Every industry has its own vocabulary. The right vocabulary signals "we belong here." The wrong vocabulary signals "we're outsiders trying to sound like insiders." Brand vocabulary decisions. Which industry terms to use, which to avoid, which to translate. Affect whether your audience recognizes you as a credible peer or dismisses you as out-of-touch.
The instinct of many founders is to either over-use jargon (signaling expertise) or under-use jargon (making content accessible). Both extremes hurt brand. Here's the framework for getting vocabulary right.
The three categories of industry vocabulary
Industry vocabulary falls into three categories. Each requires different brand treatment.
Category 1: Insider language that signals competence. Specialized terms that your audience uses and expects. Using them correctly signals "we operate in this space." Avoiding them signals "we don't really understand this."
Examples for a B2B SaaS audience: "ARR," "CAC," "PMF," "churn," "CRM." For a design audience: "kerning," "leading," "WCAG," "rasterize." For developers: "API," "deploy," "production," "deprecation."
Brand treatment: use this vocabulary naturally and correctly. Don't translate. Don't explain. The audience expects you to know.
Category 2: Jargon that signals try-hard. Specialized terms that have become buzzwords. Overused. Imprecise. Often the kind of word that's deployed when the speaker doesn't have anything specific to say.
Examples: "synergy," "leverage," "stakeholder," "circle back," "deep dive," "value-add," "best practices," "thought leader."
Brand treatment: avoid. Every use of this vocabulary makes your brand sound like every other corporate brand. The cost is high; the benefit is zero.
Category 3: Domain language that needs translation. Specialized terms that your audience may not know but that come up frequently in your work. Customers might or might not understand them.
Examples for brand identity: "kerning," "WCAG," "vector," "raster." For most founder audiences, these need brief explanation before use.
Brand treatment: use the term but include a brief gloss the first time. ("We've calibrated the kerning. The spacing between letters. To feel intentional.") Subsequent uses can drop the gloss.
The diagnostic question
For any potentially jargony word, ask: "If I use this word, will my target audience recognize it as appropriate insider language, dismiss it as buzzword, or feel excluded by it?"
The answer depends entirely on who your target audience is. The same word can be Category 1 for one audience and Category 3 for another:
- "API" is Category 1 for developers, Category 3 for non-technical founders
- "Kerning" is Category 1 for designers, Category 3 for most founders
- "ARR" is Category 1 for SaaS investors, Category 3 for early-stage founders
This is why audience definition matters so much for brand vocabulary decisions. Without knowing exactly who you're writing for, you can't correctly categorize any specific word.
The buzzword test
One reliable test for whether a word has crossed from Category 1 (legitimate insider language) to Category 2 (try-hard buzzword): if removing the word makes the sentence equally meaningful, the word was buzzword.
Examples:
- "We help businesses leverage their data." Remove "leverage": "We help businesses use their data." Same meaning, less buzzwordy. The word "leverage" was buzzword.
- "We support stakeholder alignment." Remove "stakeholder": "We support alignment." If "stakeholder" wasn't specifying anything that "alignment" doesn't already imply, the word was buzzword.
- "We integrate with your CRM." Remove "CRM": "We integrate with your..." The sentence breaks. "CRM" was doing real work as Category 1 vocabulary.
Run your brand copy through this test. Any word you can remove without losing meaning is likely Category 2 buzzword. Cut it.
The intentional vocabulary list
Brand vocabulary works best when it's intentional. Two lists in your brand voice document:
Words we use deliberately. The Category 1 insider language that's appropriate for our audience. The specific words that signal we understand the space. Example for a brand identity tool serving founders: "wordmark," "favicon," "palette," "voice," "register." These get used because they're correct.
Words we never use. The Category 2 buzzwords we've decided to avoid. Example list: "leverage," "synergy," "stakeholder," "best practices," "thought leader," "next-level," "game-changer." The list grows as you notice patterns.
The "never use" list is more powerful than the "use deliberately" list. Most brand voice problems come from defaulting to corporate buzzwords; the explicit ban eliminates them.
The translation discipline
For Category 3 vocabulary. Terms your audience may not know. Develop the translation discipline:
First use: term with brief gloss. "Your favicon (the small icon in browser tabs) needs..." or "Kerning. The spacing between letters. Affects..."
Subsequent uses: term alone. The audience now knows the term.
Glossary or footnote: for documents with significant domain vocabulary, an end-of-document glossary or first-use footnotes save space and reduce repetition.
This discipline lets you use precise domain language while remaining accessible. Customers learn the vocabulary as they engage with you, which actually strengthens the brand relationship. They feel they're becoming insiders alongside you.
The "performing for the wrong audience" failure
A common failure: founders write brand copy that performs for an audience that isn't their target customer. The most common version: writing for VCs and brand peers instead of for customers.
Signs you might be doing this:
- Your homepage copy uses TAM, "moat," "wedge," "ICP," and other investor vocabulary
- You describe your product in terms of category positioning rather than customer outcomes
- Your case studies emphasize what investors want to see (metrics, growth) over what customers want to see (specifics, outcomes, voice)
The fix: write for the actual customer. Investor-vocabulary should appear in investor materials. Customer-vocabulary should appear everywhere customers will see it. The brand vocabulary needs to match the brand audience.
The category-leader vocabulary trap
Another failure: borrowing vocabulary from the category leader. If you're competing with Notion and they use "workspace," "page," and "block" as vocabulary, you might be tempted to use the same vocabulary because customers recognize it.
The trap: using Notion's vocabulary positions you as Notion-like. If you're trying to differentiate, you need your own vocabulary. If you're trying to be Notion-compatible, the shared vocabulary helps but the brand differentiation suffers.
Decide deliberately. Borrowed vocabulary is a positioning choice with real consequences.
The honest vocabulary assessment
30-minute exercise:
- Read your homepage and three blog posts aloud
- Mark every word that could be buzzword (anything that feels generic-corporate)
- For each marked word, ask: does it pass the removal test? (Can I remove it without losing meaning?)
- Replace the words that fail the test with specific alternatives
- Note the patterns. Which buzzwords show up repeatedly
Most founders find 8-15 instances of buzzword in a single hour's audit. Each replacement makes the brand sound more specific to you and less generic-corporate. The cumulative effect across years of content is significant.
Brand vocabulary isn't a small detail. It's the texture of every sentence you write. Distinctive vocabulary makes brands distinctive. Generic vocabulary makes brands generic. The choice is made one word at a time.
Your brand kit, ready in 10 minutes.
Five quick taps. Free preview before you pay.
Start building free →