Working With Teams That Play To Win

The power of a name lies not in comfort but in creating a distinctive experience that builds cumulative advantage over time.

David Plasik approaches naming as a strategic exercise in creating asymmetric advantage rather than seeking consensus. When developing names, he deliberately looks for polarization within teams, viewing tension and disagreement as signs of a name's strength and energy. As he explains, "Most clients come to a naming project absolutely believing with full confidence that they're going to know it when they see it, and the truth is it almost never happens."

This counterintuitive approach stems from understanding that humans naturally gravitate toward comfort and familiarity, which leads to safe but forgettable choices. Plasik deliberately steers clients away from descriptive names toward bolder options that initially feel uncomfortable. "There is no power in comfort," he emphasizes, "not in the marketplace."

His process deliberately separates teams and gives them different contexts to generate ideas, finding that the most successful names often come from teams working on disguised briefs rather than the actual assignment. This creates the mental freedom to make "mistakes" that turn into breakthroughs. For Windsurf, one team was simply asked to explore concepts communicating flow and dynamics rather than naming an IDE.

For leaders making naming decisions, this means:

• Expect discomfort with truly distinctive names; if everyone immediately loves it, it's likely too safe
• Look for polarization in team reactions as a positive signal of a name's potential energy
• Focus on the experience and behavior you want to create rather than describing what you do
• Test potential names by asking "What could this name do for us?" rather than "Do you like this name?"
• Separate the naming process from immediate evaluation to prevent premature judgment

For individual contributors, this perspective offers practical guidance:

• When evaluating potential names, suspend judgment and speculate on possibilities rather than seeking immediate comfort
• Look for names that create a predisposition to consider your product because "they're not like the other guys"
• Understand that a great name creates a cumulative advantage that compounds over time
• Test names by presenting them as competitors ("Our competitor just launched, they're called X") to gauge genuine reactions
• Recognize that domain availability is far less important than finding the right name first

As Plasik summarizes: "You're not just looking for a word, you're looking for this experience. And if you get it right—not just a good name but the right name—the value is almost unlimited."

The Diamond Framework for Naming

For teams without access to professional naming services, Plasik offers a structured approach using a diamond framework with four key questions:

1. How do we define winning for our company?
2. What do we have to win with now?
3. What do we need to win in the future?
4. What do we need to say to win?

This framework shifts thinking from descriptive naming toward creating experiences that reflect how you want to behave in the marketplace and how you want the marketplace to behave toward you.