Naming inconsistencies everywhere
Different teams, agencies, and platforms use different conventions, meaning cross-channel analysis is hard work.
No central source of naming logic
Naming conventions live in spreadsheets, version control is hard and validation is impossible.
Manual QA catches problems too late
You discover naming errors at reporting time — well after the campaign launched — when it’s too late to fix.
Unable to analyse at the level you need
Without consistent and granular taxonomy, you can’t dig into the detail – the data’s there but unusable.
Broken reports
Stakeholders lose trust when numbers don’t add up or categories don’t match.
Hours of cleanup
Analysts spend days reconciling naming variations instead of finding insights.
Missed optimisation
You can’t improve what you can’t measure – and inconsistent taxonomy means you can’t measure accurately.
Centralised taxonomy definitions
One place to define all your levels – market, channel, product, audience, creative, offer. Everyone works from the same source.
Automated name generation
Users select from dropdowns, the system generates compliant names. No manual typing, no inconsistencies.
Approval workflows
New values can require sign-off before they’re available. Control what gets added without blocking day-to-day work.
Rogue naming detection
Every generated name gets a unique ID. When campaigns appear without valid IDs, you know instantly – not three months later.
Clean data from day one
Names are correct at creation, not fixed in post-processing.
Report by any dimension
With consistent taxonomy, you can analyse performance in whatever detail the business needs.
Full audit trail
Know who created what, when, and whether it was approved.
Evolves with your business
Add new markets, products, or channels without breaking your naming framework.
Bright Analytics modules to unpack your taxonomy, validate data and present for easy analysis.
The taxonomy is your reporting structure – all the ways you need to break down your data (market, audience, channel, product, creative, offer, etc.).
Naming conventions are built from taxonomy levels. You’ll typically have several – one for campaigns, one for creatives – each combining different levels.
Yes. Using the same master data defined for your campaigns, you can build naming conventions for tracking parameters. Use coded values, convert to lowercase, strip spaces – whatever your analytics setup requires.
We can run workshops to agree your taxonomy levels and capture the values you need. When there are multiple channels and agencies involved in can help to bring everyone together in a workshop environment to work through questions and channel / platform quirks together. We then get the Taxonomy Manager into key users’ hands for sense-checking, before rolling out to end users.
Absolutely. Role-based permissions control who can generate names, who can create new taxonomy values, and who can approve proposed values. Admins have full control; end-users see only what they need.
Yes. Each taxonomy value can have an associated code. Names can display full values in the UI while outputting codes in the final string – which are then unpacked at reporting time.
Of course! You can customise every last element of the ‘formula’ for a naming convention, from delimiter’s to coded values, forcing upper, lower case, replacement of specific characters for any free text levels you allow.
Taxonomy problems hide in plain sight until reporting falls apart. Book a 30-minute taxonomy audit and we’ll review your current naming conventions across channels, identify where inconsistencies are costing you insight, and show you a path to cleaner, more reliable data.