Naming a Product: The Sonos Story

When David Plasik and his team at Lexicon Branding presented "Sonos" as a name for a speaker company, they faced immediate rejection. The client team was fixated on finding a name that positioned them as an entertainment company, believing Sonos lacked sufficient emotion. This case study explores how persistence, strategic framing, and understanding the difference between internal comfort and market impact led to the adoption of what would become an iconic brand name.

Situation

• Client expectations: The founding team of Sonos was focused on positioning themselves as an entertainment company
• Initial rejection: When presented with "Sonos," the team dismissed it for not being "entertainment-like" enough
• Naming philosophy clash: The client was seeking comfort and familiarity while Lexicon was advocating for distinctiveness
• Timing challenge: The company needed to finalize their name but was stuck between competing visions

Actions

• Strategic reframing: Plasik challenged the client's self-perception, arguing they weren't an entertainment company but rather made speakers that enabled entertainment
• Highlighting linguistic strengths: Emphasized the palindromic quality of Sonos (reads the same forward and backward, looks similar upside down)
• Extraordinary effort: Plasik flew back to Santa Barbara at his own expense for a second meeting to advocate for the name
• Perspective shift: Helped the client see they were naming the product for themselves rather than for the marketplace

Results

• Breakthrough moment: Founder Bob McFarlane realized they were "trying to name this for ourselves" when they should be "naming it for the marketplace and the customers"
• Decision reversal: The team ultimately embraced Sonos as their name
• Market success: Sonos became a highly successful brand with strong recognition
• Relationship strengthening: The client later wrote a note about how Plasik's persistence helped them make the right decision

Key Lessons

• Polarization signals strength: When a name creates tension or disagreement within a team, it often indicates energy and potential market impact
• Experience over description: Focus on the experience a name creates rather than descriptive accuracy
• Internal comfort is the enemy: As Plasik notes, "There is no power in comfort" when it comes to effective naming
• Persistence matters: Sometimes advocating for the right solution requires extraordinary effort and conviction
• Shift perspective: Help clients distinguish between naming for internal comfort versus market effectiveness
• Linguistic qualities matter: Special properties like palindromes can add memorability and distinctiveness
• Market-first mindset: The critical shift came when the client realized the name was for customers, not themselves

The Sonos case demonstrates that great names often feel uncomfortable at first. The most effective brand names create distinctive market positions rather than simply describing what a company does.