The Art of Naming: Best Practices for Make.com Scenarios and Zapier Zaps

In the rapidly evolving landscape of business automation, tools like Make.com and Zapier have become indispensable for streamlining operations, connecting disparate systems, and empowering teams to achieve more with less. From automating HR onboarding flows to orchestrating complex marketing campaigns, these platforms are the invisible engines driving modern efficiency. Yet, for all their power, the true longevity and scalability of your automated workflows often hinge on a seemingly minor detail: how you name them. As 4Spot Consulting, we’ve witnessed firsthand the chaos that ensues from a haphazard naming convention and the elegant simplicity that emerges from a thoughtfully organized one.

The naming of your Make.com scenarios and Zapier zaps is not merely an administrative task; it is a critical component of your automation strategy. It impacts maintainability, collaboration, debugging, and ultimately, the future-proofing of your digital infrastructure. Think of it as the foundational architecture for a complex building; without clear blueprints and labels, even the most robust structure can become unmanageable and prone to failure.

Why a Robust Naming Convention is Non-Negotiable

Poorly named automations are like unlabeled wires in a server room – they work until they don’t, and then nobody knows how to fix them. Consider a scenario where multiple team members are building or modifying zaps and scenarios. Without a consistent naming structure, identifying the purpose of an automation, who created it, what systems it touches, or what state it’s in (e.g., production, testing, draft) becomes a monumental task. This invariably leads to duplicated efforts, fear of breaking existing workflows, prolonged debugging times, and a general state of organizational paralysis when it comes to scaling automation.

Furthermore, as your automation footprint grows, the ability to quickly search, filter, and understand your workflows becomes paramount. A well-designed naming convention acts as an internal search engine, allowing you to pinpoint specific processes instantly. It facilitates knowledge transfer when team members join or leave, ensures business continuity, and transforms a collection of disparate automations into a cohesive, manageable ecosystem.

Establishing a Naming Framework: Core Principles

While specific conventions may vary based on organizational size, complexity, and specific use cases, several core principles apply universally to both Make.com and Zapier:

Clarity and Specificity Over Brevity

Your automation’s name should clearly articulate its purpose and function. While it might be tempting to use short, cryptic names, prioritize clarity. A good name answers fundamental questions: What does it do? Which systems are involved? What is the trigger and what is the outcome? For instance, instead of “CRM Update,” consider “Salesforce Lead to HubSpot Contact Sync – New Leads.” This immediately tells you the source, destination, and the specific event triggering the automation.

Consistency is King: Adopt a Standard

The most crucial aspect of any naming strategy is consistency. Develop a standardized format and stick to it religiously. A common approach is to use a structured format like `[Source App] – [Trigger Event] to [Target App] – [Action]`. Examples:

• `Salesforce – New Lead to HubSpot – Create Contact` (Zapier)
• `Stripe – New Payment to Slack – Payment Alert` (Make.com)

For more complex scenarios, you might incorporate departments or project codes: `[Department Abbr] – [Project Abbr] – [Source] to [Target] – [Action]`. E.g., `HR – ONB – BambooHR – New Hire to ADP – Create Employee Profile`.

Incorporate Key Metadata

Beyond functional description, consider embedding metadata within the name itself or by leveraging tags/folders that complement the naming convention. This could include:

• **Status:** Indicating if it’s `_DRAFT`, `_TESTING`, `_PRODUCTION`, or `_DEPRECATED`.
• **Version:** For major iterations, `_V1`, `_V2`.
• **Owner/Department:** If not evident from the context, include the team responsible.
• **Frequency:** For scheduled automations, `_Daily`, `_Hourly`.

Example: `CRM – Deal Won to Xero – Invoice Creation_PROD_V2`.

Leverage Folders and Tags

Both Make.com and Zapier offer robust folder and tagging systems. Use these in conjunction with your naming convention to provide an additional layer of organization. Group automations by department, project, application, or business process. A clean folder structure makes it easy to navigate to relevant automations, while tags offer flexible cross-referencing capabilities.

Future-Proofing Your Names

Anticipate change. While you can’t predict every pivot, avoid names that are too narrowly defined or tied to temporary specifics. If a “Zapier – Email to Slack” moves to “Make – Email to MS Teams,” the underlying intent remains. Focus on the core business process rather than ephemeral tool specifics within the name itself, letting the platform (Zapier/Make) implicitly define the tool, and using tags/folders for the specific app where needed.

The investment in establishing and enforcing a robust naming convention for your Make.com scenarios and Zapier zaps pays dividends many times over. It transforms what could become a tangled web of automation into a clear, navigable, and scalable asset for your organization. For businesses leveraging automation to drive growth and efficiency, adopting this disciplined approach is not just a best practice – it’s a strategic imperative. At 4Spot Consulting, we guide our clients through establishing these frameworks, ensuring their automation investments yield maximum long-term value and contribute effectively to their AI-driven strategy.

If you would like to read more, we recommend this article: Make vs. Zapier: Powering HR & Recruiting Automation with AI-Driven Strategy