Naming the suite – collaborating with policy to reduce risk
Context
We needed a name for the new suite of courses aimed at teachers. The name had to clearly communicate the offer, feel credible to the audience, and align with existing policy and branding—particularly the NPQ (National Professional Qualification) landscape.
Because naming is difficult to change later, we treated this as a high-risk decision that required evidence from users as well as close collaboration with policy colleagues.
What we did
The TTE Digital team utilised user research sessions team to test potential names with the target audience.
We ran two rounds of research using name options that had been predefined by policy and digital colleagues. This included potential users for the reception and SEND courses, as well as school leadership. We focused on understanding:
- what each name communicated at a glance, particularly around the course complexity and length of time it might take to complete
- what users thought the courses were for and who they were aimed at
Alongside the research, we shared emerging insights with policy colleagues. This helped to make sure decisions reflected both user needs and policy intent.
What we learned
It was important that the name communicated who it’s for and appealed to those who the courses were targeted at.
Users interpreted different names as signalling different levels and audiences.
“National Professional Development (NPD)” often communicated that the courses were not aimed at leadership, which aligned with the intended audience for the suite and helped distinguish it from NPQs.
“National Professional Development (NPD) sounds like it’s for someone earlier in their career (than NPQs), it’s not focused on leadership.”
— School leader
This suggested that the name could help set expectations about the offer being distinct from, and less leadership-focused than, NPQs.
The similarity with NPQs was also seen as a positive factor, and helped build credibility for the new courses even though the positioning differed from NPQs.
“Having ‘National’ and ‘Professional’ draws me in.”
— Teacher
Outcome
We selected National Professional Development as the name for the suite.
It:
- clearly differentiated the offer from leadership-focused NPQs
- aligned with how users interpreted the intended audience
- provided cohesion within the wider policy landscape
- was supported by policy stakeholders for consistency and branding
We recognised that the name would need to work alongside supporting content to fully explain where the courses sit.
Next steps
We are continuing to explore how to help users find the right CPD within an increasingly complex landscape. This includes:
- improving how options are grouped and described
- testing how naming works alongside supporting content
- refining how progression between offers is communicated