It’s probably annoying when you see that. Tiny decisions in a system like naming, labels, and terminology can have a surprisingly large effect on the people who use it every day. If you have come across something like this, depending on the tools you’re using, let’s say Airtable, you had someone create a base for you or the structure for a base for you, and you’d notice something like that in the finished product. On the column, it says “Task name,” “Project name,” “Client name.” It’s just a sign of a badly built system. Because if a table is for projects, shouldn’t it just say project? If it’s for clients, shouldn’t it just say client instead of client name?
With tools like this, being able to write out or create copy in a way that inspires people, or has this effect on the people that are using it and motivates them or pushes them to add details, to want to use it. They come in, and it looks like a template that you got off somewhere (AI or another place), something that wasn’t created for your people. It just fails the test. It tells you that time wasn’t taken in the creation of this. Ideally, when I’m working on creating an Airtable base, or moving data to Airtable, I have a roadmap, and it lists out all the tables, steps, columns, everything. Depending on the processes, the industry that this client is in, the number of people who are using the tool, and previous tools, I bring all of this over and see how we can create something for our people that solves the problem.