What should we call this thing?

We held our branding and communications workshop last week – thanks to all those who participated, and we hope you found the discussion as interesting and worthwhile as we did. Thanks especially to Todd and Carl at Fireplough for their great facilitation of the session, it was much appreciated.

The purpose of the workshop was to kick around ideas for the name of the venture (it won’t be called ‘New Think Tank’), based on the purpose, values and ‘personality’ of what we’re attempting to do.

We’d love to hear your ideas as well. Have a look at the presentation here – New think tank 13th April 2012 workshop – which isn’t final by any means but represents part of our current ‘pitch’, then tell us what you think, either by posting a comment below or sending us an email via the Get involved page.

All (nice) suggestions are welcome – no idea is too stupid, as they say – but we want to avoid anything too think tanky (‘institute’, ‘centre’ etc) or too obvious (like ‘frontline‘, which is also a flea spray for pets of course). So get creative and we look forward to your ideas.


4 Comments on “What should we call this thing?”

  1. Can you manage a name (and a practice) which is the opposite of what I fear – which is roughly… OMG not another think tank; not another lot of 30-something fluent cocky graduates reading the opinion polls, pontificating, making suggestions based half on principle and half on what this grotesque government might be willing to fund. Better grow vegetables or read Marx or a good novel.

    • Thanks Michael, I agree that we need to be not ‘just another think tank’, and I’m not sure that’s what the world needs right now anyway. What we’re called, and more importantly how we work, will be critical to establishing the necessary crediblity to build a community of public and voluntary service providers and users. And I’m no fan of policy cockiness either.

  2. Thanks Michael H. That’s reassuring. From reading your stuff I would say that there are 2 distinctive features to be captured (if possible) in a name:
    (i) it’s about social policy (i.e. not tax, not housing, not transport, not pensions – except insofar as everything connects with everything else)
    (ii) it’s about method: collaborative work between users, professionals and policy-makers – combining the expertise of all. That looks distinctive to me.

    We have been trying to do something a bit similar (but only on London housing and planning) in a network called Just Space and you might find that of interest. http://justspace2010.wordpress.com

    Good luck

    • As you say,it would be great if the name suggested the focus on social policy and the ways of working, but also the potential benefits – more credible and grounded research and analysis, more practical and implementable policy proposals, and from this better supported reform programmes. That’s too much to get into one name of course, but we might be able to point towards these benefits by emphasising the (hoped for) authenticity of the approach. Thanks for telling us about Just Space, it sounds interesting.


Let us know what you think

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s