When we first started building our design system, we quickly realized that giving it a name wasn't just a matter of creativity — it was a matter of clarity, identity, and adoption. Without a distinct name, the system felt abstract and hard to reference in conversations across teams. Developers called it "the components library," designers referred to "UI Kit," and product managers weren't even sure what it was. The lack of a shared label created friction, diluted ownership, and made documentation and onboarding harder. Naming it became a small but crucial step toward aligning everyone around a single source of truth.
Principles, not Features
It matters a lot what kind of company stands behind a design system — what they believe in and how those beliefs shape their product. The design system in question was built for ActiveCollab, a project management app that goes beyond task tracking and feature checklists. At its core, ActiveCollab is about fostering meaningful collaboration, creating clarity in communication, and supporting teams in doing their best work without burning out. These values guided not just how the product was built, but how the design system should be named and structured.
Baptizing
My initial idea was to find a noun that begins with the letters "AC" (as a nod to ActiveCollab), while also capturing the spirit of collaboration and teamwork. That's why I chose: "Accord".
Further on, my ideas began to revolve around nouns that evoke collaboration — not just among team members and clients using ActiveCollab, but also between designers and developers working together to build the design system itself. That's why I thought of "Alliance".
…then through "colleague" to "Companion".
In the end, none of those names were chosen — but the process itself was meaningful. If nothing else, it gave me a better understanding of how to approach naming thoughtfully and collaboratively. And who knows, it might even make naming my daughter one day a little easier.