Is it ever a good idea to resurrect a brand name or is it better to let sleeping dogs lie? If it died once, it probably died for a reason. But it can bring instant recognition which is invaluable in helping to stand out from the competition.
Those of a certain age will know all about Arthur Andersen (one of the original big five accounting firms) and the Enron scandal. In effect, it ended very badly for everyone, with Arthur Andersen being blamed and forever tainted by it, and unsurprisingly it collapsed not soon after. Twenty-odd years later, Andersen Consulting is coming back, being spun out of Andersen Global. Just as before, it’s all very familiar.
‘Arthur’ has been dropped from the names, presumably in a balancing act of recognition and heritage whilst distancing itself from everything they wish was forgotten.
Most people under 40 probably won’t remember or know anything about its original downfall so won’t care. But for the older generation (and more senior level in charge of the purse strings) it will have some name recognition, and there’s the argument that it might provide some cut through that’s worth having. But with a history that ended in such disgrace, I really don’t think I’d have brought it back, as it surely does them far more harm than good.
After all, when the original Andersen Consulting split away from the parent group back in the early 2000s, it was forced to change its name to something new and it seems to have worked out alright for them. You might have heard of them – they’re called Accenture.
— Know your audience
