Summary

Under pressure, you find out whether naming is running the launch. That moment tests if strategy is really steering what to build, when to release, and how to prove it. The move is to make the brand a decision system that aligns choices. Then execution regains clarity—and pace.

→ Watch more videos in this playlist on YouTube

Our Perspective

What this means for leaders navigating growth, change or transformation in their organisation.

The Real Launch Risk

The bigger risk in a launch isn’t the name; it’s the misalignment that sits beneath it. When teams frame launch as a moment, not a chain of decisions, they ship noise rather than intent. Markets now read coherence across story, experience and delivery. If the internal logic is loose, the external verdict is harsh.

The base rate should sober us. Deloitte notes that around a third of drug launches fall short of first‑year expectations, and only about a quarter manage to claw back later—evidence that late fixes rarely change the arc. The lesson is simple: control the decision architecture early or accept volatility later.

Design The Decision Chain

In our experience with launch‑stage leadership teams, the breakthrough is agreeing the decision logic before debating the name. Treat the launch as an operating system that connects portfolio choices, decision rights and market proof. The name then becomes a consequence, not the centrepiece.

• Portfolio fit: Decide where the product strengthens or stretches the brand, and why now. Tie success to revenue, adoption and a handful of leading signals you can track weekly.
• Governance: Make decision rights explicit. Stage the work with firm milestones, rehearsed handovers and pre‑agreed “if/then” responses to known risks.
• Market mechanics: Design the narrative, naming and claims to travel across channels, with proof points that show up early and often.

Evidence Over Volume

Customers and partners reward credible signals over loud launches. That means pilots that mirror real usage, partner endorsements that de‑risk adoption, and early customer outcomes that are specific, not vague. Publish less, but make each proof travel further by aligning language and metrics across sales, product and customer success.

The coordination cost is real. HaveIgnition reports that most launches involve many hands—over half have eight or more stakeholders, and the vast majority include at least four—so ambiguity multiplies quickly. This is precisely why clarity before creativity matters: when everyone knows what “good” looks like, momentum compounds.

Implications For Leaders

Three moves raise the odds without slowing pace:

• Set a single “north star” for the launch, then three leading indicators (e.g., trial activation, qualified pipeline, retention after 30 days) to steer decisions.
• Map decision rights once, visibly. Who decides, who advises, who’s informed—then rehearse two failure scenarios to test the system.
• Build a lightweight proof library—pilots, customer quotes, benchmarks—that go live with the announcement and compound over the first 90 days.

Treat launches as compounding systems rather than first nights, and brand starts working as an amplifier of value, not a last‑minute label.

Sources:

• Drug launch success variability analysis — Deloitte
• HaveIgnition product launch effectiveness statistics — HaveIgnition

Further Resources

1. Brand Strategy: Beyond Logos and Design Assets
2. When Brand Awareness Undermines Your Demand Strategy
3. The Positioning Myth: Why Trade-Offs Drive Strategy

Curious how this applies in your market? We’re speaking with leaders across industries every week. Let’s talk.

Back to top