exactly what it sounds like. Links that accept payments. Zero confusion.
HubSpot's "Sequences" ❌
Could mean anything. Requires explanation that it's automated email follow-up.
Notion's "Databases" ✅
Structured data in tables. Name matches customer mental model.
Zoom's "Breakout Rooms" ✅
Perfectly descriptive. Rooms where groups break out for discussions.
The Adoption Impact
Here's what happens when you get naming right:
Feature pages get 2-3x more clicks because customers understand what they're clicking on.
Sales cycles shorten because reps spend less time explaining what things are called and more time on value.
Support tickets decrease because customers can find and use features without help.
Adoption rates improve because there's no friction between seeing the feature and understanding what it does.
The best feature names are invisible. Customers see them, instantly understand them, and move straight to using them. That's when you know you've named it right.