How to Name Product Features (When Everyone Has an Opinion)

"It's too soft."

I was in hour two of a pricing and packaging meeting, and we'd just spent 45 minutes debating what to call a feature. The product lead had rejected "Data Repository" as the header for a capability group. Not because it was wrong—it was technically accurate. But because it didn't convey urgency or differentiation.

"What about 'Advanced Operations Management'?" someone suggested.

"Or 'Real-Time Process Automation'?"

"Centralized Workflow Hub?"

We had a spreadsheet with 47 features that needed customer-facing names. Some features cost us money to deliver (notification APIs). Some were demos that closed deals. Some were so technical that customer success didn't want to explain them to prospects. And we needed names that worked across all these contexts—sales decks, pricing pages, demo scripts, and support documentation.

The spreadsheet had been through six rounds of edits. Product wanted technical accuracy. Sales wanted demo-able language. Customer success wanted simplicity. Marketing wanted differentiation. And every time we changed a name, it broke something else—pricing expectations, competitive positioning, or sales objections.

That's when I learned that feature naming isn't a creative writing exercise. It's stakeholder management disguised as copywriting.

The Problem With How Most Teams Name Features

Most feature naming happens like this:

1. Product ships a feature with an internal codename
2. Someone asks "what should we call this on the pricing page?"
3. Marketing writes something that sounds good
4. Sales complains they can't explain it
5. Customer success complains it creates the wrong expectations
6. Everyone revises it three times until it's either too vague or too technical

You end up with one of two failure modes:

Too soft: Generic language that doesn't differentiate. "Enhanced Reporting." "Advanced Analytics." "Premium Support." These sound professional but tell customers nothing about what they're actually getting. A prospect reads your pricing page and thinks "don't I already have reporting?"

Too technical: Precise language that confuses buyers. "User Self-Service Mobile Setup Portal." "Real-time Bi-directional API Sync." "Multi-tenant Identity Management." These are accurate but require a glossary to understand. Customer success has to spend 15 minutes on every demo call explaining what the feature actually does.

The real problem isn't the names themselves. It's that most teams name features one at a time, in isolation, without a systematic framework for what makes a good feature name.

There are only two hard things in software development: cache invalidation and naming things. Product marketers are lucky—we only have to worry about one of those. But that's bad enough.

The Feature Naming Framework That Actually Works

After going through this process with multiple pricing redesigns, I've learned that good feature naming follows a specific sequence. Skip a step and you end up with names that work in one context but fail in another.

Step 1: Group Features into Capabilities First

Don't start by naming individual features. Start by grouping related features into logical capabilities.

Most teams make the mistake of creating a flat list of features, then trying to organize them later. This leads to feature names appearing in random order with no clear logic—you might have "Reporting" as feature #3, then "Advanced Reporting" as feature #27.

Instead, create capability groups first:

Bad approach: Flat feature list

• Authentication System
• Mobile Onboarding
• User Profiles
• Quick Setup
• Activity Reports
• User Transfers
• Video Onboarding

Good approach: Capability groups

• User Identity & Setup
  • Mobile Onboarding
  • Quick Setup
  • User Profiles
  • User Transfers
• Training & Onboarding
  • Video Onboarding
  • Custom Onboarding
• Authentication & Access Management
  • Authentication System
  • Self-Service Reporting

Why this matters: Capability grouping forces you to think about how customers understand your product. They don't want "17 features"—they want "solutions to 4 problems." The grouping becomes your story structure for demos, pricing pages, and sales conversations.

One product manager told me: "When you do this, it forces discipline. It forces you to think about what each feature actually is. You can have spreadsheets where everyone nods along, but when you actually name things, you realize half your team doesn't agree on what the feature does."

Step 2: Apply the Demo-Ability Test

Before finalizing any feature name, ask: "Can a sales rep demo this in 30 seconds without a glossary?"

We had a feature originally named "User Self-Service Mobile Setup Portal." Technically accurate—it was a portal for users, accessed via mobile notification, for self-service setup. But try saying that to a prospect.

The product manager pushed to simplify it to "Mobile Onboarding." Customer success initially resisted—"That's not specific enough. How will we explain the difference between mobile and in-app onboarding?"

But then we tested it in a demo. "Mobile Onboarding" let the sales rep pull out their phone, send themselves a setup link via notification, and complete the flow in real-time. The prospect got it immediately. No explanation needed.

"User Self-Service Mobile Setup Portal" required a 2-minute explanation before the demo even started.

The demo-ability test: If explaining the feature name takes longer than demonstrating the feature, the name is wrong.

Step 3: Check Pricing Implications

Some features have variable costs that affect pricing. Your naming needs to reflect this.

We debated whether to combine "Mobile Onboarding" and "In-App Setup" into a single "User Onboarding" feature. It would simplify the pricing page—one fewer line item to explain.

But then engineering reminded us: Mobile notifications cost money. We pay per message via API. In-app setup is free.

If we called it "User Onboarding" and included both, we'd either:

• Eat the notification costs (bad for margins)
• Limit mobile onboarding to higher tiers only (confusing for customers who see "User Onboarding" on all tiers)
• Add asterisks explaining "Mobile included on Pro tier only" (messy pricing page)

We kept them separate. "Mobile Onboarding: Limited" on the base tier meant customers got 100 messages/month. "Mobile Onboarding: Unlimited" on higher tiers meant no caps. Clear expectations, clean pricing.

The pricing test: Does this name create expectations about what's included? Will customers be confused when they hit usage limits or paywalls?

Step 4: Sales Enablement Check

This is the step most teams skip, and it's why half your feature names get ignored by the sales team.

Ask your customer success and sales leaders: "Do you want to explain this level of detail on discovery calls?"

We had a feature called "Salesforce & HubSpot Integration—Bi-directional CRM Data Sync." Product loved it because it was precise. It described exactly what the integration did.

The product lead pushed back: "I don't want to talk about specific integrations. I want to talk about the value—connecting mobile and desktop workflows. Let sales mention the specific platforms if the prospect uses them."

We changed it to "Cross-Platform Data Sync" with "Salesforce & HubSpot" as supporting details, not the headline. This let sales lead with the value (seamless data flow) and mention the platforms only when relevant.

Sales reps stopped skipping over the feature in demos. They could tell a story about eliminating manual data entry instead of listing integration partners.

The enablement test: Will sales actually use this name in their pitch, or will they make up their own language because yours is too awkward?

Step 5: Decide When to Combine vs. Separate Features

This is where most naming debates happen. Should "Mobile Onboarding" and "In-App Setup" be one feature or two?

The decision criteria:

Keep features separate when:

• They have different pricing implications (one costs money, one doesn't)
• They're experienced differently by end users (different workflows)
• They're valuable to demo individually (showing both creates differentiation)
• Some customers will only use one

Combine features when:

• They're variations of the same job-to-be-done
• Customer success doesn't want to explain the nuance
• Separating them makes your pricing page too cluttered
• The distinction is technical, not customer-facing

For mobile and in-app onboarding, we kept them separate because:

1. Different costs (mobile has API fees, in-app doesn't)
2. Different workflows (mobile for remote setup, in-app for logged-in users)
3. Demo value (showing mobile onboarding live via notification was a standout demo moment)

But we combined five different "workflow templates" into a single "Custom Templates" feature because customer success told us: "I don't want to explain the difference between a process checklist and a compliance form on a sales call. They're all templates. Bundle them."

Common Feature Naming Mistakes

After seeing dozens of pricing redesigns, here are the mistakes that show up repeatedly:

Mistake 1: "Too Soft" Language That Doesn't Differentiate

When you read your competitor's pricing page and see "Advanced Reporting," then look at your pricing page and see "Enhanced Analytics," you have a problem. These names sound professional but communicate nothing.

I've been guilty of this. I once named a feature "Premium Support" because I couldn't think of anything better. Sales immediately pushed back: "What makes it premium? Faster response times? Dedicated rep? Training? Customers think 'premium' just means 'more expensive.'"

We changed it to "Priority Support with Dedicated Success Manager" and deal close rates on that tier improved. Specific names set specific expectations.

The differentiation test: If you swapped this name onto your competitor's pricing page, would anyone notice?

Mistake 2: Flat Feature Lists Without Capability Grouping

Competitors in one industry I studied had pricing pages with 30+ features in a single ungrouped list. Prospects told us in research interviews: "I gave up trying to compare them. Too many checkmarks and asterisks."

When you organize features into 5-7 capability groups, suddenly your pricing page tells a story:

1. First, you need to manage user identity
2. Then, you need training and onboarding
3. Then, you need authentication and access
4. Then, you need workflow automation

Each group builds on the previous one. Customers understand the progression instead of drowning in a feature matrix.

Mistake 3: Names That Create Pricing Expectations You Can't Meet

We almost made this mistake with "Unlimited Integrations." Marketing loved it. It sounded premium.

Then product asked: "What happens when a customer wants a custom integration that would take us 3 months to build? Are we committed to building any integration they request?"

We didn't mean "unlimited" as in "infinite custom development." We meant "unlimited usage of our existing integrations." But that's not what "unlimited" communicates.

We changed it to "All Standard Integrations Included" and avoided a customer expectation nightmare.

Mistake 4: Not Considering How Features Will Be Explained

Your pricing page might say "Real-time Team Analytics" but if your customer success team has to spend 10 minutes on every demo call explaining what that means, your name is creating friction.

One CS leader told me: "I don't want to be at this detailed level. I don't want to explain whether analytics includes resource cost projections or just headcount. Just call it 'Team Dashboard' and let me show them what's in it."

That feedback changed our approach. We started reviewing every feature name with CS and asking: "If a prospect asks 'what is this?' on a discovery call, how long does it take you to answer?"

If the answer was more than 15 seconds, we simplified the name.

Real Examples from a Naming Process

Let me walk through specific decisions from a recent pricing redesign to show how this framework plays out in practice.

Example 1: The "Mobile Onboarding" Decision

Original name: "User Portal - Mobile > Self Setup"

The debate: Product lead wanted to combine this with "In-App Setup" into a single "User Self-Onboarding" feature. Customer success agreed—"I don't want to explain the difference between mobile and in-app on every call."

Why we kept it separate:

The product manager made a compelling case: "Mobile onboarding demos incredibly well. We can pull out our phone, send ourselves a notification, and complete the setup flow live in the demo. Prospects remember that. It's a standout moment."

But more importantly: Mobile notifications cost money. We pay per message via third-party API. In-app setup is free.

If we bundled them as "User Self-Onboarding," we'd have to either:

• Eat notification costs on all tiers (bad for unit economics)
• Restrict mobile to higher tiers (confusing—why does "User Self-Onboarding" work differently on different tiers?)
• Add pricing footnotes explaining the notification cap (cluttered pricing page)

Final decision: Keep them separate.

Pricing structure:

• Base tier: "Mobile Onboarding: Limited" (100 messages/month)
• Mid tier: "Mobile Onboarding: Limited" (500 messages/month)
• Premium tier: "Mobile Onboarding: Unlimited"

This set clear expectations. Customers knew exactly what they were getting, and we could demo the feature on sales calls without pricing surprises later.

Example 2: Grouping Authentication Features

Original structure: Flat list with authentication features scattered

• Authentication System (line item 4)
• Hardware Tokens (line item 12)
• User Self-Service Login (line item 23)

The problem: Prospects couldn't tell these were part of the same system. It looked like three unrelated features.

What we did: Created a capability group called "Authentication & Access Management" and nested all three features:

Authentication & Access Management

• Authentication System
• Hardware Tokens (sold separately)
• Self-Service Login

Now the pricing page told a story: "Here's how users access the platform. Software manages permissions, hardware provides additional security, and self-service login lets users authenticate without admin intervention."

Sales started using this structure in their demos. Instead of showing three disconnected features, they could show the complete authentication flow in one narrative.

Example 3: "Limited" vs "Included" vs "Unlimited"

The challenge: How do you show that a feature is available on multiple tiers but with different usage limits?

Most teams use checkmarks or "✓" symbols. But that doesn't communicate limits.

What we did:

• Included: Feature is available with no usage restrictions and no additional cost
• Limited: Feature is available with usage caps (shown in tooltip or asterisk)
• Unlimited: Feature is available with no usage caps

Example:

• Base tier: "Bulk Notifications: Limited (100 messages/month)"
• Mid tier: "Bulk Notifications: Limited (1,000 messages/month)"
• Premium tier: "Bulk Notifications: Unlimited"

This created clear expectations without cluttering the pricing page with detailed usage tables. Prospects could see at a glance which tier met their needs.

Example 4: The "Custom Templates" Consolidation

Original naming: Five separate features

• Process Checklist Templates
• Daily Standup Meeting Forms
• Team Communication Templates
• Compliance Form Templates
• Audit & Review Log Templates

The problem: Customer success said: "I don't want to list all five of these on a sales call. Prospects don't care about the difference between a process checklist and a compliance form. They want templates. Just call it that."

What we did: Consolidated into "Custom Templates" with a description: "Templates for meetings, workflows, compliance, and audits."

This gave sales a clean talking point—"You get comprehensive workflow templates"—and let them drill into specifics only if the prospect asked.

We added the detailed list to the product documentation and demo environment, but kept the pricing page simple.

The Feature Naming Checklist

Before finalizing any feature name, run it through these five questions:

1. Does this name describe a capability or just a feature?

Bad: "API Integration"
Good: "Automated Data Sync with Project Management Tools"

The second version tells customers what job it does, not just what it is.

2. Can a sales rep demo this in 30 seconds?

If your rep has to spend 2 minutes explaining what the feature name means before they can show the feature, the name is too complex.

3. Does the name create pricing expectations?

"Unlimited" means unlimited. "Premium" means more expensive. "Advanced" means there's a basic version somewhere.

Make sure your naming aligns with what customers will actually get.

4. Will customer success want to explain this detail level?

If CS tells you "I don't want to explain the difference between these two features," you should probably combine them or rename them to avoid the question.

5. Is it specific enough to differentiate but simple enough to understand?

"Enhanced Analytics" is simple but not specific.
"Real-time Multi-dimensional Team Analytics with Predictive Resource Cost Modeling" is specific but not simple.

"Team Analytics Dashboard" might be the right balance.

Why This Matters More Than You Think

Most PMMs think feature naming is a minor tactical task. Write some copy, get it approved, move on.

But I've seen feature names directly impact:

Sales velocity: When we renamed "Integration Suite" to show specific integrations ("Sync with Salesforce, HubSpot, and 15+ platforms"), deal cycle time decreased by 12%. Sales reps stopped getting the question "which platforms do you integrate with?" because the pricing page answered it.

Support load: When we clarified "Limited" vs "Unlimited" on usage-based features, support tickets about unexpected billing decreased by 40%. Better naming set better expectations.

Win rates: In competitive deals, clear capability grouping made our pricing page easier to understand than competitors who had 30+ ungrouped features. Buyers told us in win/loss interviews: "Your pricing made sense. Theirs was overwhelming."

Feature naming is rarely the reason you win or lose a deal. But it's friction. Bad names create confusion. Confusion creates questions. Questions slow down deals.

Good names don't make prospects buy. But they remove one more reason to delay.

The Uncomfortable Truth About Feature Naming

Here's what nobody tells you about feature naming: It's not a copywriting problem. It's a stakeholder alignment problem.

When you can't agree on what to name a feature, it's usually because your team doesn't agree on:

• What the feature does (product vs. sales understanding)
• Who it's for (marketing vs. customer success target buyer)
• What value it delivers (positioning disagreement)
• How it's priced (pricing strategy uncertainty)

The naming debate is just where these disagreements surface.

The product manager wanted "Mobile Onboarding" separate because it had pricing implications and demo value. Customer success wanted it combined because they didn't want to explain nuance. Both were right. The naming decision forced us to choose a priority: demo-ability and pricing clarity won.

Every feature naming decision is really a decision about:

• Product priorities: What matters enough to highlight separately?
• Sales strategy: What demos well vs. what creates confusion?
• Pricing strategy: What has variable costs vs. flat costs?
• Positioning: What differentiates vs. what's table stakes?

The best feature names survive all four tests. Technical accuracy (product), sales clarity (CS/AE), pricing expectations (finance), and competitive differentiation (marketing).

When your team can't agree on names, it usually means you haven't aligned on these underlying priorities.

Getting Past the Naming Spreadsheet Hell

Most feature naming happens in Google Sheets that have been edited 47 times across 6 stakeholder groups. By version 23, nobody remembers why "Enhanced Analytics" became "Advanced Reporting Suite" became "Analytics Dashboard Pro."

The problem with spreadsheet naming: Everyone edits in isolation. Product changes a name without realizing sales was using the old name in their pitch deck. Marketing tweaks language without checking if it affects pricing expectations. Customer success simplifies something without knowing it breaks competitive positioning.

You end up with pricing pages where features are named differently than they're described in the product. Sales decks that use different language than marketing pages. Support docs that reference features by old names because nobody updated them.

What you really need is one source of truth where naming decisions live, stakeholders can collaborate, and everyone sees the same version. Not because tools solve naming problems, but because they force the conversation to happen in one place instead of across 47 spreadsheet versions and 12 Slack threads.

The naming process I've described isn't fast. It's stakeholder management. But doing it once, systematically, beats doing it six times in six different spreadsheets.

What Actually Works

After going through this process multiple times, here's what I've learned:

1. Start with capability grouping, not feature naming. You'll change half your feature names once you see them grouped into logical categories. Group first, then name.

2. Involve sales and customer success early. They'll tell you which names create confusion and which enable conversations. Listen to them.

3. Test names in actual demos. Don't just debate names in meetings. Have a sales rep use them in a mock demo. You'll immediately see which ones work.

4. Set pricing expectations explicitly. "Limited" and "Unlimited" are better than checkmarks and asterisks. Customers want to know what they're getting.

5. Review competitor naming. Not to copy it, but to ensure you differentiate. If everyone in your category says "Advanced Analytics," you need different language.

6. Version your naming decisions. Keep a changelog of what you changed and why. When someone asks "why did we call it this?" six months later, you'll have an answer.

7. Accept that naming is stakeholder management. The best name isn't the most creative. It's the one that works for product, sales, CS, and pricing simultaneously.

Feature naming will never be easy. But it can be systematic.

And when everyone's arguing about whether to call something "Advanced Operations Management" or "Data Repository," having a framework beats having another two-hour meeting where nothing gets decided.