Well, you asked for comments, so here goes (feel free to just to do an eye roll and move on)

This is my new ‘go to’ for the teaching and coaching I am doing. As always, you have made me stop, think, synthesize… And I continue to ponder. So many considerations, it strikes me that:

Initial trial behavior is a different ‘job’ than getting ‘adoption’

That this is different for (relatively) durable goods when compared to services, transient and chronic conditions (health related and other), digital products , FMCG and so on.

Where habit and routines are developed, there are strong countervailing forces (societal and otherwise) promoting ‘variety seeking’ and/or ‘change’

In a world of abundant choices, loyalty has eroded, switching is common, switching back and forth seems even more common. Does it make sense to think that a subscription remains untested and unchanged (with a deep and wide moat)

The choices and the options which never stop coming (some simply a function of delayed awareness and consideration, not to mention forgetting) makes the getting and keeping more nuanced, and challenging.

That dynamically continuous “innovation” is more likely the phenomenon to capture as it is more likely the most prevalent.

Finally, that there are important multi-level interactions involving factors such a necessity vs luxury (discretionary types), choice options (product/ brand / variant), accessibility (financially and physically), uses (continuous vs occasional; fixed vs variable) and situations (transient, chronic, episodic, ritualistic, private v. public; familiar vs. novel; and so on). I am a devout interactionist, and I see the world through that lens.

Keep writing — keep innovating. I love what you are doing!