Know-How Exchange : Branding

Why don't you keep the owner's name and create a branding campaign that captures a theme (e.g. Morgan Stanley presents "Exervio".

I find it rather an unconvincing argument for changing the name of an organization.You have already built some brand image, so why do it? You do not change your scope or activities- you simply grow.
What's in a name?The reason there is no Arthur Anderson among the big five anymore is not the name itself, but indecent dealings the company indulged in.

I agree with not taking out the founders name only because people recognize your company that you have established, maybe just add "Global" to the end? Just to say "the big picture" to everyone.

Never change the name unless you're trying to get away from negative publicity or a bad past. It's similar changing the packaging...there are often way too many failures when this occurs.

Why not just add something to the name...

"John Doe Executive Coaching Firm"

I would put my concentration on building a solid business model, ensuring that the business itself will be able to meet the demands of a new, more expansive client base.

Sometimes a flashy name can sound a bit pretentious, I would stick with the name unless it's something really displeasing to the ear such as Engelbert Humberdink.

You say that you are already working with clients all across the US...
That tells me that the current name is working.
Obviously, if there are some good values associated with that name, it means something to people.
Changing it for the sake of "sounding like a big boy" doesn't make any sense at all.
I don't believe that some private capital investment firm will notice you if you suddenly will call yourself "catapult" or "primus" or some other pretentious latin sounding name.
Take a long look at yourself, see all the good things (notice the bad ones too) and just learn how to grow with all the assets you already have.
You can't change who you are, only how you perform.
I'll be happy to offer you internal branding workshops myself...

I almost never encourage my clients to change a name. The time it took to brand your name is basically lost, forcing you to start all over again. However, if you are set on the thought, then my recommendation would be to use the name in different format. Ex. use an abbreviation, or just add a tagline.

Besides, some of the best company names are actual names (Elizabeth Arden, Tommy Hilfiger, etc.)

It's the company and the marketing that mostly builds the name and reputation, NOT the name itself.

Heidi Bisbee
Bizzybee Marketing
Bowling Green, OH

Here is my view, I tend to agree with some of the other comments.

Keep the name, you have built a good reputation and brand.

Add your new name:
Exervio "An arthur anderson co."

I sense the problem is not the name, but the future plan to sell up. Presumably the founder wants to retain their own name for future use to avoid a situation like Saatchi and Saatchi versus M&C Saatchi in the advertising world, or Terence Conran and "Conran Design Group".

In which case, this a personal decision, rather than a business decision. It's down to the founder themselves as to how much control they want to retain over their own name.

Changing a name for any other reason is not merited unless the brand is tarnished in some way. There are plenty of businesses that retain their founders names - Hewlett Packard, Bell Labs, Warner Bros, Dell, Goldman Sacks, Procter and Gamble, Chanel etc.

If the founder takes the decision that he or she wants to retain their name separately from the business, then the name should be changed, but I would try to retain connections with the old name for continuity - eg initials and a period of planned transition would be needed.