Sonos was initially rejected by the client for not feeling "entertainment-like," but won acceptance after reframing for the marketplace and highlighting its qualities (palindrome, connection to sound, visual symmetry)
Client teams often seek comfort and familiarity, which can hinder the selection of bold, imaginative names
Microsoft's Azure: Microsoft wanted a "cloud"-based name, but Lexicon advocated for "Azure" (meaning blue), leveraging its distinctiveness, sound symbolism, and ability to tell a story rather than make a statement
Names like Pentium and Blackberry also faced initial resistance, with polarization among stakeholders seen as a strength
The process has three steps: Identify, Invent, Implement
Identify: Focuses on current and desired brand behavior and experience, as well as competitive landscape, to create a creative framework (not just objectives)
Invent: Utilizes three small creative teams, each receiving different briefs (real assignment, disguised company/context, completely different domain) to generate diverse, uninhibited ideas
Most winning names originate from teams working outside the obvious domain, freeing them from constraints
Heavy investment in linguistics and cognitive science, particularly in sound symbolism, supporting creative choices with research
Lexicon maintains a global linguist network (253 linguists over 40 years; 108 linguists in 76 countries) for both creative and evaluative work
Sound symbolism research guides which letters to use and what emotions or experiences they evoke (e.g., S and Z for noise, V for vibrancy, B for reliability, X for innovation)
Thousands of ideas are generated (about 2,000–4,000 per project), then filtered down through trademark, legal, and linguistic screening
The final set is presented to clients, often with consumer/customer research and prototypes to demonstrate name potential
The process typically takes eight weeks for most projects, up to four months for larger companies
For intangible products, teams are assigned tangible or metaphorical briefs to create flow and dynamic association (Windsurf replaced "Kodium" after reframing for experience)
Compounds (like Windsurf, PowerBook) multiply positive associations and perform well according to research, despite initial client concerns over length
When to change company/product names: after a strategic shift, when the original name was chosen hastily, after a pivot, or following a merger
For small teams or startups: focus on defining "winning" and the experiential goals, not just on the word itself
Use the diamond exercise: four corners labeled “win,” “what do we have to win,” “what do we need to win,” “what do we need to say to win”—work through these to clarify objectives
Generate at least 1,500–2,000 names/ideas before evaluating—suspend judgment; “speculate, don’t evaluate”
Evaluate names for boldness, distinctiveness, and market differentiation, not just comfort
Ask outsiders to react as if the name is from a competitor to gauge impact
Look for polarization as a positive sign—teams should argue and feel tension about strong names
Implementation includes helping client teams sell the name internally (mockups, rationale), conducting customer research to assess imagination and expectation, not just conceptual fit
Names should be easy to process—processing fluency increases adoption
The ".com" domain is less critical now; prioritize the right name, then supplement with alternative domains or slight variations if needed