Policy Brief #94 - Rightsizing Brand Names: The Effects of Brand Name Length on Brand Name Attitude and Recognition

24 June 2026

Jesse Zee, Kim Willems, Malaika Brengman and Timothy Desmet 

For decades, branding experts, business advisors, and marketing textbooks have promoted a simple naming principle: keep brand names short, ideally limited to two syllables. This rule is widely used because short names are assumed to be easier to remember, easier to process, and more appealing to consumers.

This policy brief revisits that assumption. The findings show that the widely used two-syllable rule oversimplifies how consumers process brand names. Whether shorter names perform better depends on the outcome being considered. 
 

Highlights

1.      The persistence of short names and the two-syllable rule

Conventional branding advice strongly favours short names. Business publications, brand name consultants, and marketing textbooks frequently argue that shorter brand names are easier to remember and therefore more effective. In many cases, this recommendation is translated into a simple rule of thumb: aim for two syllables.
The popularity of this advice is understandable. Brand names must compete for attention in increasingly crowded markets, and shorter names appear easier to process. As a result, the assumption that “shorter is better” has become deeply embedded in branding practice.

Despite its popularity, however, the empirical basis for the two-syllable rule remains surprisingly limited. More importantly, it assumes that syllables provide the most meaningful way to evaluate brand name length.

Our recent study challenges both assumptions.

2.    Recognition: longer names perform better

The first assumption in branding we challenge is that shorter names are easier to remember.

Instead, our findings show that when consumers are asked to recognise previously encountered non-word brand names, recognition improves as brand name length increases. Longer names were recognised more accurately than shorter names.

This finding challenges the beforementioned conventional belief that shortening a brand name automatically improves memorability. Longer names provide more information, making them easier to distinguish from competing names during recognition.

For organisations developing new brands, the implication is straightforward: reducing a name to its shortest possible form does not necessarily improve recognition and may even sacrifice distinctiveness. When a firm’s goal is to launch a highly distinguishable brand, as is often the case in brands advertised through billboards, radio or awareness campaigns, it is probably better to prefer a longer brand name over horter alternatives.

3.    Moving beyond syllables: why phonemes matter

The second assumption we challenge is that syllables provide the most meaningful way to evaluate brand name length. The widely used two-syllable rule not only recommends short brand names but also assumes that syllable count is the most appropriate measure of length.

Our findings suggest otherwise. Brand name length can also be measured through phonemes, the smallest units of sound in a language. Because phonemes capture sound structure more precisely, they provide a more detailed measure of brand name length than syllables.

Consider the brand names Lee and Dell. Both are one-syllable names. Lee consists of two phonemes (/l/ and /iː/), whereas Dell consists of three phonemes (/d/, /ɛ/, and /l/). From a syllable perspective, the two names appear equally short. From a phonemic perspective, however, Dell is 50% longer than Lee. This illustrates why syllable counts can overlook meaningful variation in brand name structure.

This distinction becomes important when examining brand attitudes. While conventional branding advice recommends two-syllable names, our findings suggest that attitudes are better predicted by phonemic length. Brand names containing approximately 3–4 phonemes are associated with the most favourable attitudes, regardless of whether they contain one, two, or three syllables.

Table 1 illustrates these ideas using existing non-word brand names. Names with the same number of syllables can differ substantially in their phonemic length and expected evaluative outcomes. Conversely, names associated with favourable attitudes cluster around 3–4 phonemes, even when they differ in syllabic length.
This distinction has practical consequences. If brand managers relied solely on the traditional two-syllable rule, they might favour names such as Honda or Revlon over names such as Dell or Skype. Our findings suggest that this would be a misleading conclusion, as phonemic length provides a more informative guide to expected brand attitudes than syllable count alone.

Note. At the time of launch none of these NWBNs were existing English dictionary words

4.     Key recommendations and lessons learned

DOWNLOAD THE POLICY BRIEF