Don't Let the Wrong Name Stick

When Convenience Names Things

There was a working session where a system got drawn on a whiteboard.

A box was labeled “Salesforce.”

It wasn’t exactly right, but it was close enough. Everyone understood what it roughly represented, and the conversation kept moving.

At one point, it came up—usually as a question:

"But this is flexible for other CRMs, right?"

People nodded. It made sense. The understanding in the room shifted.

And then the conversation kept going.

No one disagreed. But no one changed it either.

Then it gets ported into a digital diagram.

Agreement Isn’t the Same as Action

It comes up again later.

A little more directly this time: "if it’s not really Salesforce, we should probably call it something else."

Still no pushback. Just no follow-through.

Because in the moment, it wasn’t the problem. The team was focused on bigger things. “Salesforce” was good enough to keep moving.

So it stayed.

Then it Forks

Over time, something else starts to happen.

Not because anyone disagrees.

One group is focused on building — Salesforce is the only CRM in scope right now — so “Salesforce” still works. It’s close enough. It keeps things moving.

Another group is focused on growth. “This needs to be flexible for other CRMs.”

So they start calling it “CRM.”

Both are reasonable.

Both are referring to the same thing.

But they’re optimizing for different things—at different moments.

And this is where it gets tricky.

Aligning on a shared name would help.

But it also feels like it slows things down.

So we don’t.

We just keep going—using what works for us.

Then We Start Compensating

We do what teams do.

We don’t stop to fix it.

We just… jot it down in little notebooks or virtual docs.

“Salesforce” over here is “CRM” over here.

We all kind of know it.
We all kind of agree.
We just never change it.

And now we’re not just remembering context—that it has to work beyond Salesforce—we’re managing mappings of names across contexts.

Then it Starts to Hurt

Now it’s inconvenient—both to keep the current path and to form a new one.

The current path is confusing.

And now it’s already everywhere.

It Adds Up

Nothing is technically broken.

It just gets harder than it should be.

A little more explanation.
A little more backtracking.
A little more confusion than necessary.

It’s harder to add new people.

It takes more time to align and collaborate.

It Compounds

One label on one diagram doesn’t matter much.

Until it’s five.

Or ten.

Or twenty.

Each one slightly off. Slightly assumed. Slightly explained.

And now everything takes a little longer, a little more effort, a little more patience than it should.

The Reality

No one is wrong.

Everyone is doing exactly what they should be doing.

And still—it ends up harder than it needs to be.

The Pattern

We let convenience name things early—and then try to fix it by committee once it’s already spread.

The Middle Ground

The name itself doesn’t have to be perfect.

But it does have to be intentional.

Not overthought. Not debated endlessly. Just… closed.

Because it’s much easier to adjust a name early—when it’s just a conversation—than to unwind it later, once it’s spread.