David Placek on Brand Naming, Sound Symbolism, and the Art of the Bold Name
Source: Lenny’s Podcast Speaker: David Placek Date: ~2024 Link: Episode
David Placek is the founder of Lexicon Branding, which has named Powerbook, Pentium, Blackberry, Swiffer, the Impossible Burger, Vercel, Windsurf, CapCut, and Azure across 4,000+ projects and 40+ years. This conversation covers the science of brand naming: why human intuition fails, the three-phase Lexicon process, how linguistics and cognitive science shape the work, and a practical exercise any startup can use.
Key ideas
-
You won’t know it when you see it. Clients universally expect to recognise the right name on first encounter. They are almost always wrong — because comfort-seeking and pattern-matching to what has been successful before are the opposite of the distinctiveness that great names require. Sonos was rejected as “not entertainment-like.” Azure was called “a dumb idea.” The right name creates discomfort before it creates confidence.
-
Asymmetric and cumulative advantage. A brand name is the most enduring brand asset — design, messaging, and product features will all change, but the name stays. The right name creates asymmetric advantage before launch (it distinguishes before a single feature comparison) and cumulative advantage over time (compounding bond with each interaction). Descriptive names (Cloud Pro, ProChip) forfeit both.
-
Identify → Invent → Implement. Lexicon’s three-phase process: (1) Identify — understand how the client behaves now and wants to behave in the future; develop a competitive landscape; create a creative framework. (2) Invent — three small teams of two, each differently briefed (one knows everything; one thinks it’s a competitor product; one thinks it’s an unrelated category); plus a linguistic engine built from 18,000+ morphemes and Sound Symbolism research. (3) Implement — help internal advocates win approval; build prototypes and mock-ups; run consumer research.
-
Polarisation as quality signal. Andy Grove’s insight when approving Pentium over the engineers’ preferred ProChip: internal argument about a name is evidence of energy and distinctiveness, not a problem to resolve. A name everyone immediately likes is probably a name without stakes. The practitioner test: ask outsiders “our competitor just launched — they’re called X” and observe whether they lean in with curiosity.
-
Diamond exercise for startups. Four-point diagnostic: (1) define winning; (2) what do we have to win; (3) what do we need to win; (4) what do we need to say. The fourth point generates the experiential directions for name generation. Generate 1,000–2,000 name ideas before evaluating any. Suspend judgment; speculate. Synchronicity technique: flip through unrelated magazines (hunting, aviation) when naming something intangible — unexpected words create the non-obvious connections that make distinctive names.
Context
Lexicon Branding has employed 253 linguists over 40 years and maintains a network of 108 linguists in 76 countries. R&D partnerships with Stanford and MIT linguistics departments ground the Sound Symbolism framework. The firm works primarily with named clients rather than taking open calls; Placek runs occasional “office hours” for founders.
Related
- David Placek on Brand Naming — notes
- Sound Symbolism — concept page for the phonemic-quality mapping framework
- Arielle Jackson on the Art of Building Legendary Brands — broader brand architecture; naming spectrum (real words → coined → abstract)
- Christopher Lochhead on Category Design, the Better Trap, and Languaging — languaging as category creation; descriptive name trap = naming-level Better Trap
- April Dunford on Product Positioning — positioning as the competitive context a name lands in