While I agree that the name change is necessary for Alignment, and that it should not include references to librar* terms, Association of Strategic Knowledge Professionals is a poor choice for naming the association.

"Strategic" appears to have been included to suggest value, but you can’t promote something as valuable by simply slapping a label on it (unless you are selling fabric softener). In our case, you need to demonstrate how the activities of information professionals contribute to the attainment of organization objectives. You need to demonstrate it effectively and repeatedly, and you need to consistently link that performance to whatever name you choose to call yourself. Simply including "strategic" in the association name is unlikely to improve the recognition of information professionals. What is more likely is that it will suggest to decision-makers that information professionals in fact have a rather misguided understanding of how branding works.

I can understand wanting to include "knowledge" in the name. "Information" isn’t seen as having much value to organizations. Despite having access to an abundance of information, organizations appear to be unable to derive much value from it. Just as data managers moved up the ladder to become information managers, for years now we have witnessed a similar migration from "information" up to "knowledge", all in an attempt to establish relevance and gain credibility. 

However, the fact remains that by and large what we work with is information. Yes, all librarians need to understand the role information plays in the creation, sharing, acquisition, and application of knowledge, but that does not make us knowledge professionals. That understanding is critical do providing information services to our clientele, but it does not define our area of expertise. We are information professionals, and there is nothing wrong with that!

"Knowledge" as a concept is already overused and misused to such an extent that its effectiveness as a promotional tool is quite limited. It might have been effective a decade ago, but these days is more likely to be greeted with a raised, skeptical eyebrow than anything else.

Association of Strategic Knowledge Professionals isn’t likely to mean much to business and industry. As a branding effort it is too transparent, too clumsy, to be effective, and is more likely to be more of a detriment to the association’s alignment activities.

As far as the acronym goes, ASKPro, presented by the SLA executive as an integral part of the new name, did not go over well with the members. SLA HQ is now retreating from using ASKPro, trying to "take it off the table", so to speak. While the acronym can certainly be taken off the voting ballot, HQ can't stop people from using it. I suspect it will continue to be associated with Association of Strategic Knowledge Professionals for quite some time, to the further detriment of the name.

More importantly, I believe that the acronym played a non-negligible role in selecting words to make up the new name. Now the acronym is gone, leaving us with a name that is little more then a string of keywords that the organization would like, one day, to have integrated into its brand. 

SLA HQ has tried to justify the name selection on the research that was done to develop and test the name. While research certainly must be conducted, spending time doing research and following a research process alone is not enough to guarantee a successful outcome. The outcomes are restricted by, among other things, the data used (the list of possible names is quote poor and, IMHO, biased toward ASKPro), the subjects (why wasn't the name tested with clients? execitives? decision-makers? i.e. the people it is supposed to influence?), as well as the influence of the researchers' bias. While I believe the research does provide some useful insights into possible names for the SLA, as a justification for the choice of name it is certainly questionable.

Going forward with a name change for a membership organization is a huge risk, and it is my opinion that the SLA has fumbled the ball on this one. We’ll know for sure after the vote takes place.