What’s in a name?

Why blame politicians for being obsessed with name changes? When the mighty Hindustan Lever Limited (HLL) thinks it makes sense to change its change to Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL), you have to concede that politicians too may have a point.

There was a big fuss when Madras was changed to Chennai, Calcutta to Kolkata and Bombay to Mumbai. When Bangalore was changed to Bengalooru, some people thought that was the beginning of the end for India’s Silicon Valley. It’s a different matter that these name changes have by themselves done little to diminish the attractiveness of any of these cities as an investment destination. No surprise, either. Did foreigners worry when Peking was changed to Beijing? Or Ceylon to Sri Lanka?

HLL was thought up at a time when xenophobic sentiments were strong and MNCs were viewed with suspicion in the developing world- they were seen as colonialists under private, instead of government, auspices. The proposed name change suggests that Unilever no longer believes that a strong foreign association is politically incorrect in post-reform India. Only a year or two ago, HLL made bold to bring in a foreigner as CEO after a long time (although the chairman is still Indian).

HLL says the change of name will help it leverage the brand of its international parent. Many will be sceptical. HLL is a terrific brand and it has already has the right mix of desi and videsi appeal. To go from HLL to HUL may not make things worse but there’s little reason to believe that it will make things better. HLL no longer sits on the high pedestal it once enjoyed; it has made mistakes in recent years. Investors must hope this is not another.