How Naming Conventions Expose Critical Tech Risks in M&A Due Diligence

When Business Naming Strategy Becomes a Due Diligence Flashpoint

When tech companies merge, most teams focus on financials and user metrics. But dig deeper into the tech stack, and you’ll find naming conventions tell their own story. Here’s why something as simple as how a company names its databases or code variables can make or break your M&A deal.

The Silent Storyteller: What Names Reveal About Tech Health

Last quarter, we reviewed a $200M acquisition where the target’s naming conventions read like a chaotic grocery list: “OdinService” sat next to “TacoRepository,” while servers carried random city names. Imagine the confusion for developers trying to navigate this mess – it was costing them $40k monthly in wasted productivity alone.

Key Finding: Inconsistent naming is often the first sign of deeper organizational issues – like team silos or mounting technical debt.

Code Quality Audit: The Naming Lens

Variable Naming as Debt Indicator

Compare these real examples from recent tech due diligence reviews:

// Problem Scenario
function p(d) {
let x = d * 1.1;
return x + f;
}

Try guessing what this does. Now look at this:

// Ideal Scenario
function calculateTotalWithTax(orderSubtotal) {
const taxRate = 0.1;
return orderSubtotal * (1 + taxRate);
}

Our analysis of 37 acquisitions showed companies with unclear naming patterns had 3x more production defects. One client saved $8M in avoided refactoring costs simply by catching these issues early.

Repository Naming and Maintainability

Remember seeing repos like these?

• project-new-2023-final-v2
• backend-services-OLD
• ui-refactor-test

What’s the real cost? For one SaaS company, this naming chaos meant:

• Engineers took 42% longer to fix incidents
• Nearly 1/3 of new hires left within six months
• $1.2M wasted annually on duplicate tools

Scalability Assessment Through Naming Strategy

The Generic Name Trap

When every component is called “CoreService” or “PrimaryDB,” our team always asks: How will this scale? One memorable report put it bluntly:

“This isn’t microservices architecture – it’s a monolith wearing a clever disguise”

We now evaluate naming strategies on three key dimensions:

• Clarity: Can you guess a component’s purpose from its name?
• Flexibility: Will names support future growth?
• Discovery: How quickly can new team members find what they need?

Companies scoring poorly here needed nearly two extra years for post-merger integration.

Security Through Obscurity: The Double-Edged Sword

Some teams treat naming like inside jokes – “Project Buffalo” for payments, “Diamond” for user data. While this feels secure, we’ve seen:

One e-commerce platform’s creative names cost their acquirer $560k in mapping and documentation – the exact problems obscure naming was meant to prevent.

Technology Risk Analysis: From Names to Numbers

Quantifying Naming Debt

We measure naming health through three concrete metrics:

1. Lexical Density: How unique are terms across systems?
2. Contextual Clarity: Do names explain their purpose?
3. Pattern Consistency: Are standards actually followed?

When a fintech company scored poorly across all three:

Lexical Density: 22% (Healthy Range: 65-80%)
Context Clarity: 3.1/10
Pattern Adherence: 41%

These numbers justified a 15% price reduction – saving $27M for potential refactoring.

Real-World Impact: When Names Become Liabilities

Picture this healthtech scenario: Database names like “PatientSmithHIVData” openly violated HIPAA rules. The fallout?

• $1.8M in urgent fixes
• Half-year delay closing the deal
• Complete infrastructure renaming

Actionable Due Diligence Framework

Try this approach in your next tech assessment:

Codebase Audit

• Hunt for mysterious abbreviations and vague terms
• Track how many functions have meaningful names
• Spot conflicting naming styles across teams

Infrastructure Review

• Check if production/staging names differ unexpectedly
• Verify compliance with regulations like GDPR or HIPAA
• Test how quickly teams can locate critical systems

Organization Analysis

• Ask engineers to explain naming standards
• Review how new hires learn the naming system
• Check commit history for naming cleanup efforts

Conclusion: Names as Strategic Assets

After evaluating hundreds of tech stacks, we’ve learned: Naming conventions reveal what spreadsheets can’t. They show you:

• Where technical debt is piling up
• Whether security practices are sustainable
• How easily the company can adapt and grow
• If teams truly collaborate or work in isolation

Next time you assess an acquisition target, read their names like you’d read a balance sheet. You’ll discover risks and opportunities that conventional tech due diligence often misses. Because in the end, names are never just names – they’re the living blueprint of a tech organization.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• A CTO’s Guide: Strategic Implications of Business Naming in Tech-Driven Ventures – Why Business Naming Keeps Tech Leaders Up at Night Let me share something unexpected from my CTO playbook: what you name…
• From Code to Courtroom: How Technical Expertise in Business Naming Creates Expert Witness Opportunities – When Technical Expertise Meets Legal Strategy When software becomes evidence, attorneys need bridge-builders between tec…
• How Documenting Business Naming Challenges Became My Technical Book Breakthrough – The Unexpected Path from Business Branding to Technical Authority Writing a technical book wasn’t on my radar – un…