Subscribe now

Facebook’s 7 friends in 10 days. Slack’s 2,000 messages. Pinterest’s four weeks of weekly saves.

These famous “aha moments” launched an industry obsession. Every product team now hunts for their magic activation metric—the one action that predicts whether users will stick around.

That approach is dead for AI products, and increasingly broken for everything else.

When Facebook discovered their magic number in 2008, users had fewer alternatives and more patience. Today? Users drown in options, B2B teams suffer from tool fatigue, and the gap between first use and full value has expanded dramatically.

YouTube doesn’t deliver its core value, a perfectly curated dashboard and content recommendation, on day one. Which I experienced when I was showing my grandma on her computer how to navigate YouTube, and the default recommendations were horrible, I would never use it haha.

Meditation apps require weeks before users experience real benefits. Enterprise AI tools need significant investment—data, time, behavior change—before they can deliver their promise.

I kept seeing the same pattern with stuck products. Founders would show me their retention curves, activation metrics, aha moment hypotheses. Everything looked right on paper. Users still left.

The problem wasn’t their metrics. They were measuring an incomplete picture, stuck on finding that one magic moment, while the actual resource determining survival—user interest—depleted invisibly.

For AI products especially, this is make-or-break. The more data you have, the better the product gets. But there’s this awkward middle zone where you don’t have enough data yet and you need to keep users engaged anyway. Master this for AI, and you’ll have the approach for any delayed-value product.

The Missing Variable: Interest as a Depleting Resource

Every product starts with what I call “Willingness to Use It”—that invisible psychological credit users grant you at the beginning. It comes from belief in the product, a friend’s recommendation, curiosity, or just “it looks cool.”

But it’s a limited resource with a half-life measured in minutes, not days.

If nothing happens, no progress shows, no reward materializes, the interest runs dry. Add friction or confusion, and it’s over. That’s when your app goes from home screen to trash.

Traditional retention curves show you WHO left. Cohort analysis tells you WHEN they left. Funnel analysis shows WHERE they dropped off.

But none of them show you WHY—the invisible erosion of interest that happens when users are investing effort but not yet seeing the value they came for.

The aha moment frameworks tell you to find the action that correlates with retention. But correlation isn’t causation, and a single action isn’t a strategy for managing a depleting resource over time.

Introducing the ‘Aha’ to Value Model

This is why I developed what I call the ‘Aha’ to Value Model—a framework for architecting value delivery across the awkward period from first ‘Aha’ moment until your product delivers full value.

It’s there to help you visualize something you’re probably already doing, but actually think it through.

The model maps user interest over time and usage, tracking the journey toward what I call “Full Product Value”—the moment when your product starts delivering the core value the user came for.

Everything before that point? You’re just trying to keep interest high enough to get there.

When I use this model, it reminds me of Flappy Bird. Your primary objective is to keep the bird above the ground and avoid obstacles by tapping the screen. It’s a helpful way to approach this framework—you’re constantly working to keep interest from hitting zero.

The real product experience—the flywheels, the habit loops, the retention mechanics—all that begins AFTER users hit Full Product Value. But a huge number of users never get there because they run out of interest first.

The Three Behavioral Zones

The model identifies three critical zones that determine whether users survive the journey:

1. Multiplication of Temporary Value (The Purple Zone)

This is anything that temporarily creates the feeling that “this is worth it,” even if the main value hasn’t hit yet. Usually exceeds user expectations, so interest drops more slowly.

Fun, visual polish, sense of progress, curiosity, amazing insight, personalization, or just the fact that something reacts to you. It’s that moment you think, “Hmm, I’ll give it a bit longer.”

For example, Notion creates a full template based on what you’re trying to do. GitHub Copilot’s immediate code suggestions while it learns your style. Or Claude Code suddenly organizing your desktop files.

This is usually to create such a “wow” effect that it keeps users interested for a long time until another value can be delivered.

2. Willingness to Use It (The Green Zone)

This is that invisible psychological energy people have at the start—their trust, credit, or motivation before your product owes them anything.

It could come from belief in the product, a friend’s recommendation, clever marketing, or simply “it looks cool.” But it’s not just about visual hacks. It’s about slowly integrating the product into a user’s everyday workflow in an engaging or easy way, until it becomes irreplaceable.

This is how Figma did it early on. They didn’t offer an incredible experience, but very subtle intuitive enhancements that you didn’t consider revolutionary until you had to go back to your old design software and realized that it sucked.

3. Losing Interest Fast (The Red Zone)

This is where motivation runs dry because nothing’s happening. The product doesn’t show progress, reward effort, or explain where it’s headed. Nothing holds you. Nothing pulls you forward. Add frustration or confusion, and users are done.

This is the zone where most products actually operate—they just don’t realize it because they’re tracking retention rates, not interest levels.

Value Events: The Strategic Markers That Keep Interest Alive

Here’s where the model gets practical. Between first use and Full Product Value, you need Value Events—strategic moments that move users toward thinking, “OK, this makes sense.”

These aren’t random celebrations or fake progress bars. They’re carefully architected moments based on four behavioral dimensions (borrowed from Alex Hormozi’s $100M Offers framework, adapted for product contexts):

1. Impact on Current Outcome

The more an event shapes users’ sense of self, goal, or progress, the more valuable it feels. This is why GitHub Copilot showing you a perfect function completion feels significant—it’s not just saving time, it’s making you feel like a more capable developer.

2. Moving Closer to the Goal

If users feel they’re getting closer to why they’re using your product, interest grows. If they feel stagnant or can’t see progress, interest drops. This is explicit feedback: “You’ve analyzed 100 data points—your AI model is 40% more accurate.”

3. Time Delay

The longer the gap between value events, the faster interest drops. Stay silent too long, and people leave. This is the killer for AI products that need huge of data before they deliver insights. This can be ‘hacked’.

4. Effort-to-Outcome Ratio

Here’s the nuance most teams miss: High effort isn’t automatically bad. If effort leads to meaningful results (or even perceived meaningful results), people see it as an investment, not a waste. But pointless effort—filling out forms that lead nowhere, clicking through tutorials that don’t apply—kills interest instantly.

For example, but just stating simple reasons of why people need to do something, even in simple, annoying forms like registration:

The goal isn’t to manufacture fake moments. It’s to strategically surface genuine progress and value at intervals short enough that interest never hits zero.

The AI-Specific Challenge: When Your Product Needs to Learn Before It Can Deliver

This is where the model becomes survival-critical for AI builders.

AI products have a unique problem: Full Product Value often requires the AI to learn from user behavior over time. This creates a chicken-and-egg situation:

• Users need to invest (data, time, usage) before seeing value

• But users won’t invest without seeing value

• And every failed attempt trains them to avoid AI tools entirely

Traditional SaaS products could deliver immediate value. Slack shows you messages right away. Notion gives you a blank canvas that’s immediately useful. Even Facebook could show you your friends’ posts on day one.

But AI products? They promise personalization, intelligence, prediction—all things that require the system to learn about YOU first.

This gap between first use and full value is where most AI products die.

The Solution: Engineer Value During the Learning Phase

The solution isn’t to speed up AI learning (though that helps). It’s to engineer Value Events that feel meaningful even while the AI is still learning.

Here’s how:

Show users their own patterns. “You’ve logged 7 meals this week—here’s what we’re learning: you typically eat lunch between 12-1pm and prefer protein-heavy breakfasts.” This gives immediate value (self-knowledge) while the AI learns.

Make data contribution feel like building something. “You’re building your taste profile: 43% complete. Users with 80%+ complete profiles get 3x more accurate recommendations.” This frames effort as investment, not busywork.

Give insights about the journey itself. “Most users see their first breakthrough insight after 2 weeks of use. You’re on day 9—ahead of 60% of users.” This manages expectations while maintaining interest.

Surface micro-predictions early. Even if your AI isn’t ready for the full value proposition, show smaller wins. If your AI will eventually predict customer churn, start by showing simpler patterns: “Your response time increased 40% this week—this correlates with engagement drops in our data.”

A Quick Example: Applying the Model

Let’s say you’re building an AI-powered email assistant that learns your writing style and automates responses.

Full Product Value: User trusts the AI to draft 70%+ of their emails with minimal editing, saving 10+ hours weekly.

Time to Full Product Value: 3-4 weeks (AI needs to learn style, tone, and common scenarios).

The Problem: Users need to correct/guide the AI dozens of times before it’s useful. That’s a lot of effort with no immediate payoff.

Value Events to Engineer:

Day 1: AI shows analysis of your last 50 emails: “You receive 34 emails/day on average. 60% are quick replies under 100 words. 25% include scheduling requests.” (Low effort, immediate insight about yourself)

Day 3: First AI-suggested response. It’s not perfect, but it captures your tone in one paragraph. User edits it but thinks, “Wow, that’s actually close.” (First evidence the AI understands you)

Day 7: “Your AI assistant has learned 15 common response patterns. Here are the top 3.” Shows them with examples. (Makes learning visible)

Day 10: AI drafts its first email that requires only minor edits. Flags it: “This is your best draft yet—95% match to your style.” (Milestone moment)

Day 14: Shows time saved: “You’ve edited 23 AI drafts this week, average edit time: 45 seconds. Compared to writing from scratch (avg: 4 minutes), you’ve saved 76 minutes.” (Quantified value during learning phase)

Day 21: Achievement unlocked: AI has successfully drafted 10 emails with minimal edits. “Your assistant is ready for prime time. Want to enable auto-draft for simple replies?” (Graduation moment)

Notice how each event does real work—it’s not fake gamification. You’re showing genuine progress while the AI learns.

The Framework in Practice: Three Questions Before You Build

When I work with startups to architect their products using this model, I start with three questions:

Question 1: When exactly can we consider the product fully integrated with the user, and what does that look like?

This forces specificity about “Full Product Value.” Not vague goals like “daily active use” but concrete: “User has created 3 automated workflows that save them 5+ hours weekly and can’t imagine going back to manual processes.”

Notice how different this is from traditional aha moment thinking, which focuses on a single action. Full integration is a state, not an event.

Question 2: What is the first “AHA” moment, how fast can it be delivered, and how strong will the impact be?

Note the phrasing: “first” aha moment. This acknowledges there will be multiple. Speed matters because of that depleting interest resource. Impact matters because weak aha moments barely move the needle—they’re not worth the effort to engineer.

Question 3: What needs to happen for full integration, and what small values, features, or surprises can we offer that will increase the likelihood of continued usage?

This is mapping out your Value Events between Question 2 (first aha) and Question 1 (full integration). It’s the strategic architecture work that most teams skip because they’re busy hunting for THE magic metric.

What Product Teams Should Do Differently

If you’re building a product, especially an AI product, here’s what changes when you adopt this model:

Stop hunting for THE aha moment. Start architecting the value journey. Your analytics should track interest proxies (engagement depth, return frequency, feature exploration) not just single activation metrics.

Treat user interest as your scarcest resource. Every design decision should ask: “Does this add to or deplete interest?” Unnecessary onboarding steps? Interest drain. Confusing UI? Interest drain. Value Event that shows progress? Interest gain.

Make AI learning visible and valuable in itself. If your product needs to learn before it delivers full value, the learning process must feel like value creation, not homework.

Map your Value Events explicitly. Literally create a timeline from first use to Full Product Value and mark every point where you’ll inject temporary value, show progress, or create an aha moment. If you have gaps longer than 3-5 days with nothing happening, you’re in danger.

Test interest levels, not just retention rates. Add qualitative checkpoints: “On a scale of 1-10, how likely are you to use this tomorrow?” Track it at multiple points. When it drops below 6, you’re in the red zone.

Final Words

As AI commoditizes the technical side of product building, the bottleneck has shifted entirely to understanding human behavior. Anyone can spin up an AI feature now. But building something people actually adopt? That requires understanding the invisible dynamics—the way interest depletes, the psychological credit users grant you and how quickly you spend it.

This model applies to any product where there’s a gap between first use and full value. Digital products like SaaS and mobile apps. Physical products like smart home devices. Hybrid experiences like subscription boxes or fitness equipment. Anywhere users need to invest time, data, or behavior change before experiencing your core value proposition.

The difference between “let’s try adding a tutorial” and “let’s map the complete interest journey and engineer Value Events with specific behavioral mechanisms” is the difference between 5% improvement and 50% improvement in activation.

You’re already tracking actions. Start tracking interest.

— Peter

Share

Let’s create a journey like this together, so people not only stay, but will love to come back to your product.

Free Behavioral Diagnostic

This is the first self-development article I’ve written for people who might be suffering from the same ego and identity issues I’ve struggled with. It’s for high achievers who either:

• Want to achieve their goals without destroying themselves in the process

• Have already achieved fame, money, or status—and can’t figure out why it’s ruining their life

I’ve burned out at least five times. Once, I ended up in the hospital on an operating table because stress had inflamed and shut down my entire digestive system. After that, my life hasn’t been the same, but I enjoy my life far more than before.

When you build your identity around the wrong thing, it won’t just make you unhappy—it can cost you your life.

You wouldn’t be the first. You won’t be the last.

This article is long because the issue runs deep. I went on a hunt to understand it completely and learn how to systematically build a life that doesn’t destroy me.

One of the cornerstones of advising tech companies is working with founders—understanding their mental models, how they view the world, and helping them see the blindspots that could harm them or their business.

This is a major one.

So let’s go.

Subscribe now

SECTION 1: THE PROBLEM

This is story I have seen waaay too many times…

I had a beer with my barber in a Prague park after he cut my hair. Something seemed off, so I asked if everything was okay. Then I watched this incredibly talented guy explain how miserable he’d become.

Business was bad. Fewer and fewer customers. As he explained the situation, I recognized a pattern I’ve seen constantly with talented people who go out on their own:

• He thought he was doing everything “right”

• And hated every second of it

Thematic Instagram grids. Perfect color schemes. Every article read, every ebook bought. Copying other influencers and companies. Perfectly edited hair videos.

The results? Almost nothing. And the guy looked dead inside.

“I hate it and I don’t know what to do,” he told me.

This is the same guy who used to do hair for models and well-known companies. The same pattern I see with people who were either famous or exceptionally skilled at their craft.

They build their identity around being the best. Stop taking feedback. Stop innovating. Stop pushing to get better.

When I went through what he was doing, two major problems stood out:

First: Bad reviews and declining clients. When I asked when he last checked in with customers, he said never—a hairdresser with 20 years of experience knows hair best and had all the rational for every bad review.

Second: His content was completely generic. He’d erased his personality entirely, just copying what everyone else was doing. Every post could’ve been from any barber in any city. Zero personality. Zero perspective. Nobody gave a shit.

We spent the next hour drinking beers and mapping out what actually made him different—his unconventional techniques, strong opinions about hair products, the way he saw his work. He got excited. Started coming up with ideas that sounded like him, not like a content template.

But he never truly committed to talking with customers or reinventing his approach.

Things improved briefly. Then got worse. He slipped back into the same patterns—chasing what worked for others instead of building from what was real for him.

Eventually, he closed the shop.

His story isn’t unique.

The Pattern Is Everywhere

You know people like this. Probably more than you want to admit.

People who can land jobs but can’t stay in them.

Who can build projects to a certain scale, then watch every attempt at growth fail.

Who can attract partners but can’t keep them.

Smart people crushing it in corporate roles who implode the moment they start their own thing.

Or worse: people who have success but hate what they do.

Followers and attention, but feel empty despite the audience.

Rich but miserable.

Picture-perfect Instagram relationships with broken souls behind the camera.

I see it constantly. One friend wants to build an app for models in Dubai, from Slovakia, while running a repair shop. Another is launching an AI consulting business despite working at a savings bank and never shipping anything. A girl I know is building “her new app,” but can’t explain what problem or need she is actually addressing.

I’m not saying people shouldn’t try. I’m saying everyone is chasing trends instead of building from their actual strengths and experience. They’re optimizing for what looks successful rather than what they’re capable of sustaining.

And that’s why most of them will end up, best case, successful but miserable.

Where The Society Is Now

How many of you know people who had quality content or normal pictures, but then started posting more and more ridiculous stuff?

For example, these girls figured out that they can play NPC (non-playable character) on TikTok—meaning if you pay for a certain emoji, the girl does it but in a sexy way.

Or food influencers who are literally dying at a very young age because of this game.

The most common example I’ve started seeing is with younger girls that I even follow, who had normal pictures on Instagram, posted something more exposed, got lots of attention, and then started posting more sexualized pictures, which usually escalates to plastic surgery and losing the respect of normal men. I’ve seen it way too many times. And then saying, “Where are all the good men?”

But make no mistake, this isn’t relevant to just famous influencers. This is relevant to any creator whatsoever. It’s relevant for everyone creating any content. And everyone should create content in today’s age.

It can go as far as affecting what kind of businessman, lawyer, or doctor you are. But let’s go back.

The Numbers Are Shocking

Multiple recent surveys show that more than half of Gen Z would like to become influencers if given the chance. A 2023 Morning Consult survey found that 57% of Gen Z respondents aspired to be influencers. Another survey of young Americans aged 13 to 38 reported that 86% were willing to try out being influencers on social media platforms.

But what’s more shocking is that a growing body of research and firsthand accounts reveal that many influencers and content creators are struggling with depression, burnout, and a deep dislike for the content creation process. This phenomenon isn’t isolated—it’s a widespread occupational hazard in the creator economy.

“Recent surveys indicate that about 80% of content creators report being burnt out, with two-thirds saying this burnout is directly impacting their mental health. Common mental health challenges include anxiety, depression, panic attacks, imposter syndrome, and even identity crises. The pressure to constantly produce content, maintain relevance, and engage with followers leaves little room for rest, leading to a blurred line between personal and professional life.” Sources: Aisnet, Wired, Agility

This is why I started focusing on misalignments in human behavior and business, and why I’m trying to make this article as convincing as possible to show you the importance.

Why This Matters

I’ve studied failure more than success for years now, and here’s what I believe: to answer simple but complex problems, you need a mix of practicality, psychology, and some uncomfortable spiritual honesty about what we’re actually optimizing for.

But we need to be clear about the stakes. If you don’t take what we’re about to explore seriously, the consequences are real.

You can build a life that looks perfect on paper but feels dead inside.

I’ve watched it happen to too many people: the shy person who got addicted to attention and lost themselves in the performance.

The principled person who started cutting corners because it was easier.

The talented creator who built an audience doing embarrassing shit and lost the respect of everyone who actually mattered.

The business owner who was chasing money and all clients ended up hating what they built.

Their souls got corrupted along the way, and they didn’t even notice it happening.

Who This Is For

This isn’t for everyone. It’s for people who feel something is off and want to understand why before they’re too far down the wrong path to turn back.

For those who want to build something real without losing themselves in the process. Who understands that business failures usually start with founder behavior, not market conditions.

I don’t want to just talk about startups or content creation. I want to talk about the mechanism that ruins all of it when you get it wrong—and how to build in a way that doesn’t require you to become someone you’ll eventually hate.

Because here’s what I’ve learned: there’s a right way and a wrong way to build success. The wrong way works faster, gets you attention quicker, and traps you completely. The right way is slower, harder to explain to others, and the only path that doesn’t require you to sell pieces of yourself you can’t buy back.

The question isn’t whether you’ll pay a price. You will. The question is which price you’re willing to pay, and whether you’ll choose it consciously or stumble into it blind.

Let’s start with why this trap is so easy to fall into, and so hard to escape.

SECTION 2: THE MECHANISM

Here’s the truth nobody wants to hear: the world is systematically designed to trap you into becoming the wrong version of yourself. Not maliciously, but everyone is competing for your attention, money, time, and energy, and they don’t care about the long-term cost to you.

The best way I’ve heard it explained: our world is optimized for front-end experiences.

Things that look good, taste great, feel easy, deliver instant satisfaction. But these same things destroy your back-end systems—your dopamine regulation, your attention span, your ability to think clearly, your sense of what actually matters.

For those not in tech: the front-end is what users see and interact with. The back-end is the complex infrastructure that actually makes everything work. Building solid back-end systems is harder, more expensive, and essential—but invisible to most people.

We’re living in a front-end world that’s systematically destroying the back-end of human functioning.

And the mechanism that traps you has three distinct parts. Each one builds on the last. By the time you realize you’re caught, you’re usually too deep to escape without losing everything you’ve built.

Part 1: The Capture (How You Get Trapped)

The Attention Economy Isn’t What You Think

Everyone knows that likes and comments trigger dopamine. Every notification is a small hit that makes you feel good. Basic stuff.

But what almost nobody talks about is that this taps into primal tribal wiring. Your brain has a hard time separating digital reality from actual reality—if it could, you wouldn’t get scared watching horror movies.

Getting attention, followers, and engagement doesn’t just feel good. It raises your status. It moves you higher in the social hierarchy, which fundamentally changes how your brain operates. This is explored in The Winner Effect: The Neuroscience of Success and Failure—winning and moving up literally rewires your thinking.

When you rise in status, your brain stops operating from scarcity. You think more clearly. You make better decisions. You feel safer. In evolutionary terms, higher status meant better food, more security, higher survival odds. Your position in the hierarchy is still directly connected to your level of existential anxiety.

So attention isn’t just about dopamine hits. It’s a direct survival mechanism. Your brain interprets social proof as safety, as belonging, as moving away from the danger of exile.

This is why the trap works so well: you’re not just chasing likes. You’re chasing the feeling of not being in danger and feeling good.

When Success Attaches to Identity

Once you get traction—followers growing, money coming in, people recognizing you—something dangerous happens. You start forming an identity around it.

And this is where people get fucked.

As mentioned right at the beginning, I learned this the hard way. I was successful doing M&A deals worth millions, so I convinced myself I understood business better than most people. Started a consultancy. It went nowhere for 2.5 years, but I kept going because stopping would mean admitting I was wrong, that maybe I didn’t understand business the way I thought I did.

I ended up in the hospital on the operating table, almost dead from stress.

Now, when something isn’t working, it takes me about a day of feeling like shit, then I move on. I’m not attached to being “the guy who knows business” anymore. I’m just trying to figure out what actually works and building cool things.

This is why course correction becomes nearly impossible for most people. When you build success on a shaky foundation, when your identity gets wrapped up in a particular version of yourself, changing direction means destroying who you think you are. That’s not a business decision anymore—it’s an existential crisis.

Paul Graham nailed this in his essay “Keep Your Identity Small.” The more you tie your identity to specific positions or roles, the harder it becomes to think clearly or change course. Every challenge to your approach feels like a challenge to your existence.

(Amazing short essay btw, I highly recommend reading it)

Which leads directly to the second part of the trap.

Part 2: The Lock (Why You Can’t Escape)

Your Brain Is Wired Against Change

Once you’ve built something—an image, a reputation, a “thing that works”—your brain becomes deeply reluctant to change it, even when it stops working, even when it’s slowly destroying you.

Why?

Because your brain isn’t optimized for growth. It’s optimized for efficiency and survival. From an evolutionary perspective, consistency meant staying alive:

• Same path to water = no predators

• Same food sources = no poison

• Same behavior in the tribe = group acceptance, not exile

Changing patterns meant risk. Risk meant potential death. So our brains developed a powerful bias: keep doing what hasn’t killed you yet.

This wiring didn’t disappear when we moved into modern life. It just found new applications:

• Staying in jobs that drain you because switching feels dangerous

• Playing roles that no longer fit because change threatens your identity

• Creating content you’ve outgrown because it still gets engagement

The pattern feels safe even when it’s slowly killing you.

The Social Reinforcement Loop

Your brain craves consistency. But here’s what makes escape nearly impossible: everyone around you craves it too.

People get used to you being “the funny one,” “the serious entrepreneur,” “the fitness person,” “the one who always has their shit together.” They file you away in their mental model of the world.

And when you try to shift? They push back.

Not because they want to hurt you. Because your change forces them to update their model of you, and that takes effort. Worse, your growth can feel like an uncomfortable mirror. If you can change, it proves change is possible—and that’s threatening to people who’ve convinced themselves it isn’t.

Your evolution challenges their excuses.

So parents, friends, colleagues—they resist. They make comments. They question your decisions. They remind you of “who you really are.” Sometimes consciously, usually not. They’re just trying to maintain their stable understanding of the world, and you staying consistent makes their world more predictable.

It’s not fully their fault, so do not be mad about it, but happy, because it means you are growing. If they did not complain, it would mean that, in reality, you are not truly changing.

Change the perception, and it will set you free.

Your brain interprets this resistance as social danger. Potential rejection. Loss of belonging. Wasted energy fighting upstream.

So you fold. You stay consistent. Not because it’s right. Not because the reasons you give yourself are true. But because staying the same feels safer than facing the combined weight of your own biology and everyone else’s expectations.

The Biology Working Against You

Two cognitive patterns make this trap even stronger: loss aversion and sunk cost fallacy.

Loss aversion is our tendency to fear losses more intensely than we value equivalent gains. Losing $100 feels significantly worse than gaining $100 feels good. Losing status, audience, income, identity—these losses feel catastrophic even when the gain on the other side might be bigger.

Sunk cost fallacy is when you keep investing in something because you’ve already invested so much, even when it no longer makes sense. You’ve spent three years building this audience, this reputation, this version of yourself. Walking away feels like wasting all that effort.

Combined with the status you’ve gained? Your brain will fight you at every level. It doesn’t want to lose the artificial sense of safety that social proof provides. It doesn’t want to abandon the investment. It doesn’t want to face the uncertainty of rebuilding from scratch.

So it convinces you to stay. To keep performing. To maintain the consistency that’s slowly suffocating you.

People like Elon Musk or successful serial entrepreneurs can start over repeatedly because their identity is tied to building and enduring suffering and building something that is bigger than themselves, to the vision, not to any particular success. Their core identity is “person who builds things from nothing because it is necessary,” so starting over doesn’t threaten who they are—it confirms it.

But most people’s identity is tied to the specific success they achieved, which makes pivoting feel like dying.

Part 3: The Escalation (Why It Gets Worse Over Time)

The Hedonic Treadmill

Here’s where the trap becomes a death spiral: hedonic adaptation.

People quickly get used to whatever level you’re operating at, then return to baseline. The excitement fades. The novelty wears off. What impressed them last month is just your new normal this month.

If your success depends on performance—always doing new things, entertaining people, staying interesting—you’re caught in an escalation cycle. Once you do something people love, you have a short window before it becomes their expectation. Anything below that new level feels boring, and you get punished for it.

So you escalate. Crazier content. More extreme positions. Bigger promises. Whatever it takes to recreate that initial spike of attention.

This is why you see creators who started with thoughtful content slowly shift to reaction videos, hot takes, and controversy. Why people who built audiences on substance end up doing whatever gets clicks. Why the girl posting normal photos eventually posts increasingly sexualized content, gets plastic surgery, and wonders where all the quality men went.

The algorithm rewards the escalation. The audience demands it. Your income depends on it. And your brain—still operating on that status/survival wiring—tells you that maintaining attention is maintaining safety.

The Performance Trap

If your income depends on eyeballs—how many people view what you do—the escalation trap is inevitable.

You haven’t built long-term equity with people. You haven’t created something that compounds in value regardless of whether you’re performing right now. You’ve built a machine that requires constant feeding, constant novelty, constant escalation.

Get boring? They leave. Stop performing? The algorithm buries you. Take a break? Someone else fills the space you occupied.

This is why playing the attention game eventually destroys most people who try it.

The game itself requires you to keep escalating until you either burn out, lose respect, or become someone unrecognizable.

The better approach? Get people used to a consistent format and stick with it.

Take YouTuber penguinz0—same camera angle, same monotone voice, no production. He’s built a loyal audience over the years by being reliably himself, not chasing trends.

Or Mariusz, a small-cap investor who just talks about stocks in low-production videos. His platform costs $3000 yearly, and people happily pay. When he tried performative videos for more views, it backfired badly.

But the consistent format can also build a certain personality, like a guy who always talks about new entertainment formats in a funny way. It does not have to be just doing the same thing. The key is creating consistent expectations, but with various outcomes or stories.

Why Nobody Just Stops

You know what’s worse than being trapped in this cycle? Success.

Because real success—the kind built on substance, skill, genuine value—is brutally hard. Jensen Huang, Nvidia’s founder, said it perfectly: “I wouldn’t do it again. Building NVIDIA turned out to be a million times harder than any of us imagined. If we had known the pain, vulnerability, and suffering we’d go through, I don’t think anyone in their right mind would ever start a company.”

When you’ve found a shortcut—when you’ve gotten attention, status, and income through performance and escalation rather than through building something genuinely valuable, your brain knows that the legitimate path is harder. Much harder.

You’re trapped between two impossible choices:

1. Keep escalating in the performance game until something breaks

2. Start over building the hard way, losing everything you’ve gained

Most people can’t stomach option two. The gap between who they are now and who they’d be starting over feels unbridgeable. The problem of now building it again, you now know how hard that is so your brain will do anything it can to convince you not to do it. So they stay on the treadmill, running faster and faster, hoping they can somehow make it work.

They can’t.

The Complete Trap

Let’s see the whole mechanism:

The Capture: Attention triggers your tribal status wiring → You feel safer, think better, get rewarded → You build an identity around this success

The Lock: Your identity becomes attached to this version of yourself → Your brain resists change (survival instinct) → Everyone around you resists change (their model of you) → Biology reinforces staying (loss aversion, sunk costs)

The Escalation: Hedonic adaptation means yesterday’s success becomes today’s baseline → You must escalate to maintain attention → The escalation becomes unsustainable → But quitting means losing everything and starting over → So you stay trapped

This isn’t a character flaw. It’s not a weakness. It’s a systematic mechanism that captures people who are trying to succeed, then makes escape progressively more expensive the longer they’re caught in it.

The question isn’t whether this trap exists. It obviously does—you can see it everywhere once you know what to look for.

The real question is: how do you avoid getting caught in the first place? And if you’re already trapped, what does escape actually require?

That’s what we need to talk about next.

SECTION 3: THE MCCONAUGHEY PRINCIPLE

There was a time when Matthew McConaughey was stuck playing one role: the charming, shirtless rom-com guy. How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, Failure to Launch, The Wedding Planner—same character, different title. Hollywood loved him like that. The paychecks were massive. And for a while, he loved it too.

But then something shifted. He wanted more. “I wanted to do work that challenged me,” McConaughey said in interviews. “But the industry only saw me one way.”

So he made a decision that looked insane from the outside: he stopped. Turned down a $14.5 million offer for another rom-com and disappeared from Hollywood for nearly two years.

“If I couldn’t do what I wanted, I wasn’t going to do anything,” he said.

No income. No spotlight. No guarantees that this gamble would work. Just the certainty that continuing down the same path would eventually kill whatever made him want to act in the first place.

That silence created space. He actively pursued roles that offered depth and complexity—The Lincoln Lawyer, Mud, Magic Mike, True Detective. Smaller paychecks initially. Less mainstream appeal. But actual characters instead of the same performance in different costumes.

Then came Dallas Buyers Club and the Oscar.

That wasn’t a comeback. It was a rebirth.

What This Actually Shows

McConaughey’s story illustrates something most people miss about breaking free from the consistency trap: the mechanism doesn’t break when you make a new choice. It breaks when you’re willing to lose everything the old choice gave you.

Status. Income. Identity. Audience. All of it.

He wasn’t just changing the type of movies he made. He was destroying the entire identity Hollywood had built around him—and that he’d profited from for years. He had to be willing to become nobody again before he could become someone new.

Most people can’t stomach that gap. The period where you’re neither who you were nor who you want to become. Where you’ve lost the old status but haven’t gained the new one. Where your bank account is draining and everyone’s asking if you’ve lost your mind.

That gap is where most people break and go crawling back to the consistency trap.

Why External Change Is So Hard

But here’s the piece that makes this even more complicated: it’s not just your internal resistance. The world around you has locked you into a pattern too.

McConaughey couldn’t just announce “I’m a serious actor now” and have everyone believe him. His existing audience wanted the rom-com guy. Casting directors saw him as the rom-com guy. His agent’s business model depended on him being the rom-com guy.

Everyone had filed him away in their mental model, and changing that model required more than just his decision to change. It required disappearing long enough that the old association weakened. It required proof through completely different work. It required time for people to forget who he’d been so they could see who he was becoming.

This is the external lock that reinforces the internal one. Your reputation becomes a prison. Your success becomes a limitation. The very people who benefited from the old version of you have incentives to keep you there.

Of course, there are different ways also how to approach it, but the article would be too long, and I wanted to point out sometimes how crazy it can be, so people can understand what is ahead of them a prepare for hardships.

The Consistency Principle in Action

McConaughey understood something that most people never figure out: you can’t evolve publicly without triggering massive resistance. You have to create enough distance from the old pattern that people can’t easily pull you back into it.

Two years of silence wasn’t just about finding better roles. It was about breaking the consistency expectation. About making the gap between old McConaughey and new McConaughey so wide that there was no gradual slide back into familiar territory.

If he’d tried to transition slowly—one rom-com, then one serious role, then another rom-com—he would’ve failed, or it would have taken a very long time. The pressure to return to what worked would’ve been too strong. His audience would’ve punished the serious attempts. His income would’ve stayed tied to the old pattern.

He had to make the break complete enough that going back wasn’t an option.

What This Requires

Let’s be clear about what McConaughey actually did, because most people romanticize this story without understanding the price:

He accepted complete uncertainty. No guarantee the serious roles would come. No promise that audiences would accept him in them. Just conviction that continuing the old path was worse than the risk of failing at something new.

He gave up massive money. $14.5 million is real wealth. Most people tell themselves they’d walk away from the wrong path, but when someone offers you life-changing money to stay comfortable, almost everyone takes it.

He endured social pressure. Everyone thought he was crazy. His agent probably fought him. His family probably questioned him. The industry wrote him off. He had to hold his position while everyone around him suggested he was making a catastrophic mistake.

He created space before filling it. He didn’t immediately jump into new work. He disappeared. Let the old identity fade. Gave himself room to figure out who he wanted to become without the pressure of maintaining who he’d been.

This is what breaking free actually costs. Not a mindset shift. Not a new strategy. A willingness to lose everything you’ve built and sit in the uncertainty of not knowing if you can build something better.

Most people aren’t willing to pay that price. Which is why most people stay trapped.

The Pattern That Repeats

You see this same principle in everyone who successfully breaks the consistency trap:

Dave Chappelle walked away from $50 million and Comedy Central fame because the success was destroying what he actually valued. Disappeared for years. Came back on his terms.

Artists who delete their entire catalog and start fresh under new names because the old identity was limiting their growth.

Founders who shut down successful companies because they’d outgrown what made those companies work in the first place.

The pattern is always the same: Complete break. Extended uncertainty. Willingness to lose everything. Only then can you rebuild on a foundation that actually fits who you’ve become.

There’s no gradual version of this. No way to slowly transition while maintaining your current status and income. The mechanism that traps you doesn’t respond to gentle pressure. It requires a violent break.

Which raises the obvious question: if escape is this expensive, isn’t the better strategy to never get trapped in the first place?

That’s exactly right. And that’s what we need to talk about next—how to build in a way that creates options instead of prisons. How to succeed without painting yourself into corners you’ll need McConaughey-level courage to escape from.

Because the real insight isn’t how to break free. It’s how to build foundations that don’t trap you to begin with.

SECTION 4: HOW THIS PLAYS OUT ACROSS DOMAINS

The consistency trap isn’t just an individual problem. It shapes how products evolve, how brands behave, and how entire companies get stuck in patterns they can’t escape. Understanding how it works at different scales shows you why building correctly from the start matters so much.

The Alex Hormozi Example

Alex Hormozi is one of the sharpest business minds creating content today. Runs portfolio companies, sells books, invests. His content was designed for small and medium business owners, and he was dominating that space with straightforward YouTube videos.

Then he started experimenting. Dating advice with his wife. Lifting content. Food videos. Highly produced, entertaining content about not having kids. All the stuff that gets engagement.

And it worked. Following grew. Engagement grew. Views grew.

Then he ran into a friend who said something that stopped him cold: “I loved your videos, but I guess you’re not making them for me anymore, so I stopped watching.”

That friend represented his entire target market. The entrepreneurs and business owners whose actual business he served.

Hormozi went back and analyzed the data. While engagement was up, his real business metrics—book sales, workshop applications, qualified entrepreneur leads—were declining.

He immediately stopped the lifestyle content and returned to business education.

What This Shows

Hormozi caught this early because he was tracking the right metrics. Most people don’t. They see follower counts going up and assume that means success, not realizing they’re building an audience that can’t buy what they actually sell.

This is the attention trap in microcosm: engagement metrics pushed him toward content that grew his audience but destroyed his business.

If he’d continued for another year, the problem would’ve been much worse. His reputation would’ve shifted from “business educator” to “lifestyle personality who talks about everything.” His existing audience would’ve left completely. His new audience would’ve expected the entertainment to continue.

He would’ve been trapped serving an audience that wanted something different from what his business provided. Success at the wrong thing, which is worse than failure because it feels like you’re winning while your foundation crumbles.

The key insight: Hormozi’s core identity was “person who builds and teaches business building.” So recognizing the misalignment and correcting course didn’t threaten who he was. It confirmed it.

Someone whose identity was tied to being popular, being an influencer, having a big following? They couldn’t have made that pivot. They would’ve kept chasing engagement even as their business died, because losing the audience would’ve felt like losing themselves.

How Products Get Trapped

Instagram and Facebook Messenger weren’t designed perfectly from day one. They evolved. But once they reached scale, they couldn’t just redesign everything overnight.

Why? Because users hate sudden change. It breaks their mental models. Creates friction. Forces them to think.

So what do these platforms do? Tiny, invisible updates. A button moves slightly. A feature shifts. A layout tweaks incrementally.

Over time—five years later—you open the app and think, “This feels completely different now.” But you never noticed it happening.

That’s not an accident. That’s a necessity. Once you’ve trained millions of people to use your product a certain way, changing it requires fighting the consistency trap at massive scale. Users will revolt against sudden changes. They’ll leave. They’ll complain. They’ll demand the old version back.

The platforms are trapped by their own success into evolving so slowly that users don’t consciously register the changes.

Brand Consistency as Strategy

Apple never discounts iPhones. Not during holidays. Not for Black Friday. Not ever.

Not because they couldn’t. Because doing so would shatter the mental model they’ve spent decades building: premium, untouchable, high-status.

The moment Apple starts playing the discount game, the entire perception collapses. People stop thinking “this holds value.” They start thinking, “if I wait, it’ll be cheaper.”

Even used iPhones hold value because of this consistency. Apple has trapped itself into a position where it cannot compete on price without destroying the foundation on which its entire brand rests.

This is consistency as a competitive advantage. But it’s also consistency as a constraint. Apple can’t suddenly decide to make a budget phone line the way Samsung can. Their brand won’t support it. Their audience won’t accept it.

They’ve built a prison of premium positioning. It’s a very profitable prison, but it’s still a prison.

The Strategic Insight

These examples show the same mechanism operating at different scales:

Individual level: Hormozi almost trapped himself with the wrong audience

Product level: Platforms can only evolve through invisible incremental changes

Brand level: Apple locked themselves into premium positioning permanently

In every case, early decisions create patterns that become progressively harder to change. Success makes the patterns stronger. Time makes them more rigid.

Which means the only real leverage point is at the beginning. Before you’ve locked in patterns. Before you’ve built an audience expecting specific things. Before your identity is attached to particular outcomes.

This is why how you start matters infinitely more than most people realize. You’re not just building a business or audience. You’re building the constraints that will govern every future decision you make.

Get it right early, and you build something that can evolve with you. Get it wrong, and you build a prison that gets stronger the more successful you become.

So how do you actually build right from the start? That requires understanding the price structure of every choice you make—which is what we need to map out next.

SECTION 5: THE PRICE STRUCTURE

Life operates on a brutal but simple principle: everything costs something. The tragedy isn’t that we pay prices—it’s that most people pay them unconsciously, discovering the real cost only after they’re locked into consequences they never saw coming.

Dan Millman captured this in The Way of the Peaceful Warrior: freedom isn’t the absence of consequences. It’s full consciousness of them before you choose. Most people make decisions like gamblers in denial, hoping for wins while remaining willfully blind to what they’re actually risking.

Real freedom comes from staring directly at every price tag before you commit.

Your Strengths Will Destroy You

Your greatest strengths eventually become your greatest weaknesses if you don’t evolve with circumstances. The trait that builds success in one context becomes the thing that sabotages you in the next.

The entrepreneur whose appetite for risk and lightning-fast decisions builds a startup discovers these same traits demolish the mature company that needs careful systems and patient planning. What got you here won’t just fail to get you there—it might actively destroy what you’re trying to build.

I have a friend who’s exceptionally good at attracting women. His effortless charm and magnetic confidence make him irresistible initially. Women are drawn to how he makes conversation feel easy, how he makes them feel like the most important person in the room, his fearless approach to connection.

But these exact qualities poison every relationship. The spontaneity that was thrilling becomes unreliability she can’t plan around. The confidence that attracted her becomes arrogance that dismisses her concerns. The social magnetism that made her feel chosen makes her feel like another audience member in his ongoing performance.

He’s trapped by his own gifts. The hidden price of surface-level magnetism: a string of relationships that burn bright and die fast, leaving him wondering why he can’t find someone who appreciates who he “really” is.

But this is who he really is. He just never calculated the full cost of being that person.

Consider the perfectionist whose exacting standards drive exceptional work but paralyze them from shipping anything unless it’s flawless. Or the people-pleaser whose agreeableness makes them beloved in small teams but useless as leaders who must sometimes disappoint people to serve larger goals. The workaholic whose dedication builds career success while destroying their marriage, health, and relationship with their children.

Each pays the price of strength taken too far, unexamined in new contexts.

The Misalignment Detective

The most dangerous lies are the ones you tell yourself. And the most expensive blindness is to the gap between your declared values and your revealed priorities.

Words are performance. Actions are truth.

Your calendar, bank statements, attention patterns—these documents don’t lie. They show what you actually value, regardless of what you claim to value.

When someone says family matters most but works 80-hour weeks for money they already have enough of, their schedule tells the real story. When they claim to want financial freedom but finance a lifestyle requiring them to stay trapped in jobs they hate, their spending reveals their actual priorities. When they talk about wanting deep relationships but spend free time scrolling instead of calling friends, their behavior votes against their stated desires.

This misalignment isn’t just hypocrisy. It’s systematic self-sabotage.

You can’t reach a destination when your internal GPS says “family time” but your feet walk toward the office every weekend. You can’t build wealth when your mouth says “financial independence” but your hands reach for every new status symbol.

The price of this unconscious living is perpetual frustration: working incredibly hard but never arriving where you think you want to go. Busy but not effective. Active but not progressing. Paying the cost of effort without receiving the reward of alignment.

Most people avoid this audit because they’re terrified of what they’ll find. They suspect their actions reveal priorities they’re not proud of—that they care more about appearing successful than being fulfilled, more about comfort than courage, more about being liked than being respected.

But this avoidance costs them their one life, spent in service of values they never consciously chose.

The Price of Conscious Choosing

When you’re considering that promotion, you’re not just choosing more money and prestige. You’re also choosing longer hours, increased pressure, potentially less time with family, the weight of greater responsibility, possibly becoming the kind of person who makes decisions that disappoint people you care about.

When you see all costs upfront, you can decide if the total package aligns with who you want to become.

Without this clarity, you’re not making choices—you’re reacting to opportunities and hoping the bill never comes due.

It always does.

Charlie Munger’s approach to debate exemplifies this principle. He doesn’t just prepare his arguments—he becomes his own opposition’s most informed critic. Only when he can argue against himself better than his opponent can does he truly understand what he’s defending.

This isn’t intellectual honesty for its own sake. It’s strategic wisdom born from understanding that you can’t navigate successfully through terrain you refuse to map.

Munger knows the price of entering any debate unprepared isn’t just losing the argument—it’s looking foolish, damaging reputation, potentially making decisions based on incomplete information. So he pays the upfront cost of rigorous preparation to avoid the much steeper price of public failure and poor judgment.

The same principle applies to every significant choice: career moves, relationships, lifestyle changes, business ventures.

The question isn’t whether you’ll pay a price. You always will. The question is whether you’ll pay it consciously, as the calculated cost of getting what you truly want, or unconsciously, as the surprise tax on your self-deception.

Most people choose the surprise tax because they’re afraid that conscious choosing will reveal that what they want costs more than they’re willing to pay. But this fear costs them everything: they end up paying prices they never agreed to, for outcomes they never truly wanted, becoming people they never intended to be.

Examples of Hidden Prices

The “successful but miserable” trap: You optimize for external markers—title, salary, reputation—without asking if those markers align with how you actually want to spend your days. The price reveals itself years later when you realize you’ve built an impressive career doing work that drains you.

The “cheap money” trap: You take income doing work you don’t respect because it’s easier than building something legitimate. The price: you spend that money frantically on things you don’t need, trying to wash away the taste of inauthenticity. Several psychologists have observed this pattern—when your income feels dirty, you end up spending it on stupid shit just to make yourself feel better.

The “wrong audience” trap: You build a following serving people you don’t actually want to serve because the growth feels good. The price compounds: wrong clients refer more wrong clients. Your reputation crystallizes around work that doesn’t represent who you are, making it progressively harder to pivot toward what you actually want.

The “attention addiction” trap: You optimize for engagement metrics rather than building genuine value. The price: you become dependent on performing for an audience that will abandon you the moment you stop entertaining them. No equity. No compounding. Just an endless treadmill that gets faster every year.

Each of these traps is easy to fall into because the costs are delayed. They don’t bill you immediately. You discover them later, usually after you’re too invested to walk away without losing everything.

The Compound Cost

The most expensive part isn’t the initial price. It’s how costs compound over time.

Wrong decisions don’t just cost you once. They reshape your opportunities, your reputation, your skills, your network—everything that determines what options you’ll have in the future.

Take the wrong job, and two years later you have wrong-job experience, wrong-job connections, wrong-job skills, and a resume that tells a story about who you are that isn’t accurate. Changing direction now costs more than it would’ve cost before you started.

Build the wrong audience, and three years later you have wrong-audience reputation, wrong-audience referrals, wrong-audience income streams, and a brand that makes it nearly impossible to attract the right audience without starting completely over.

Marry the wrong person, and a decade later you have shared assets, children, intertwined families, and a life that requires dismantling everything you’ve built together to escape.

This is why early decisions matter so much. Not because they’re harder to change technically, but because the costs of changing them compound over time. The longer you wait, the more expensive the pivot becomes.

Conscious vs. Unconscious Prices

There are two types of prices in life:

Conscious prices: You see them clearly, decide they’re worth paying, and pay them intentionally. These feel hard but clean. You’re suffering for something you chose, which makes the suffering meaningful.

Unconscious prices: You stumble into them, discover them too late, and spend years paying for decisions you never consciously made. These feel like betrayal because you never agreed to them.

The work of building a good life is moving as many prices as possible from the unconscious category to the conscious one. Looking at every major choice and asking: “What is this really going to cost me? Not just money and time, but identity, relationships, health, peace of mind, future options?”

Most people avoid this work because honest answers are uncomfortable. Conscious choosing means admitting that what you want might cost more than you’re willing to pay. It means saying no to opportunities that look good but don’t actually fit. It means accepting limitations and tradeoffs instead of pretending you can have everything.

But unconscious choosing costs infinitely more. It costs you your life, spent paying bills you never saw coming for purchases you never consciously made.

The Real Question

The question isn’t whether you’ll pay prices for your choices. You will, always.

The question is: Will you pay them consciously, understanding what you’re getting in exchange? Or unconsciously, discovering years later that you’ve been paying for something you never actually wanted?

Every choice you make is a price negotiation with your future self. Most people never look at the contract before signing. They just hope it works out.

That hope is expensive.

SECTION 6: STRATEGIC PREVENTION

If you don’t have a clear vision for yourself, you become part of someone else’s vision for you.

You’ll unconsciously optimize for other people’s definitions of success, other people’s approval, other people’s money—until one day you wake up trapped in a life that fits you like a borrowed suit.

This isn’t just philosophical. It’s practical survival.

Because once you become known for something, once you build an audience around a particular version of yourself, changing direction becomes exponentially harder. Your reputation becomes your prison. Your success becomes your limitation.

The time to figure out who you are is before you become well-known for being someone else.

Know Yourself Before the World Defines You

Start with brutal self-analysis. What are your actual skills, not the ones you think you should have?

What personality traits do you genuinely possess, not the ones that look good on paper? What are your unfair advantages—the unique combinations of experience, perspective, and ability that only you bring?

Where does your energy naturally flow? What kind of work energizes you versus drains you? How do you authentically like to look, talk, move through the world?

This isn’t about personality tests and LinkedIn buzzwords. It’s about understanding your core operating system so you can build a life that runs on your natural fuel instead of fighting against your grain every day.

Most people skip this step. They see what’s working for others and try to replicate it. They optimize for external metrics before understanding their internal wiring. Then they wonder why success feels hollow or why they burn out in the long run despite doing everything “right.”

When you engage with trends, use them as communication methods, not as your core identity. If you’re naturally analytical and introverted, you can package your insights using current formats and platforms without pretending to be an extroverted entertainer. The trend is the wrapper. Your authentic value is the gift inside.

Choose Your Audience Like You’d Choose a Spouse

Here’s what almost nobody figures out intentionally: you become like the people you serve.

I haven’t seen anyone talk about this.

Your audience doesn’t just consume your content—they shape your character, your opportunities, ultimately your life. To create for them, you need to think about what they want, what they respond to, what problems they have. And you become what you think about consistently.

Choose them as carefully as you’d choose a spouse, because in many ways they’ll have more influence over your daily existence.

I know a Slovak singer who makes excellent money creating children’s music. The problem? He despises kids. Every song he writes, every performance he gives, every interaction with young fans must feel like a betrayal of his soul. The money is good, but it’s contaminated money—earned by being someone he fundamentally isn’t. He spends it frantically on expensive things, trying to wash away the taste.

The same pattern destroys OnlyFans creators who build massive followings serving audiences they actually despise. They perform intimacy for strangers they can’t stand, fake desire for people they find repulsive, pretend to be aroused by interactions that make their skin crawl. The money flows in, but so does the self-loathing.

When your income feels dirty, you end up spending it on stupid shit just to feel better. The money becomes contaminated by how you earned it, and no amount seems worth the spiritual price.

At least, not for me.

The Compound Cost of Wrong Audiences

Wrong audiences don’t just drain your energy—they multiply themselves. Clients you don’t want to work with refer more clients you don’t want to work with. Followers who engage with content you hate encourage you to make more content you hate. Your reputation crystallizes around work that doesn’t represent who you are, making it progressively harder to pivot toward what you actually want.

This trap usually starts with survival: you need money, so you take any client who can pay. But what begins as a temporary compromise becomes permanent character. Those clients shape your brand, your referrals, your daily experience. Before you realize it, you’ve built a successful business you actively resent.

The Mirror Effect

Over time, you absorb the characteristics of the people you serve. If your clients are entitled and demanding, you develop those traits. If your audience is negative and cynical, that energy seeps into your worldview. If your customers accept low-quality work, you start accepting low-quality work from yourself.

This isn’t mystical—it’s practical psychology. You adapt to your environment, and your audience is a major part of your professional environment. Their language becomes your language. Their problems become your focus. Their values influence your decisions.

Choose your audience partly based on who you want to become. If you want to be more disciplined, serve people who value discipline. If you want to think bigger in a sustainable way, work with clients who operate at scale. If you want to stay optimistic, avoid building a brand that attracts chronic complainers.

The Quality vs. Quantity Decision

Most people optimize for metrics that don’t matter: reach instead of resonance, followers instead of fans, attention instead of respect. They choose quantity over quality because it feels like progress, but it’s often progress in the wrong direction.

The content that generates maximum reach—outrage, controversy, surface-level trends—usually attracts the wrong audience for long-term success. You can get millions of views reacting to trending topics, but what kind of business can you build on an audience that’s only interested in your hot takes on this week’s drama?

If you want clients with depth, resources, and respect for quality work, you can’t build your brand just on shallow, reactive content. You need to create work that demonstrates the thinking and expertise those clients value, even if it grows more slowly.

The strategic approach: create high-quality, substantial content that showcases your real capabilities, then extract short-form, trend-based content from that foundation. Lead with substance, follow with attention-grabbing formats. This way, people who discover you through trending content can find the deeper work that qualifies you for better opportunities.

The question isn’t whether quality or quantity is “better”—it’s which game you can win while staying yourself.

Build on Timeless Foundations

Trends change. Algorithms shift. Platforms die. But skills, perspective, and genuine expertise compound forever.

Your core identity should be built on timeless elements—your actual capabilities, your way of thinking, your values—rather than temporary trends. Trends should influence how you communicate, not what you fundamentally stand for.

The TikTok dancer who wants to become a business owner has no bridge between identities. The political commentator, tired of the outrage cycle, has no clear next move. The lifestyle blogger whose life circumstances changed has no foundation to build from.

If your brand is completely dependent on fleeting trends or narrow niches, you have no exit strategy. You’re trapped serving whatever’s working right now, with no path forward when it stops working.

The Exit Strategy Everyone Ignores

Most people build their entire professional identity on foundations that won’t last, with no plan for what happens when they want or need to change direction.

The sustainable path is choosing your direction consciously, then staying consistent long enough for compound interest to work. This requires saying no to appealing distractions, easy opportunities, and audiences that don’t align with your vision. It means doing the same essential work, in the same general direction, for long enough that you become genuinely excellent at something meaningful.

The payoff isn’t just professional success—it’s the deep satisfaction of building a life that actually fits who you are. Where your work energizes instead of drains you. Where your audience appreciates the real you instead of a performance. Where your reputation reflects your authentic capabilities and values.

Without this intentional vision, you’ll drift into someone else’s plan for your life. You’ll optimize for their metrics, serve their goals, become who they need you to be. You’ll be successful at being someone else, which is the most sophisticated form of failure.

The question isn’t whether you’ll have a vision—it’s whether it will be yours or theirs.

SECTION 7: WHAT THIS ACTUALLY COSTS (A Case Study)

Writing advice about living authentically is easy. Following it when the bills are due and the world is pulling you in different directions—that’s the real test.

I don’t just write these ideas. I’ve built my life around them. And I want to show you what that actually looks like, not as justification, but as a case study in what these principles cost when applied in practice.

The Self-Analysis Tax

I’ve changed jobs, sectors, and positions more than most people consider rational. But each transition was deliberate. Every time I left a position—or got fired from one—I spent weeks analyzing what I loved about the work, what drained me, why those reactions occurred, and what I wanted to learn next.

This level of self-examination is exhausting. I’ve taken every personality test I could find, visited advisors from conventional career counselors to uncomfortably spiritual guides, spent countless hours dissecting my motivations and reactions.

This is the compound cost of optimization. I’ve traded comfortable ignorance for constant self-examination. Most days it’s worth it. Some days I’m not sure. But I know what the alternative costs: I’ve watched more than 90% of the people I meet live lives they don’t truly love, or worse, lives they actively resent.

That terrifies me more than the occasional paralysis from over-analysis.

The price: Mental energy, time, sometimes feeling like you’re never satisfied because you’re always questioning.

The payoff: Each transition gets me closer to work that actually fits. The gaps between “this is wrong” and “I need to leave” get shorter. The recovery time from failures shrinks.

Long-Form in a Short-Form World

I write long-form analysis in the age of TikTok. Most people don’t have time to read 8,000-word pieces. The reach is a fraction of what shallow, reactive posts would generate.

But I love this work. Writing these pieces is therapeutic—it helps me process ideas, connect disparate thoughts, clarify my thinking. More importantly, it’s sustainable. I’ve tried creating low-quality, triggering content that performs well on social media. Got sick of it quickly.

When I sit down to write for three hours, it doesn’t feel like work. When I was churning out hot takes and trending commentary, every minute felt like torture.

The price: Slower growth, smaller audience, less immediate validation, sometimes wondering if I’m making the right call when I see others gaining followers faster.

The payoff: Work that energizes me. Clients and readers who actually understand what I’m trying to do without me dumbing it down. A body of work I’m proud of rather than embarrassed by, even years later.

This is choosing audience over reach. I write for people who think in systems, not soundbites. That limits my growth but maintains my sanity.

The best way is, of course, to do both, but this is where having a team is the most feasible idea.

Turning Down Contaminated Money

The real test comes when you’re broke and someone offers you money to compromise your principles.

I’m skilled at behavioral insights, manipulation of behavior, and understanding human decision-making, which means I regularly get approached by casinos and betting companies. The money used to be tempting, especially when you could barely afford groceries.

A few years ago, I couldn’t find work I wanted, was running out of savings, and got an offer for 2.5 times my normal salary working on high-frequency trading products. They needed someone who understood systems but had behavioral intuition.

I knew I’d be bored. I knew I wouldn’t love it. I knew it would feel like selling my soul for a paycheck.

So even in my worst financial period, I said no.

People close to me thought I’d lost my mind. “Just take the money and figure it out later.”

The price: Seven months of financial stress. Uncertainty. Social pressure. Watching my savings drain while wondering if I’d made a catastrophic mistake.

The payoff: Three weeks after I turned down that offer—seven months after I started looking—I found work with a company I actually trully enjoyed. More importantly, I didn’t have to spend years doing work I hated while trying to reverse the career trajectory that a wrong choice would’ve created.

This is what loss aversion looks like when you override it. My brain was screaming to take the money. I knew the price would be hating my work. Seven months of financial stress versus years of soul-dead employment. I chose the shorter suffering.

The worst lie, people think you can do both. But that’s for another day.

The Boundary Tax

I’ve told myself I’d rather live alone than be disrespected. This applies to friends, family, romantic relationships, and professional situations. I don’t tolerate people crossing serious lines, even when maintaining those boundaries costs me relationships or opportunities.

The paradox: Setting these standards has actually led to deeper relationships. When you’re clear about what you will and won’t accept, you attract people who respect boundaries. You repel those who don’t. The quality increases dramatically.

The price: Some relationships end. Some opportunities close. Sometimes you sit alone wondering if your standards are too high.

The payoff: Every relationship I have now is based on mutual respect. I don’t spend energy managing people who drain me. The cost of enforcing boundaries feels much lower than the cost of tolerating disrespect would have been.

The Pattern

Warren Buffett’s acquisition of Nebraska Furniture Mart from Rose Blumkin in 1983 became legendary for how it was sealed—with a handshake. No due diligence, no financial audits, no legal paperwork. Buffett asked her price, she told him, they shook hands.

Mrs. B was 89, continued running the business for years after the sale, and the handshake deal became one of Buffett’s most profitable investments. It perfectly embodied his philosophy that when you find people of integrity, complicated agreements become unnecessary.

When you’re willing to sacrifice present comfort for future alignment, when you consistently choose authenticity over convenience, when you refuse to compromise core values even when it’s expensive, the world eventually reorganizes around your integrity.

But it might take significantly longer.

Every major sacrifice I’ve made for future alignment has paid off, usually in ways I couldn’t have predicted. Turning down quick money led to better opportunities. Ending relationships that didn’t serve me made space for ones that did. Choosing difficult but meaningful work over easy but empty work built skills and a reputation that continue to compound.

But at that moment, it is not as easy and glamorous as it sounds.

What This Actually Looks Like

This isn’t about being stubborn or precious. It’s about recognizing that short-term discomfort is often the price of long-term satisfaction.

Most people optimize for immediate relief—they take the job that pays now, enter the relationship that’s convenient now, build the audience that grows now. But these quick fixes often become long-term traps.

The periods of uncertainty, financial stress, and social pressure to compromise have always preceded the most meaningful breakthroughs. Not because the universe rewards patience, but because staying focused on what I actually wanted instead of taking the first exit from discomfort eventually led to finding what I was looking for.

The life I’m building by following these principles isn’t always glamorous, but it’s genuinely mine. The work energizes me. The relationships fulfill me. The challenges feel worth facing.

That’s the difference between writing advice and living it. Anyone can type inspiring words about authenticity and alignment. Living by those words when the world is pulling you in other directions—paying the actual prices these choices require—that’s where theory meets reality.

SECTION 8: CLOSING

Most people reading this won’t change anything.

They’ll nod along, feel briefly motivated, recognize the patterns in their own lives—then go back to optimizing for metrics that don’t matter and serving audiences they don’t respect.

Why?

Because change requires losing your current status before you gain a new status.

That gap—where you’re neither who you were nor who you want to become—is where most people break. The biology, the social pressure, the sunk costs, the loss aversion—all of it conspires to keep you exactly where you are.

The mechanism I’ve laid out isn’t secret knowledge. It’s obvious once you see it. You probably recognized yourself in multiple examples. You know people trapped in every variation of this pattern.

The hard part isn’t understanding the trap. It’s being willing to lose everything you’ve built to escape it.

The Question You Need to Answer

Here’s what you need to figure out:

Are you building a life that fits who you are, or are you becoming whoever your current success requires you to be?

Because five years from now, the gap between those two versions of yourself will either be closing or becoming unbridgeable. Every day you spend optimizing for the wrong things makes the real you harder to find. Every audience you build around a performance makes authenticity more expensive. Every identity you attach to temporary success makes evolution feel like death.

Most people discover this too late—after they’ve built impressive careers doing work that drains them, after they’ve attracted audiences that expect performances they’re tired of giving, after they’ve become successful at being someone they never actually wanted to be.

The McConaughey move—walking away from $14.5 million and two years of uncertainty—sounds romantic in retrospect. But most people facing that choice take the money. They tell themselves they’ll figure it out later. They convince themselves that the discomfort is temporary.

It’s not temporary. It compounds.

What Actually Matters

The principles in this piece aren’t complicated:

• Know yourself before the world defines you

• Choose your audience as carefully as a spouse

• Build on timeless foundations, not temporary trends

• See every price tag before you commit

• Be willing to lose everything to stay aligned

Simple to understand. Brutal to execute.

Because execution requires making choices that look insane to everyone around you. Turning down money when you need it. Walking away from success that’s working. Enforcing boundaries that cost you relationships. Sitting in uncertainty instead of grabbing the first comfortable option.

Most people aren’t willing to pay these prices. Which is why most people end up trapped.

The Real Price

You will pay a price for your choices. That’s guaranteed.

The only question is which price:

The price of building slowly and authentically, or the price of getting trapped in someone else’s definition of success?

The price of knowing yourself deeply, or the price of waking up at 50, realizing you’ve become a stranger?

The price of saying no to wrong opportunities, or the price of spending decades serving audiences you don’t respect?

The price of short-term uncertainty, or the price of long-term misery?

You’re choosing right now, whether you realize it or not. Every decision about what content to create, which clients to serve, what work to pursue, which opportunities to accept—these choices are building the prison or the foundation.

Most people drift into their prisons without noticing. The bars appear slowly, disguised as success. By the time they realize they’re trapped, escape requires McConaughey-level courage and sacrifice.

They succeed at playing a character, then get trapped maintaining that persona. The character becomes a cage with golden bars - financially rewarding but spiritually suffocating. They can’t evolve without potentially losing everything they’ve built.

Basically, selling your soul to the devil.

The alternative is building foundations that allow evolution from the start. Choosing alignment over growth. Quality over quantity. Authenticity over performance. Long-term integrity over short-term validation.

It’s slower. It’s harder to explain to others. The results take longer to materialize.

But it’s the only path that doesn’t require you to destroy yourself to escape what you’ve built.

So, which price are you willing to pay?

Because one way or another, you’re going to pay it.

— Peter

I’ll analyze where your business, content, or career is rewarding you for being the wrong version of yourself, and show you what it’s costing you.

Free Behavioral Diagnostic

Companies don’t fail because of what they see in their data.

They fail because of what they don’t see.

The invisible gap between how founders think users behave and how users actually behave. The misalignment between what teams build and what users need. The friction hiding in plain sight that analytics can’t measure but everyone feels.

There’s a discipline emerging to solve this problem. Not by optimizing metrics or running A/B tests or adding more features. By architecting the invisible behavioral layer beneath all of that.

It’s called Behavioral Systems Architecture.

And it doesn’t fit in any existing category—because it sits at the intersection of all of them while belonging to none.

In the age of AI, where anyone can build a product in hours, the bottleneck has shifted from technical execution to understanding the invisible behavioral dynamics that make products actually work.

AI can build your product. It cannot architect the human behavior that makes it succeed.

Subscribe now

The Problem Nobody Talks About

Your activation is stuck at X%. Your retention drops off after Day 10. Users request features but don’t use them when you ship them. Your competitor does basically the same thing, but crushes you. You can’t understand and explain why.

Everyone tells you to “improve UX” or “optimize the funnel” or “run more experiments.”

But here’s what’s actually happening:

• Your founder’s mental model of how users behave ←→ How users actually behave

• What your team decides to build ←→ What users actually need

• What your product assumes ←→ What users actually experience

• What your data shows ←→ Why it’s actually happening

This misalignment is invisible to:

• Analytics (shows WHAT, not WHY)

• User research (users say one thing, do another)

• A/B testing (optimizes symptoms, not root causes)

• The founders themselves (they’re inside the system)

Every surface problem—poor activation, terrible retention, features nobody uses, growth that stalls despite “good metrics”—traces back to invisible behavioral misalignment.

But even when you find the bottleneck, another challenge emerges: systematic application.

Here’s the paradox: we live in an age where all information is free and instantly available. Yet company failures are accelerating, not declining.

Why? Because it’s not about having information—it’s about systematic application of insights.

It’s knowing:

• Which behavioral insights apply to which behaviors

• At what time in the customer journey

• In what specific context

• How to implement them without creating new friction

This is where even the minority who identify root causes (not just symptoms) still fail. They find the invisible misalignment but can’t architect a systematic solution.

This is what Behavioral Systems Architecture solves.

What Behavioral Systems Architecture Actually Is

Behavioral Systems Architecture is the structural design of human behavior within systems.

It’s not:

• Psychology → that focuses on the internal feelings of individuals

• UX/HCI → that focuses on digital interfaces

• Behavioral Economics → that focuses on cognitive biases

• Strategy Consulting → that focuses on markets and business models

• Organizational Design → that focuses on hierarchy and structure

• Brand Positioning → that focuses on communication

• Systems Thinking → that provides frameworks but not behavioral specificity

Behavioral Systems Architecture sits at the intersection of all these disciplines but fits in none of them.

It operates at the structural layer beneath:

• How founders’ mental models shape organizational behavior

• How teams’ decision-making processes determine what actually gets built

• How product design creates user behavior patterns

• How customer psychology drives adoption and retention

• How system incentives guide actions

• How emotional friction determines outcomes

The core principle: Behavioral Systems Architecture shapes behavior through structure, not motivation.

It doesn’t just change people. It changes the environment around people—across all touchpoints of their journey, in different contexts—so their behavior naturally aligns with desired outcomes.

This is a fundamentally different approach—and a different discipline entirely.

The Behavioral Systems Architecture Framework

The discipline can be understood through nine interconnected sub-fields—each addressing a different layer of the behavioral system:

1. Founder Behavioral Architecture

How founder psychology, mental models, and decision-making patterns shape organizational behavior and execution reality.

2. Organizational Behavioral Architecture

The structural patterns behind team performance, alignment, psychological safety, and how decisions, changes, and transformations actually get made versus how they’re supposed to be made.

3. Customer Behavioral Architecture

How customers perceive value, make decisions, build trust, and adopt products—the psychological journey from awareness to habit.

4. Product Behavior Architecture

How interfaces, features, flows, and friction points shape user actions at the micro-interaction level.

5. Narrative Architecture

How brand messaging, positioning, and storytelling shape meaning and identity in users’ minds.

6. Decision Architecture

How leaders, teams, and customers make choices inside systems—the structure of decision-making environments.

7. Incentive Architecture

How rewards, resources, consequences, and motivational structures guide behavior patterns.

8. Emotional Architecture

How emotional signals, psychological contracts, tensions, and feelings influence outcomes.

9. Performance Architecture

How rhythms, rituals, environmental design, and structural patterns shape sustained output.

These nine sub-fields form a complete ecosystem. Traditional disciplines address one or two layers. Behavioral Systems Architecture integrates all of them systemically.

How Behavioral Systems Architecture Works in Practice

The discipline reveals invisible patterns through systematic analysis across the complete behavioral system.

Case Study: Alza’s E-commerce Dominance

A behavioral systems architecture analysis of Alza (Czech e-commerce) mapped their complete customer journey across 16 behavioral touchpoints, revealing how they:

• Weaponized authentic scarcity (night delivery creating availability bias, not artificial countdown timers)

• Engineered social proof at scale (strategic review architecture, not just star ratings)

• Reduced cognitive load systematically (category naming, framing effects, center-stage positioning)

• Created behavioral habit loops (loyalty mechanisms tied to identity, not just discounts)

They went from startup to billion-dollar company not by optimizing features, but by architecting complete behavioral systems that worked with human psychology rather than against it.

The analysis identified specific interventions:

• How they positioned product categories to trigger center-stage bias

• How they structured pricing display to leverage anchoring and contrast effects

• How they designed the checkout flow to minimize decision fatigue

• How they built SEO strategy around reciprocity and education

This is Behavioral Systems Architecture: systematic visibility into invisible dynamics.

[Read Case Study here]

Case Study: The Paperwallet Failure

A behavioral diagnostic of a failed physical wallet startup revealed the project could have been saved with 2 weeks of proper analysis instead of 2.5 years of effort.

The core problems weren’t marketing or product quality:

Founder Mental Model Misalignment:

• Founder assumed e-commerce technical skills were the constraint

• Reality: behavioral understanding was the constraint

• Technical execution was commodity; customer psychology was the bottleneck

Customer Avatar Fragmentation:

• Tried to serve athletes, travelers, eco-conscious buyers, young people simultaneously

• Violated the principle: when you speak to everyone, you resonate with no one

• Scattered resources across incompatible psychological profiles

Mental State Targeting Errors:

• Cinema Ladies’ Night campaign targeted fun-seeking social context

• Product messaging focused on utilitarian eco-benefits

• Context-message mismatch guaranteed failure regardless of creative quality

Behavioral Misdiagnosis:

• Assumed lack of awareness was the problem (ran broad campaigns)

• Reality: lack of product-market-psychology fit was the problem

• Effort directed at symptoms, not root causes

A Behavioral Systems Architecture approach would have:

1. Mapped founder assumptions against user reality

2. Identified the single highest-potential customer avatar

3. Diagnosed behavioral fit between product and context

4. Designed targeted validation experiments

The invisible misalignment between founder mental models, product positioning, customer psychology, and context destroyed the venture. Traditional consulting focused on execution. Behavioral Systems Architecture would have diagnosed the structural impossibility.

[Read Case Study here]

Case Study: Etsy’s $32B Rise and 80% Collapse

A behavioral architecture analysis of Etsy reveals both the power of the discipline and the consequences of violating its principles.

What Etsy Built (2005-2017):

They architected a complete behavioral system based on deep psychological insights:

• Identity-based commerce (purchases as self-expression, not transactions)

• Authentic scarcity (real crafting uniqueness, not artificial countdown timers)

• IKEA effect at scale (connection to creators increased perceived value)

• Community-driven growth loops (sellers as marketers, buyers becoming sellers, social proof multiplication)

They turned shopping into identity construction. Made an effort a feature, not a bug. Created a psychological equilibrium where buyers’ desire for authenticity justified sellers’ premium pricing.

What Etsy Destroyed (2017-2024):

They systematically violated every behavioral principle:

• Allowed mass-produced goods (destroyed authentic scarcity)

• Raised fees during pandemic vulnerability (violated reciprocity)

• Replaced human curation with algorithms (eliminated community trust)

• Optimized for “gross merchandise volume” over artisan identity

• Pushed sellers to act like factories (destroyed the creator narrative)

The result: 80% stock crash, billions in lost value, mass seller exodus.

The Behavioral Systems Architecture Lesson:

You cannot violate human psychology indefinitely, even if spreadsheets say you’re winning. Etsy confused metrics for mission, scale for soul. They forgot that platforms aren’t serving “users”—they’re architecting human behavior within systems.

When the behavioral foundation collapses, everything built on top of it fails eventually.

[Read Case Study here]

Why Behavioral Architecture Matters Now

The bottleneck has shifted.

For decades, the constraint in building products was technical execution. Could you actually build the thing? Most couldn’t. Technical skill was a scarce resource.

AI has commoditized technical execution.

• Claude writes code

• Figma/Lovable designs interfaces

• Bubble ships MVPs

• GitHub Copilot handles implementation

Anyone can build a product now. The technical barrier has collapsed.

But AI cannot:

• Identify invisible behavioral misalignment between founder assumptions, mental models, blind spots and user reality

• Map the gap between what users say and what they subconsciously do

• Diagnose why teams build the wrong things despite customer feedback

• Design complete behavioral systems that work with human psychology

• Understand the emotional architecture beneath rational decisions

The competitive advantage is shifting from “can you build it” to “do you understand why people actually behave the way they do.”

Companies are drowning in data but starving for insight. They can measure everything but understand nothing. They optimize metrics while the behavioral foundation crumbles beneath them.

They know the HOW and the WHAT. But they’re missing the WHEN and—most critically—the WHY.

This is where Behavioral Systems Architecture becomes critical. Not as a luxury, but as the fundamental discipline that determines success.

The Modern Complexity Crisis

Today’s companies face unprecedented behavioral complexity:

• More distributed (remote teams, global customers, async decision-making)

• More psychological (products compete on meaning, not just utility)

• More emotionally demanding (founder burnout, team alignment challenges)

• More dependent on narrative (story-driven commerce, identity-based buying)

• More behaviorally sophisticated (customers pattern-match faster, trust slower)

Their problems are no longer:

• Strategy (everyone can Google best practices)

• Markets (information is everywhere)

• Technology (AI handles execution)

• Operations (playbooks are commoditized)

Their problems are:

• Behavior (why users don’t do what makes sense)

• Clarity (cutting through complexity to core dynamics)

• Emotional bandwidth (managing psychological load)

• Incentive alignment (making individual and system goals converge)

• Narrative coherence (meaning-making at scale)

Traditional disciplines weren’t built for this. Behavioral Systems Architecture was.

Core Methodologies of Behavioral Systems Architecture

The discipline employs systematic frameworks to surface invisible dynamics:

Friction Mapping

Identifying psychological resistance points across complete user journeys—the emotional and cognitive obstacles that don’t show up in analytics but determine outcomes.

Mental Model Diagnostics

Surfacing the assumptions, beliefs, and frameworks that shape how founders, teams, and users interpret reality—then revealing where these models diverge from actual behavior.

Incentive Structure Analysis

Mapping how rewards, consequences, and motivational architecture guide behavior—often in ways that contradict stated goals.

Behavioral Bottleneck Identification

Finding the structural constraint limiting growth—not the metric that’s low, but the invisible behavioral pattern causing it.

Decision Flow Design

Architecting the environment in which choices get made to naturally guide better outcomes without forcing or manipulating.

Emotional Architecture Mapping

Identifying how feelings, psychological contracts, and emotional signals influence decisions beneath conscious awareness.

Narrative Diagnostics

Analyzing how stories, positioning, and meaning-making shape behavior more powerfully than features or pricing.

Systematic Behavioral Loops

Designing reinforcing cycles where individual actions strengthen system-level dynamics naturally.

My Specific Approach: The Complete System View

While Behavioral Systems Architecture as a field addresses these layers, my particular methodology focuses on the complete integration across all four levels:

Founder Mental Models → Team Decision-Making → Product Design → Customer Behavior

This is different from behavioral architects who specialize in one layer (customer psychology, organizational culture, product UX). I work specifically at the integration points where misalignment creates invisible failure.

Why This Integration Matters

Most behavioral work addresses symptoms at one level:

• UX consultants optimize the product layer

• Organizational designers fix the team layer

• Customer psychologists study the user layer

• Executive coaches work with founder mindset

But the real problems live in the gaps:

• Founder assumes users want X → Team builds for XS → Product delivers XY → Users actually need Y

• This misalignment is invisible when analyzing any single layer

• It only surfaces when you map the complete system

Systematic, Not Intuitive

I don’t trust gut instinct. I use various specific frameworks for specific situations, like:

• Learning Curve Value Model (how users progress from Aha to Habit)

• Friction Mapping across complete behavioral journeys

• Mental Model Diagnostics to surface founder assumptions

• Cross-Layer Behavioral Analysis to find integration failures

Implementable, Not Theoretical

I don’t write reports that sit in drawers. I work as a strategic sparring partner who:

• Diagnoses invisible gaps in focused sessions

• Designs specific interventions, not vague recommendations

• Builds frameworks teams can actually apply

• Stays engaged through implementation

Who Needs Behavioral Systems Architecture

I mean, except for everyone, here is for whom I am currently focusing.

This discipline is essential for:

Early-stage startups where founder’s mental models directly shape everything, and misalignment between vision and execution reality kills companies before product-market fit.

Series A/B companies (€1-30M ARR) facing invisible growth ceilings:

• Activation stuck despite “improving UX”

• Retention dropping for reasons data doesn’t explain

• Features users requested but don’t actually use

• Growth plateaus despite “good metrics”

• Competitors winning with seemingly identical products

Product teams who realize:

• Data shows WHAT happens but never WHY

• User research doesn’t predict actual behavior (users say one thing, do another)

• A/B tests optimize symptoms while root causes remain invisible

• Something fundamental is blocking progress that traditional methods can’t see

Founders and executives who sense:

• Gap between their vision and what the team executes

• Team building the wrong things despite customer feedback

• Users behaving completely differently than business model assumes

• Missing something critical that no amount of data reveals

Investors and board members evaluating:

• Why similar companies with similar metrics have vastly different outcomes

• Whether founders understand their market psychologically or just tactically

• If growth is sustainable or built on behavioral foundations that will collapse

The Evidence: Blueprints as Proof

Every published “Blueprint” demonstrates this methodology in action:

15,000-25,000 word analyses that:

• Map complete customer journeys systematically

• Identify behavioral principles driving outcomes

• Reveal patterns invisible to traditional analysis

• Design actionable interventions, not just observations

These aren’t blog posts. They’re documented proof that the discipline works—complete with predictions that later proved accurate.

[View Case Studies here]

Why This Category Exists

Because what Behavioral Systems Architecture addresses doesn’t fit in existing professional categories.

It’s not:

• Management consulting (they do strategy, not behavioral systems)

• UX consulting (they do interfaces, not complete journeys)

• Organizational development (they do structure, not behavioral integration)

• Marketing psychology (they do messaging, not systematic architecture)

• Product management (they do features, not behavioral foundations)

• Behavioral consultants (they study behavior, but miss the business impact)

It’s the integration layer where all these disciplines intersect but none of them solve.

Behavioral Systems Architecture doesn’t replace these professionals—it enhances their impact.

The space where:

• Founder psychology shapes team culture

• Team culture shapes product decisions

• Product design shapes user behavior

• User behavior determines business outcomes

And where all four must align or the system fails invisibly.

Traditional disciplines optimize within their layer. Behavioral Systems Architecture architects across all layers.

This is why it’s a new category. Not because it’s trendy, but because the problems it solves don’t fit anywhere else.

Final Thoughts

Companies fail not from what they see in their data.

They fail from what they don’t see.

The invisible misalignment between assumptions and reality.
The behavioral gaps hiding between data points. The friction everyone feels but analytics can’t measure.
The structural patterns that guarantee failure regardless of execution quality.

Behavioral Systems Architecture makes the invisible visible.

Then it provides systematic methods to architect behavioral systems where:

• Structure guides behavior naturally

• Individual incentives align with system goals

• Effort goes to root causes, not symptoms

• Growth builds on sustainable psychological foundations

Not through motivation. Not through manipulation.
Through architecture.

Ready to see what you’ve been missing?

Free Behavioral Diagnostic

Explore behavioral analyses: whyandactuallyhow.substack.com

Peter Mucka
Behavioral Systems Architect
www.petermucka.com

P.S. If you’re reading this and thinking “this describes exactly the problem we’re facing but couldn’t articulate”—that’s the point. The hardest problems to solve are the ones you can’t even see. Let’s make them visible together.

Share

BeReal raised €120M, hit #1 on the App Store, and had 73 million users. They had some customer journey maps. They looked good on paper. Then they lost 94% of their users and sold for pennies.

AI Digital Twin startup has built an AI that could create your digital twin. Solid vision, decent funding, real interest from users. They mapped out their customer experience. Still couldn’t get people to stick around. Pivoted to B2B before finding product-market fit.

Two examples from way too many.

Here’s the underlying problem I want to address in this article: both companies had customer journeys poorly mapped out.

The Problem Nobody Sees

In consulting and workshops, I ask founders or people in business who ask me to help to solve their customer bottlenecks: “Show me your customer journey or your customer flow that needs to be improved.”

90% don’t have one.

The worst thing, many don’t even know what that is.

I genuinely do not understand that.

The other 10% shows me a linear path that looks complete, but does not really do everything that actually matters.

Because people “have it in their head” or it’s their product or business, so they know it….of course.

They draw: Sign up → Use product → Get value → Payment → Come back

Reality: Sign up → Confusion → Frustration → Irrelevant information → Paywall at the wrong time → Dissatisfaction with the process → Never return

I am over exaggerating, of course, but not really.

The journey shows WHERE users go. It doesn’t show WHY they leave and the DECISION they must take.

What I Kept Seeing

AI Digital Twin had users who loved the idea. They signed up excited. Then got lost in the app. Couldn’t figure out what to do. Saw a personality graph based on two questions and lost all trust. Hit a paywall before experiencing real value.

BeReal had the opposite problem. Users knew exactly what to do. The journey was simple. But that simple journey created a daily reminder that their life was boring. The app made people feel worse about themselves every time they used it.

Both had customer journeys. Both missed the behavioral flows.

The Insight

A customer journey shows the path. Behavioral flows additionally show the invisible forces along that path: emotional states, decision points, friction, value exchange, data movement, and retention mechanics.

Most founders, if ever they decide to do it, map the journey once, put it in a deck, and never look at it again. They definitely never examine it from multiple angles to find where it breaks.

This article is the blueprint I wish had existed when I first started with product building.

A systematic way to examine any customer journey through multiple lenses to find the hidden problems before they kill your product.

We’ll use a fictional AI productivity tool to show how one seemingly good journey can have ten different fatal flaws hiding underneath.

If you’ve ever wondered why users sign up but don’t stick around, this is why.

The Framework: Journey vs. Flow

Why Customer Journeys Matter

Customer journey maps serve a purpose. They force you to think from the user’s perspective instead of your feature list. They align your team around a shared understanding of the user experience. They give management a visual overview of how the product should work.

A good journey map helps you:

• Identify obvious gaps in the experience

• Communicate user flow to stakeholders

• Spot where features should connect

• Give everyone a reference point for product decisions

• And much more.

Most product teams stop here. They draw the journey, everyone nods, and it goes into a Miro board that nobody opens again.

What Customer Journeys Miss

Here’s what a typical customer journey shows:

Discover product → Sign up → Use core feature → Experience value → Return

Clean. Simple. Logical.

Here’s what it doesn’t show (these are just key main examples):

Emotional state: Are they excited or anxious at each step?
Decision pressure: What choices are they facing? What makes them bail?
Value mismatch: Are they giving more than they’re getting?
Hidden friction: Where does unnecessary difficulty slow them down?
Error states: What happens when things go wrong?
Money tension: Where does pricing create resistance?
Habit mechanics: What makes them come back vs. forget you exist?
Data dynamics: How does the product improve with use?
Network effects: How does one user bring in others?

A journey map shows the ideal path. It doesn’t show the invisible forces that push users off that path.

The Difference: Journey vs. Flow

Think of it this way:

Journey = the route on a map
Flow = the weather, traffic, road conditions, and your emotional state while driving

You can have the perfect route planned. But if there’s a storm (emotional friction), construction (technical barriers), unclear signs (confusion), or you’re running on fumes (no perceived value), you’re not making it to the destination.

Customer Journey: Shows WHERE users go
Behavioral Flows: Shows WHY they stay or leave

The journey is the structure. The flows are the psychology.

Why You Need Both

Mapping the journey alone is like designing a beautiful building and forgetting to check if the foundation can support it.

You need the journey to establish the basic path. But you need to examine that journey through multiple flow lenses to find where it breaks under real human behavior.

A product can have a logical journey and still fail because:

• The emotional flow creates anxiety instead of confidence

• The decision flow overwhelms users with too many choices or unnecessary ones

• The value flow asks for too much before giving anything back

• The friction flow makes simple actions feel like work

• The monetization flow charges at exactly the wrong psychological moment

• The retention flow has no mechanism to bring people back

• The data flow collects information but doesn’t improve the experience

• The network flow has no natural way for users to bring in others

Miss any of these, and your “good” customer journey becomes a conversion killer.

That’s why we’re going to examine one journey through ten different lenses. Each lens reveals something the surface journey hides.

The Surface: Customer Journey Map

Before we dive into flows, let’s establish what a typical customer journey looks like.

The Clean Happy Path

A standard customer journey usually breaks down into five stages:

Awareness → User discovers your product exists
Consideration → User evaluates if it solves their problem
Acquisition → User signs up or purchases
Service → User experiences the core product
Retention → User returns and becomes loyal

Depending on your business, these might be called different things (Awareness/Interest/Decision/Action/Loyalty, or Discovery/Evaluation/Purchase/Usage/Advocacy), but the concept is the same.

Two Approaches: Simple vs. Extensive

Customer journey maps can range from simple to incredibly detailed.

Simple approach (like Customer Thermometer): A clean linear path showing the main stages and key touchpoints. Takes a few hours to create. Good for getting everyone aligned quickly.

Extensive approach (like the Hustle Badger eBay example): Multi-layered maps showing touchpoints, channels, emotions, departments involved, and pain points at each stage. Takes days or weeks. Reveals cross-functional dependencies.

Both have value. The simple version gets you moving fast. The extensive version exposes organizational problems and handoff failures.

If you want to learn how to build these (especially as a team workshop), there are solid resources out there. Customer Thermometer and Hustle Badger both have excellent guides. Or just call me.

I don’t want to repeat what they’ve done: this article isn’t about building customer journey maps.

Customer journeys are the big picture. They’re necessary, but they’re the foundation, not the whole house.

This article is about behavioral flows — the smaller, more granular behavioral architecture that lives inside your journey. The part that almost nobody maps, and the part that actually determines whether users convert and stick around.

Why Founders Stop at Journey Mapping

There are a few reasons most teams never go deeper than the journey map:

• It looks complete. The journey has clear stages. Each stage has obvious touchpoints. It feels like you’ve covered everything.

• It seems logical. The path makes sense. A user discovers you, evaluates you, tries you, uses you, comes back. What else is there?

• It’s already exhausting work. Building a detailed journey map takes time, alignment meetings, debates about what goes where, and getting buy-in from different teams. By the time it’s done, nobody wants to dig deeper.

• Nobody’s asking for more. Management sees the journey map and nods. Stakeholders feel reassured. The perception is that the hard thinking is done.

So the journey map goes into Miro, gets referenced in a few meetings, and slowly becomes outdated as the product evolves.

What This Map Is Hiding

Here’s what that clean journey doesn’t show:

• At the Awareness stage: What emotional state are they in when they discover you? What competing priorities are fighting for attention?

• At the Consideration stage: What specific decision are they wrestling with? What would make them bail right now?

• At the Acquisition stage: What friction is slowing them down? What value are they getting for the effort they’re putting in?

• At the Service stage: Where are they getting stuck? What errors are killing trust? How is the product improving with their data?

• At the Retention stage: What’s actually bringing them back? What habit mechanism exists? How does one user bring in others? Growth Loops?

The journey shows the stages. It doesn’t show the psychological forces, decision points, friction, value exchange, error states, monetization tension, retention mechanics, data dynamics, or network effects happening at each stage.

Those forces determine whether users actually complete the journey or drop off somewhere along the way.

That’s what we’re about to map.

The Depth: 10 Critical Flow Lenses

Same Journey, 10 Different Failure Modes

Here’s what we’re about to do: take one product journey and examine it through ten different lenses. Same path, different perspectives.

Each lens reveals a different way the journey can fail. A product can have a logical flow but still hemorrhage users because the emotional flow creates anxiety, or the value flow asks for too much too soon, or the monetization flow charges at the worst possible moment.

Most founders examine their product through one lens: “Does the feature work?” They never check if it works psychologically, financially, or behaviorally.

We’re going to look at the same journey from ten angles:

1. Happy General Flow — The baseline ideal path

2. Emotional Flow — What users feel at each step

3. Decision-Making Flow — Where choices create drop-offs

4. Value Exchange Flow — What users give vs. get

5. Friction Flow — Where unnecessary difficulty appears

6. Error Flow — What breaks and where users get lost

7. Monetization Flow — Where money enters without breaking trust

8. Retention Flow — What creates habits vs. churn

9. Data/AI Flow — How the product improves with use

10. Network Effect Flow — How one user brings in others

By the end, you’ll see how a journey that looks fine on paper can be broken in ten different ways underneath.

Visual Legend: How to Read the Flows

Each flow diagram uses consistent notation. But it totally depends on you and your team. All you should follow is the consistency and alignment within the team on the rules.

Here is the example from one of my workshops when starting to explain the journey:

And can be used to first exercise:

This is how the trial journey to first learn multiple layers looks:

For a better idea, take a look at the image below—a screenshot of one of the user journeys for a product we were building.

Let’s go back to aligning on the elements of the diagram. Here are the examples:

Shapes:

• Rectangles = Steps in the journey (actions users take)

• Diamonds = Decision points (where users choose a path)

• Circles = Emotional states or key moments

• Clouds = External factors or triggers

• Stop signs = Drop-off points (where users leave)

Colors:

• Green = Positive experience, value delivered, smooth progress

• Yellow = Neutral or transitional moments

• Orange = Warning signs, friction, tension

• Red = Critical failures, drop-offs, broken trust

• Blue = Data or system activity happening in the background

• Purple = Network effects or social dynamics

Arrows:

• Solid arrows = Primary path (most users)

• Dashed arrows = Alternative paths or edge cases

• Thick arrows = High-volume paths

• Thin arrows = Low-volume or rare paths

This notation stays consistent across all ten lenses, so you can compare them directly.

The Main “Happy Flow” Baseline

Before we examine what breaks, here’s the ideal path — the journey as founders imagine it:

DISCOVER → SIGN UP → SETUP → EXPERIENCE VALUE → HIT LIMITATION → UPGRADE → EMBED IN WORKFLOW → RETURN → INVITE

This is the path where everything works. User finds you, signs up smoothly, gets immediate value, understands the limitation, happily upgrades, integrates you into their daily work, returns consistently, and invites teammates.

In reality, this almost never happens without friction.

But we need this baseline to compare against. Each lens will show where this happy path breaks down under real human behavior.

I’ve created a separate interactive FigJam board where all the journeys are, so you could investigate them in detail. Here is the board:

Always click on the picture to view the boards in detail‼️

Subscribe now

Pattern Preview: What to Watch For

As you go through all ten lenses, pay attention to three recurring patterns:

1. Early failures compound

Problems in the emotional flow create problems in the decision flow, which create problems in the retention flow. A user who feels anxious during setup will be more likely to abandon at the paywall and less likely to return, even if they do upgrade.

Small friction at the beginning doesn’t just slow things down — it cascades into bigger problems later.

2. Invisible transitions

The gaps BETWEEN your journey steps are where users actually drop off. Most founders optimize the steps (sign up, setup, first use) but ignore what happens between those moments.

What happens in the 3 minutes after signup, before the user opens the app again? What happens in the 24 hours between first use and second use? Those invisible transitions determine retention more than the features themselves.

3. Value inversion

The moments when you extract maximum value from users (their data, their effort, their money, their social capital) rarely align with moments when users feel they’re receiving maximum value.

You ask them to import all their work data before the AI has shown it can do anything useful. You charge them after they’ve invested effort, but before they’ve seen results compound. You ask them to invite teammates before they’re confident the product works.

This misalignment kills conversion and creates resentment.

Keep these three patterns in mind as we examine each lens. You’ll see them appear over and over in different forms.

Now let’s break down the journey piece by piece.

Lens 1: Emotional Flow

What It Reveals

Emotional flow maps the psychological states users experience at each step of your journey. It answers: What are they feeling right now, and does that emotion support or sabotage the next action you’re asking them to take?

Most founders assume users are in a neutral, rational state throughout the journey. They’re not. Every step triggers emotional responses that either build momentum or create resistance.

The emotional flow reveals:

• Where anxiety blocks action

• Where excitement drives engagement

• Where frustration causes abandonment

• Where shame prevents return

• Where confidence enables investment

Key Emotional States

DISCOVER
Emotion: Curiosity mixed with skepticism
Thought: “Can this actually solve my problem, or is it another overhyped tool?”

SIGN UP
Emotion: Mild optimism, slight wariness
Thought: “Okay, I’ll try it. But if this wastes my time...”

SETUP
Emotion: Impatience, vulnerability
Thought: “How long is this going to take? Do I trust them with my data?”

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Emotion: Surprise (positive), validation
Thought: “Oh, this actually works. Maybe this is worth it.”

HIT LIMITATION
Emotion: Frustration → resentment
Thought: “Wait, I can’t do that? I just invested all this effort and NOW you tell me?”

UPGRADE
Emotion: Internal conflict, loss aversion
Thought: “Is this worth paying for? What if I pay and it still doesn’t work?”

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Emotion: Relief, growing dependency
Thought: “Okay, I need this now. It’s part of how I work.”

RETURN
Emotion: Habit, comfort (or obligation)
Thought: “I should check this” or “Ugh, I have to do this again.”

INVITE
Emotion: Social risk, reputation concern
Thought: “Will I look smart or stupid for recommending this?”

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Setup Vulnerability: Asking for data import before showing value creates anxiety. Users think: “Why should I give you access to my work before you’ve proven anything?”

Frustration at Limitation: The emotional high from “this works!” crashes immediately into “I can’t actually do what I need.” This whiplash creates resentment toward the product, not motivation to upgrade.

Loss Aversion at Paywall: Users have invested effort (setup, data import, learning). Now they face throwing that away (abandon) or throwing money at it (upgrade). Both feel like losses.

Obligation Fatigue: If return visits feel like chores instead of habits, users experience guilt when they don’t check in and annoyance when they do. That’s a death spiral.

Invitation Anxiety: Asking users to invite others before they’re 100% confident puts their reputation at risk. Most will wait, which kills your viral loop.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“At each step, does the user’s emotional state support the action I’m asking them to take next — or am I asking them to do something while they’re anxious, frustrated, or resentful?”

If you’re asking someone to make a payment decision while they’re feeling frustrated about limitations, you’re designing against human psychology.

Lens 2: Decision-Making Flow

What It Reveals

Decision-making flow maps every choice point in your journey and shows where cognitive load overwhelms users into inaction.

Every decision requires mental energy. Too many decisions, unclear options, or high-stakes choices at the wrong time create paralysis. Users don’t consciously think “this is too many decisions” — they just close the tab and never come back.

The decision-making flow reveals:

• Where choice overload kills momentum

• Where unclear options create confusion

• Where high-stakes decisions happen too early

• Where default paths don’t exist

• Where decision fatigue causes abandonment

Key Decision Points

DISCOVER
Decision: “Is this worth my attention right now?”
Stakes: Low (just a click)
Complexity: Simple binary (look or ignore)

SIGN UP
Decision: “Which plan? Email or OAuth? Create password now?”
Stakes: Medium (time investment)
Complexity: Multiple micro-decisions compound

SETUP
Decision: “Import real data or test with fake? Connect which services? Skip or complete?”
Stakes: High (data vulnerability)
Complexity: Each choice has unclear consequences

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Decision: “Do I trust this output? Use it or verify it manually?”
Stakes: Medium (reputation risk if AI is wrong)
Complexity: Evaluating AI accuracy requires judgment

HIT LIMITATION
Decision: “Upgrade now, later, find workaround, or leave?”
Stakes: High (money + sunk cost)
Complexity: Must evaluate ROI without full information

UPGRADE
Decision: “Which tier? Monthly or annual? Add team members?”
Stakes: High (financial commitment)
Complexity: Multiple pricing variables

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Decision: “Replace old tool completely or use both? Change habits or adapt?”
Stakes: High (workflow disruption)
Complexity: Requires reimagining entire process

RETURN
Decision: “Check now or later? Daily or weekly?”
Stakes: Low (just time)
Complexity: Simple, but requires conscious choice each time

INVITE
Decision: “Who to invite? When? How to explain what this does?”
Stakes: High (social reputation)
Complexity: Requires articulating value to others

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Signup Cascade: Asking for email, password, plan choice, and preferences all at once creates a micro-decision gauntlet. Each decision is a chance to leave.

Data Import Trust Gap: “Should I connect my real work? Should I connect everything or only part of the data? Will it work good with part of the data?” is a high-stakes decision happening before you’ve earned trust. Users either skip (weak results) or import (vulnerability anxiety).

Four-Way Limitation Split: When users hit the paywall, they face four choices with unclear outcomes. Paradox of choice kills conversion — too many paths, no obvious best option.

Pricing Complexity: Monthly vs annual, tiers, team add-ons — each variable multiplies options. Users want one clear “this is for people like me” choice.

Return Decision Fatigue: If checking the product requires a conscious decision every time (vs automatic habit), users will eventually stop deciding to check.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“How many decisions does a user face before experiencing core value? Can I reduce that number by 50% through smart defaults, progressive disclosure, or removing unnecessary choices?”

Or

“How many decisions (or how long does it take) does a user face before experiencing first true ‘Aha’ moment?”

Lens 3: Value Exchange Flow

What It Reveals

Value exchange flow maps what users give versus what they get at each step. It answers: Are you extracting value before delivering it?

Users make invisible cost-benefit calculations constantly. If they feel they’re giving more than receiving, resentment builds even if the product works perfectly.

This was one of the things that did not work with AI Digital Twin; they ask for a subscription before they provide enough clear value to the person.

The value exchange flow reveals:

• Where effort exceeds perceived reward

• Where you ask for high-value inputs (data, money, attention) before proving worth

• Where users feel exploited instead of served

• Where value delivery is delayed too long

• Where the exchange becomes one-sided

Key Exchange Moments

DISCOVER
Give: Attention (scarce resource)
Get: Promise of solution
Balance: Slight deficit (they’re taking a risk on you)

SIGN UP
Give: Email, personal info, time
Get: Access to try the product
Balance: Neutral if fast, negative if complex

SETUP
Give: Work data, behavioral patterns, integration access
Get: Nothing yet (just setup completion)
Balance: Major deficit — high vulnerability, zero value received

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Give: Time learning the interface
Get: First useful output
Balance: Depends on time-to-value ratio

HIT LIMITATION
Give: Frustration, learning that capabilities are capped
Get: Awareness of what’s possible (if they pay)
Balance: Negative — feels like a bait-and-switch

UPGRADE
Give: Money, payment info, commitment
Get: Full access, removed limitations
Balance: Only positive if they’ve already seen value compound

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Give: Habit change, replacing old tools, workflow disruption
Get: Efficiency gains, better outputs
Balance: Positive if value is obvious, negative if gains are marginal

RETURN
Give: Continued attention, time
Get: Compounding value (AI learns, data accumulates)
Balance: Should improve over time — product gets better with use

INVITE
Give: Social capital, reputation risk
Get: Team collaboration features (maybe), referral discount
Balance: Negative unless value to them is obvious

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Setup Exploitation: You extract maximum value (their work data, integration access, behavioral patterns) before delivering any value. Users feel this imbalance viscerally.

Limitation Bait-and-Switch: They invest effort, start seeing value, then discover core capabilities are locked. This feels manipulative even if it’s standard freemium.

Upgrade Timing Inversion: You ask for money after they’ve given data and effort, but before the AI has improved enough to justify the cost. The value they’ve received so far doesn’t match the price.

Invitation Imbalance: You’re asking them to spend social capital (high value to them) in exchange for referral credits (low value to them). The math doesn’t work.

Non-Compounding Returns: If the product doesn’t get noticeably better with use, the “give” stays constant but the “get” doesn’t increase. Users feel they’re being milked.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“At each step, what is the user giving (time, data, money, social capital, attention) versus what are they receiving (value, efficiency, capability, status)? Where is the exchange most imbalanced, and can I flip it?”

Lens 4: Friction Flow

What It Reveals

Friction flow maps every point where unnecessary difficulty slows users down or stops them completely. It answers: Where are we making things harder than they need to be?

Not all friction is bad — some friction (like confirming a delete action) protects users. But most friction is accidental: unclear UI, technical barriers, cognitive load, or asking users to do things they shouldn’t have to do.

The friction flow reveals:

• Where users get stuck for no good reason

• Where technical issues kill momentum

• Where UI confusion creates hesitation

• Where you’re asking users to do work the system should do

• Where one friction point cascades into bigger problems

This is usually first done with you testing it first, then rigorous user testings and then looking at funnels through data analysis.

Key Friction Points

DISCOVER
Friction: Ad blockers, slow page load, unclear value prop
Impact: Lost before they even try

SIGN UP
Friction: CAPTCHA, password requirements, email verification loop
Impact: 30% abandon during signup alone

SETUP
Friction: Complex import process, unclear instructions, format compatibility issues
Impact: “This is too much work” → abandon

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Friction: Slow AI response, unclear how to prompt it, results need heavy editing
Impact: “Not worth the effort” → back to old method

HIT LIMITATION
Friction: Sudden lockout mid-task, unclear what features are blocked, no workaround
Impact: Maximum frustration at worst moment

UPGRADE
Friction: Payment form errors, unclear pricing, no clear CTA, requires card for trial
Impact: “Maybe later” → never comes back

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Friction: Doesn’t integrate with existing tools, requires changing established habits
Impact: Users keep old tool as backup → never fully commit

RETURN
Friction: Requires login every time, notifications at wrong time, no quick actions
Impact: Checking becomes chore → stop checking

INVITE
Friction: Complex invitation flow, requires explaining product, no pre-written message
Impact: “Too much work” → delay forever

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Setup is Your Biggest Leak: Most products lose 60%+ of users during setup. File format issues, API failures, unclear instructions — all fixable friction that kills adoption.

Mid-Task Paywall: Interrupting someone in the middle of work to demand payment is peak friction at peak frustration. This is designing against psychology.

Payment Form Failures: Card form errors and 12-field billing addresses cause 70% payment abandonment. If you’re not offering one-click payment options, you’re leaving money on the table.

Tool Integration Gaps: If your tool doesn’t integrate with the tools your users already live in (Slack, Notion, Google Workspace), you’re forcing them to maintain two systems. They’ll default to the old one.

Login Friction: Requiring login on every return visit creates just enough friction to make checking the product feel like work instead of habit.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“Where are users getting stuck, and is that friction serving a purpose (security, preventing errors) or is it just making our lives easier at their expense? What’s the one friction point that, if removed, would double our conversion?”

Lens 5: Error Flow

What It Reveals

Error flow maps everything that can go wrong in your journey and shows where users get lost, confused, or stuck. It answers: When things break, what happens to the user?

Most founders design for the happy path. They test features that work and ship them. But users don’t experience the happy path, they experience the edge cases, the error states, the “what do I do now?” moments that nobody designed for.

The error flow reveals:

• Where users get lost with no clear next step

• Where technical failures kill trust permanently

• Where unclear error messages create confusion

• Where there’s no recovery path

• Where one error cascades into bigger problems

Key Error States

DISCOVER
Error: 404, slow load, mobile layout broken
User sees: “This site doesn’t work” → never returns

For example, there are startups that help you address Error pages like 404 and turn it into opportunity. If such a page appear, the software will predict what you wanted to do and give you additional suggestions on the error page.

It could also be turned into upsell.

But if you don’t have these journeys and just keeping it in your head, you will never find those opportunities because there is just too many things to focus on.

SIGN UP
Error: Email already exists, password rejected, verification email in spam
User sees: “I can’t even sign up” → frustration before starting

SETUP
Error: Import fails, file format rejected, API connection timeout, data corrupted
User sees: “This product can’t handle my work” → permanent trust loss

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Error: AI gives wrong answer, output is nonsense, feature doesn’t respond
User sees: “This is just a toy, not a real tool” → credibility destroyed

HIT LIMITATION
Error: Feature locks mid-use with no warning, unclear what’s blocked, can’t complete task
User sees: “They trapped me” → rage + resentment

Like for example, I have invoice program where my subscription ended, and I cannot even access my past invoices. That is borderline criminal. I will make sure no one I know ever sign up there.

UPGRADE
Error: Payment fails, card declined, billing address format wrong, page crashes
User sees: “I tried to pay and they made it impossible” → abandon

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Error: Sync fails, data doesn’t transfer, integration breaks, work is lost
User sees: “I can’t trust this with real work” → back to old tool permanently

RETURN
Error: Session expired (must login again), notifications broken, can’t find previous work
User sees: “Why do I keep having problems?” → stop returning

INVITE
Error: Invitation doesn’t send, invitee sees broken signup, experience is buggy
User sees: “I just embarrassed myself” → never invite again

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Setup Errors Kill 80% Permanently: When import fails, users don’t think “let me try again.” They think “this product can’t handle my work.” One technical error during setup = lost customer forever.

AI Errors Destroy Credibility: One confidently wrong AI answer creates permanent skepticism. Users will verify everything manually forever, defeating the purpose of AI assistance.

Payment Errors Look Like Incompetence: If users try to give you money and your payment flow fails, they interpret it as “this company can’t handle basic commerce.” That’s a credibility death sentence.

Data Loss is Unforgivable: Lose someone’s work once, even a small amount, and they’ll never trust you with real work again. They’ll keep the old tool as backup and eventually default back to it.

No Error Recovery Path: Most products show an error message and... nothing. No “here’s what to try,” no “contact support,” no clear next step. User is stuck, searches for a solution, finds nothing, leaves.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“What’s the most common error users encounter? What happens when they hit it? Do they have a clear recovery path, or are they just stuck? How many users do we lose permanently to preventable errors?”

Lens 6: Monetization Flow

What It Reveals

Monetization flow maps where money enters your product and whether the timing, pricing, and psychology align with user readiness to pay. It answers: Are you asking for money at the moment when value is most obvious?

Most products approach monetization backwards. They design the product, then bolt on pricing later.

This creates misalignment between when users see value and when they’re asked to pay.

The monetization flow reveals:

• Where pricing appears relative to value delivery

• Where payment friction kills conversion

• Where pricing psychology works for or against you

• Where freemium limitations create resentment vs. motivation

• Where money extraction feels fair vs exploitative

Key Monetization Moments

DISCOVER
Money: Implicit cost (attention, time researching)
Psychology: “Is this worth investigating?”

SIGN UP
Money: Free (but creates expectation of ongoing free value)
Psychology: “I’m not paying until I see this works”

SETUP
Money: Effort investment (data, time) creates sunk cost
Psychology: “I’ve invested effort, maybe worth paying to not waste it”

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Money: Free tier shows taste of capability
Psychology: “This works, but is it worth paying for?”

HIT LIMITATION
Money: Paywall reveals price for first time (or reminds them)
Psychology: “Wait, how much? For what exactly?”

UPGRADE
Money: Payment decision at moment of frustration
Psychology: “Do I pay to continue or find alternative?”

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Money: Ongoing subscription cost compounds
Psychology: “Is this still worth the monthly charge?”

RETURN
Money: Recurring billing (must justify repeatedly)
Psychology: “Am I using this enough to justify cost?”

INVITE
Money: Often includes team/seat pricing
Psychology: “Now I’m spending company money, not just mine”

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Paywall at Frustration Peak: You show the paywall at the exact moment users are frustrated by limitations. This creates resentment-based purchasing decisions. Some convert, but with negative associations.

Value Accumulation Gap: You ask for money after 2-3 uses, before the AI has improved enough to demonstrate compound value. Users evaluate the price against minimal value received so far.

Pricing Complexity Kills Conversion: Three tiers, monthly vs annual, team add-ons — every variable multiplies decision complexity. Users can’t figure out which option is “for them” so they choose nothing.

Sunk Cost Manipulation: By making setup high-effort before showing pricing, you’re using psychological manipulation (sunk cost fallacy) to pressure upgrades. This works short-term but creates long-term resentment.

Per-Seat Pricing vs Network Effects: You want viral growth through invitations, but charge per seat. This creates direct conflict — inviting others increases the inviter’s cost. Most companies fail to solve this tension.

Recurring Justification Fatigue: Subscriptions require users to repeatedly justify the cost. If value doesn’t compound noticeably, the “is this still worth it?” calculation trends toward “no” over time.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“At the moment we ask for money, how much value has the user accumulated? Are we asking them to pay based on a promise (weak) or based on value they’ve already experienced (strong)? Could we deliver more value before monetizing and still have a sustainable business?”

Lens 7: Retention Flow

What It Reveals

Retention flow maps the mechanisms (or lack thereof) that bring users back repeatedly. It answers: Why would someone return tomorrow, next week, next month?

Most products treat retention as a metric to track instead of a system to design. They build features, ship them, and hope users come back. But retention doesn’t happen by accident — it requires specific behavioral architecture.

The retention flow reveals:

• What triggers bring users back

• Whether returns are habits or chores

• Where compound value creates lock-in

• Where lack of progress visibility causes abandonment

• Where retention mechanisms compete with each other

Key Retention Mechanisms

DISCOVER
Retention: N/A (first touch)
Mechanism: Must create reason to return

SIGN UP
Retention: Commitment device created
Mechanism: “I made an account, should probably use it”

SETUP
Retention: Sunk cost + data residency
Mechanism: “My stuff is in here, I guess I should check it”

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Retention: First positive experience
Mechanism: “That was useful, maybe I’ll try again when I need this”

HIT LIMITATION
Retention: Negative trigger (limitation creates frustration)
Mechanism: “I need to upgrade or find alternative” (return to decide)

UPGRADE
Retention: Financial commitment creates pressure to use
Mechanism: “I’m paying for this, better use it to justify cost”

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Retention: Actual habit formation
Mechanism: “This is where I do [task], I don’t think about alternatives”

RETURN
Retention: Reinforcement of habit or decay
Mechanism: “This works” (repeat) or “This isn’t worth checking” (stop)

INVITE
Retention: Social accountability
Mechanism: “My team uses this, I have to keep using it”

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

No External Trigger After Signup: User signs up, has good experience, then... nothing. No notification, no email, no reason to come back. They forget you exist within 72 hours.

Notification Timing is Random: You send notifications at 9 AM when they’re in meetings, or 9 PM when they’re off work. Wrong timing = ignored notifications = trained to ignore you forever.

Financial Pressure Instead of Habit: Users return for the first 2 weeks because “I’m paying for this,” not because it’s genuinely useful. Once justification fades, usage collapses.

No Visible Progress: The product should get noticeably better with use (AI learns, data accumulates, insights improve). If week 12 feels like week 1, there’s no reason to stay.

Obligation Loop Instead of Habit Loop: Returns feel like chores (”I should check this”) instead of wants (”I want to see what’s new”). Obligation fatigue builds until they stop checking entirely.

Solo Use Limits Retention: Without team adoption, there’s no social accountability. User can abandon without affecting anyone else, making churn frictionless.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“Why would someone return tomorrow? What’s the trigger? Is it internal (habit) or external (notification)? Can they see the product getting better with each use? Are they returning because they want to or because they feel they should?”

Lens 8: Data/AI Flow

What It Reveals

Data/AI flow maps how information moves through your product and whether the AI actually improves with use. It answers: Does the product get smarter as users engage with it, or is it just the same GPT wrapper every time?

Most AI products collect tons of user data but never use it to improve the user’s experience. They pipe everything to the same model with the same generic responses. Users feel this — they’re giving valuable data and getting nothing personalized in return.

The data/AI flow reveals:

• What data is collected at each step

• How that data improves (or doesn’t improve) the user experience

• Where users feel they’re training the AI vs. being served by it

• Where data value is extracted vs. delivered

• Whether the AI is actually learning or just pretending to

Key Data Moments

DISCOVER
Data collected: Browsing behavior, referral source, time on page
AI improvement: None (pre-signup)
User awareness: Low (passive collection)

SIGN UP
Data collected: Email, name, basic profile info
AI improvement: Generic segmentation only
User awareness: Medium (they provide it consciously)

SETUP
Data collected: Work data, behavioral patterns, integration access, file structures
AI improvement: Should be foundational training data
User awareness: High (they’re explicitly uploading valuable data)

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Data collected: How they use features, what they ask, how they edit outputs
AI improvement: Should refine understanding of user needs
User awareness: Medium (they know they’re interacting, unsure if it’s learning)

HIT LIMITATION
Data collected: What features they tried to use when blocked
AI improvement: Should inform which features matter most
User awareness: Low (frustrated, not thinking about data)

UPGRADE
Data collected: Pricing sensitivity, tier choice, hesitation patterns
AI improvement: Should optimize pricing strategy (company benefit, not user benefit)
User awareness: None (invisible data extraction)

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Data collected: Daily usage patterns, task types, productivity gains
AI improvement: Should create personalized shortcuts and predictions
User awareness: High if improvements are visible, low if static

RETURN
Data collected: Frequency, session depth, feature usage consistency
AI improvement: Should optimize timing and content of prompts
User awareness: Medium (they see notifications, assume it’s learning timing)

INVITE
Data collected: Team structure, collaboration patterns, shared workflows
AI improvement: Should enable team-aware features
User awareness: High (sharing data with others creates visibility)

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Setup Data Disappears Into Void: Users upload valuable work data expecting the AI to learn from it. Most products just store it in a database and keep serving generic GPT responses. The data extraction happens, the personalization doesn’t.

No Visible Learning Curve: Week 12 feels exactly like week 1. The AI gives the same generic suggestions, doesn’t remember past interactions, shows no awareness of user patterns. This makes all the data collection feel like surveillance, not service.

Aggregate Improvement vs Personal Benefit: The company uses user data to improve the product for everyone (aggregate benefit), but individual users don’t see their data making THEIR experience better (personal benefit). This creates resentment.

Data Used for Monetization, Not Experience: The most sophisticated data analysis happens in pricing optimization and churn prediction (company benefit), while the user experience remains static (no user benefit).

No Transparency on Data Use: Users don’t know if their data is training the AI, being sold to third parties, used for company analytics, or just sitting unused. This opacity creates distrust.

Interaction Data Ignored: Users edit AI outputs, reject suggestions, provide implicit feedback constantly. Most products don’t use this feedback loop to improve. It’s like teaching someone who never learns.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“Can users tell that the AI is learning from their specific data, or does it feel like the same generic tool it was on day one? If I compared a new user’s experience to a 6-month user’s experience, would there be a visible difference in personalization and accuracy?”

Lens 9: Network Effect Flow

What It Reveals

Network effect flow maps how one user brings in others and whether the product gets more valuable as more people use it. It answers: Does growth create a flywheel, or is each user an isolated island?

Most products claim to have network effects but don’t actually design for them. They add a “share” button and hope for viral growth. Real network effects require the product to be fundamentally more valuable when others use it.

The network effect flow reveals:

• Where viral loops naturally exist (or don’t)

• Whether adding users increases value for existing users

• Where social dynamics drive adoption

• Where network effects conflict with monetization

• Whether growth is extractive or mutually beneficial

Key Network Moments

DISCOVER
Network effect: Zero (first user in their circle)
Viral potential: Only if discovery came from a referral

SIGN UP
Network effect: Invitation awareness
Viral potential: “Invite your team” prompts (usually ignored)

SETUP
Network effect: Integration reveals existing team connections
Viral potential: “X colleagues already use this” (social proof)

EXPERIENCE VALUE
Network effect: Shareable outputs create awareness
Viral potential: IF output has attribution/watermark

HIT LIMITATION
Network effect: Collaboration features locked
Viral potential: “Upgrade to share with team” (blocks network growth)

UPGRADE
Network effect: Per-seat pricing
Viral potential: Conflicts with network growth (more users = more cost)

EMBED IN WORKFLOW
Network effect: Team coordination value
Viral potential: Strong IF team-dependent features exist

RETURN
Network effect: Activity feed shows team usage
Viral potential: FOMO drives engagement IF team is active

INVITE
Network effect: Should be strongest here
Viral potential: Often poorly designed (high friction, low incentive)

Diagram Structure

Click here to view

Where It Breaks

Invitation Friction is Too High: Most products make inviting others a complex, multi-step process. Users must manually enter emails, write messages, explain what the product does. This is asking them to do marketing work — most won’t.

Per-Seat Pricing Kills Viral Growth: You charge $10/user/month, so inviting 5 teammates means $50/month. Users face a direct financial penalty for growing the network. This is network effect suicide.

No Value for Solo Users: If the product requires team adoption to be useful, individual users abandon before achieving network density. If it works fine solo, there’s no pressure to invite others. This is the network effect paradox.

Collaboration Features Behind Paywall: You lock sharing and team features at the exact moment users want to invite others. This blocks your own viral loop at the critical moment.

No Visible Network Activity: Users don’t know if their teammates are active. No activity feed, no “X is online now,” no social proof of team usage. Without visibility, there’s no FOMO and no social accountability.

Generic Invitation Experience: Invited users get the same generic signup flow as strangers. No personalized landing page, no preview of what the inviter created, no context. Conversion rates tank because there’s no specific value demonstration.

Output Doesn’t Create Curiosity: When users share what they’ve created, there’s no attribution or way for recipients to discover the tool. You’re creating value without capturing awareness.

Diagnostic Question

For your product, ask:

“If I have 100 users today, how many new users will they bring in next month without me spending on marketing? What’s blocking them from inviting others — is it friction, cost, lack of value, or lack of social features? Do we actually have network effects, or are we just hoping for them?”

Subscribe now

The Pattern Revealed

What All These Lenses Reveal Together

We just examined the same journey nine different ways. Each lens exposed different failure points, but here’s what matters: they’re not independent problems. They’re interconnected.

A user who feels anxious during setup (emotional flow) is more likely to abandon when they hit friction (friction flow), less likely to see the value exchange as fair (value flow), and won’t trust the AI enough to rely on it (data flow). One weakness creates cascading failures across multiple dimensions.

The lenses reveal three critical patterns:

Pattern 1: Early Failures Compound

Problems at the beginning multiply. An anxious user during setup becomes a skeptical user during value experience, becomes a resentful user at the paywall, becomes a churned user who never returns.

Setup friction → Weak first value → Premature paywall → No retention mechanism = 95% churn

Each broken lens makes the next lens harder to fix. You can’t solve retention if value delivery is broken. You can’t fix monetization if users don’t trust your AI. You can’t build network effects if individuals won’t embed the product in their workflow.

Pattern 2: Invisible Gaps Kill Products

The spaces BETWEEN your journey steps matter more than the steps themselves. What happens in the 3 minutes after signup? The 24 hours before first return? The moment between “this works!” and hitting the paywall?

These transitions are where:

• Emotional states shift from excitement to anxiety

• Decision fatigue builds from accumulated choices

• Value perception forms based on effort vs. reward

• Friction accumulates into abandonment

• Trust erodes from unclear AI behavior

Most founders optimize the nodes (signup, first use, upgrade) but ignore the edges (the transitions between them). The edges are where users actually leave.

Pattern 3: Value Inversion Creates Resentment

Your extraction moments (when you take data, effort, money, social capital) rarely align with your delivery moments (when users feel value).

You ask for work data before the AI proves itself. You charge money after they’ve invested effort but before they’ve seen compound value. You request team invitations before they’re confident it works.

This misalignment creates a psychological deficit. Users feel exploited, not served. Even if the product eventually delivers value, the resentment from poor timing lingers.

The Compounding Effect of Multiple Flow Problems

Here’s the brutal reality: most products have 6-8 broken flows simultaneously.

Let’s trace one user through the combined broken flows:

Discover → Sign Up:

• Emotional: Skeptical but curious

• Decision: 4 micro-decisions during signup (friction)

• Value: Giving email/info, getting only access (slight deficit)

• Friction: Password requirements, verification email delay

• Drop-off rate: 30%

Setup:

• Emotional: Anxious about data vulnerability

• Decision: Real data or fake? (high-stakes choice)

• Value: Massive deficit (giving data, getting nothing yet)

• Friction: Import fails, unclear instructions

• Error: File format issues, no clear recovery

• Drop-off rate: 60% (of remaining 70% = 42% left)

Experience Value:

• Emotional: Brief delight if it works, skepticism if AI is generic

• Value: Finally receiving something, but did it require all that setup?

• Data: AI feels static, not personalized

• Drop-off rate: 20% (of remaining 42% = 33% left)

Hit Limitation:

• Emotional: Frustration spike (just got blocked)

• Decision: Upgrade, workaround, or abandon? (3-way confusion)

• Value: Perceive extraction attempt (asking money after effort)

• Monetization: Wrong timing (at frustration peak)

• Drop-off rate: 50% (of remaining 33% = 16% left)

Result: 84% of initial signups never become paying customers.

And of the 16% who upgrade:

• 40% churn within 3 months (retention flow broken)

• 5% invite others (network flow broken)

This isn’t failure in one area. It’s systematic failure across multiple behavioral dimensions compounding into massive leakage.

Why One Broken Flow Can Kill the Whole Product

Even if you fix 8 out of 9 flows, one broken flow can destroy everything.

Broken emotional flow alone: Users feel anxious and frustrated throughout. Even if features work perfectly, they associate your product with negative feelings. They leave and tell others to avoid you.

Broken friction flow alone: Every step is harder than it should be. Users burn effort getting basic things done. Even if the value is high, the pain of using it outweighs the benefit.

Broken monetization flow alone: You ask for money at the moment of maximum frustration. Conversion tanks. The few who pay resent you for it. Lifetime value collapses. Like me, who cannot access old invoices after my subscription ended. It does not make sense, and I will now make sure that I, or anyone I know, will not use those services ever again.

Broken retention flow alone: Great initial experience, but no mechanism to bring users back. They love it once, forget about it, never return. You’re constantly filling a leaky bucket.

Broken data flow alone: AI never improves. Week 12 feels like week 1. Users realize they’ve been giving data and getting nothing personalized in return. They leave feeling exploited.

Broken network flow alone: Each user is isolated. No viral growth, no team lock-in, no social accountability. Growth requires endless marketing spend. Can’t scale.

You need all the flows working together. One broken flow creates a chokepoint that bleeds users, no matter how good everything else is.

Application: How to Use This Framework

The Diagnostic Process

Here’s how to run your product through all 9 lenses systematically:

Step 1: Map your baseline journey (30 minutes)

• Write down your current customer journey: the steps users take from discovery to advocacy

• Keep it simple: 7-10 major steps max

• This is your “happy path” baseline

Step 2: Run each lens individually (2-3 hours per lens)

For each of the 9 lenses:

1. Draw the flow from your user’s perspective (not yours)

2. Identify where it breaks (be honest)

3. Rate the severity: Minor issue, major leak, or catastrophic failure

4. Note the specific fix (don’t just identify problems, define solutions)

Lens-by-lens questions:

Emotional Flow: At each step, what does the user feel? Does that emotion support or sabotage the next action?

Decision-Making Flow: How many decisions before value? Can you eliminate 50% through defaults?

Value Exchange Flow: What are they giving vs. getting? Where is the exchange most imbalanced?

Friction Flow: Where are users getting stuck for no good reason? What’s the #1 friction point?

Error Flow: What’s the most common error? Do users have a recovery path?

Monetization Flow: Are you asking for money when value is most obvious or most absent?

Retention Flow: Why would they return tomorrow? Is it habit or obligation?

Data/AI Flow: Does the product get noticeably better with use? Can users tell?

Network Effect Flow: What’s your viral coefficient? What’s blocking invitations?

Step 3: Identify compounding problems (1 hour)

• Look for where one broken flow makes another worse

• Find the cascading failures (setup anxiety → weak trust → upgrade resentment)

• Prioritize fixes that solve multiple flows at once

Step 4: Build your fix roadmap (1 hour)

• Categorize: Quick wins (< 1 week), Medium fixes (1-4 weeks), Strategic changes (> 1 month)

• Assign ownership for each fix

• Set metrics to measure improvement

Total time investment: ~30 hours to do this thoroughly. That’s less than one sprint. Worth it to not waste 6 months building on broken foundations.

Priority Framework: Which Lenses Matter Most

Not all lenses matter equally for every business model. Here’s how to prioritize:

For Freemium SaaS:

1. Friction Flow (biggest leak is usually setup)

2. Value Exchange Flow (must deliver value before paywall)

3. Monetization Flow (upgrade timing is make-or-break)

4. Retention Flow (recurring revenue requires recurring usage)

5. Everything else

For Marketplace Products:

1. Network Effect Flow (this IS your moat)

2. Friction Flow (two-sided friction kills both sides)

3. Value Exchange Flow (must balance buyer and seller value)

4. Retention Flow (liquidity requires active users)

5. Everything else

For AI/Data Products:

1. Data/AI Flow (personalization is your differentiation)

2. Value Exchange Flow (data extraction must feel fair)

3. Retention Flow (compound value requires time)

4. Friction Flow (AI complexity creates natural friction)

5. Everything else

For Viral/Social Products:

1. Network Effect Flow (viral growth is your acquisition)

2. Emotional Flow (sharing requires positive associations)

3. Retention Flow (FOMO drives habit formation)

4. Friction Flow (invitation must be frictionless)

5. Everything else

For Enterprise/B2B:

1. Friction Flow (long sales cycles can’t afford setup failure)

2. Value Exchange Flow (ROI justification is constant)

3. Network Effect Flow (team adoption is everything)

4. Data/AI Flow (integration and intelligence matter)

5. Everything else

Your priority question: “If I could only fix 3 lenses this quarter, which would have the biggest impact on my business model?”

Red Flags Checklist

Use this to spot critical problems fast:

🚩 Emotional Flow Red Flags:

• Users describe the experience as “stressful” or “overwhelming”

• Support tickets mention anxiety or confusion

• Users apologize when asking for help (”Sorry, I’m probably just dumb...”)

• High drop-off during vulnerable moments (data import, payment)

🚩 Decision-Making Flow Red Flags:

• Users ask “which option should I choose?” repeatedly

• Analytics show long hesitation times at decision points

• High cart abandonment or signup abandonment

• Users message asking to explain differences between options

🚩 Value Exchange Flow Red Flags:

• Users say “I gave you everything and got nothing back”

• Data import completion rate < 30%

• Users feel “trapped” after investing effort

• Free tier users resist upgrading despite heavy usage

🚩 Friction Flow Red Flags:

• Setup completion rate < 40%

• Users ask “how do I...?” for basic actions

• High error rates on forms or imports

• Session recordings show confusion and backtracking

🚩 Error Flow Red Flags:

• Same error appears in >10% of sessions

• Users encounter errors with no clear recovery path

• Support tickets about errors outnumber feature questions

• One error leads to cascading problems

🚩 Monetization Flow Red Flags:

• Upgrade conversion rate < 5%

• Users complain about “surprise” costs

• Payment attempts fail >30% of the time

• High churn in first billing cycle

🚩 Retention Flow Red Flags:

• Day 7 retention < 20%

• Month 2 retention < 40%

• Users check app less than 2x per week

• No clear trigger bringing users back

🚩 Data/AI Flow Red Flags:

• Users can’t tell if AI is learning from their usage

• Week 12 experience identical to Week 1

• Users verify all AI outputs manually (don’t trust it)

• No visible personalization improvements

🚩 Network Effect Flow Red Flags:

• <10% of users ever invite someone

• Viral coefficient < 0.1

• Team collaboration features unused

• Per-seat pricing conflicts with growth goals

Critical threshold: If you checked 3+ boxes in any single lens, that’s your #1 priority fix.

Template: Customer Flow Diagnostic Worksheet

View Template

The Fatal Mistakes (Why Most Journey Mapping Fails)

You have the framework. You understand the lenses. You could still fuck this up. Here’s how:

Keeping It in Your Head

The mistake: “I know the customer journey, I don’t need to map it.”

Why it kills you: Your head engineer thinks users discover you through technical blogs. Your designer thinks they come from Instagram. Your founder thinks they hear about you from friends. Nobody’s on the same page. Each person builds for a different journey that doesn’t exist.

The fix: If it’s not documented, it doesn’t exist. One shared artifact everyone references.

Poor Visualization

The mistake: Walls of text in a Google Doc. Bullet points. No diagrams.

Why it kills you: Nobody reads it. Can’t spot gaps. Can’t see where flows break. Information exists but isn’t usable.

The fix: Draw it. Use colors. Show decision points. Make it visual enough that someone can understand it in 30 seconds.

Drawing Once and Never Updating

The mistake: Map the journey in January, ship features all year, never update the map.

Why it kills you: Your map shows a journey that stopped existing 6 months ago. You’re making decisions based on outdated reality. New team members learn the wrong flow.

The fix: Update the map every time you ship something that changes the user experience. Treat it as living documentation, not a one-time exercise.

Only Showing the Happy Path

The mistake: Your journey shows: Sign up → Use product → Love it → Upgrade → Stay forever.

Why it kills you: Reality has 12 different paths, 8 error states, and 3 abandonment points. You’ve only designed for the 5% who have a perfect experience.

The fix: Map the failure paths. Show where users drop off. Design recovery flows for every error state.

Designing for Yourself, Not Users

The mistake: “I would never be confused by this, so users won’t be either.”

Why it kills you: You know how the product works. You know the terminology. You know which buttons to click. Users don’t. Your journey reflects your expertise, not their confusion.

The fix: Watch real users. Record sessions. Read support tickets. Map their actual behavior, not your imagined ideal.

Ignoring the Emotional Layer

The mistake: Journey shows functional steps only. “User enters email, user clicks button, user sees dashboard.”

Why it kills you: You’re designing for robots. Humans make decisions based on feelings, not logic. Anxiety blocks action. Frustration causes abandonment. You’re blind to why they actually leave.

The fix: Add emotional states to every step. Ask: “What are they feeling right now? Does that emotion support what I’m asking them to do next?”

Missing the Monetization Lens

The mistake: Design the entire product, then ask “where should we put the paywall?”

Why it kills you: Monetization bolted on as an afterthought always feels extractive. Users hit unexpected paywalls. Pricing doesn’t match value delivery. Conversion tanks.

The fix: Design monetization into the journey from the start. Know exactly where money enters and why that moment makes psychological sense.

The pattern: All these mistakes come from treating journey mapping as a one-time checkbox exercise instead of a living system that guides every product decision.

Don’t be that founder.

Conclusion

Journey Mapping Isn’t Enough

You can have a beautiful customer journey map on your wall. Clean stages, clear touchpoints, logical flow. And still lose 90% of your users.

Because the journey shows where users should go. The flows show why they actually leave.

BeReal had a simple journey: Get notification → Post photo → See friends. Made perfect sense. Still lost 94% of users because the emotional flow created shame, the value flow was inverted, and the retention flow was pure obligation.

AI Digital Twin had a compelling journey: Sign up → Build digital twin → Get AI insights. Looked great. Still couldn’t retain users because the friction flow killed setup, the data flow showed no improvement, and the monetization flow came too early.

The journey is necessary. But it’s not sufficient.

Users Don’t Follow Your Ideal Path

Your journey map shows the happy path. Users experience:

• Anxiety during setup (emotional flow)

• Confusion at decision points (decision flow)

• Frustration when hitting paywalls (monetization flow)

• Errors that kill trust (error flow)

• Friction that makes simple things hard (friction flow)

They don’t smoothly progress through your stages. They bounce between states, hit walls, backtrack, get lost, and leave.

Your map shows a highway. Reality is a maze with missing signs, dead ends, and no clear exit.

Design for the maze, not the highway.

The Tactical Takeaway

Run your product through all nine lenses:

1. Emotional Flow - What do they feel?

2. Decision-Making Flow - What choices break them?

3. Value Exchange Flow - What are they giving vs. getting?

4. Friction Flow - Where does it get unnecessarily hard?

5. Error Flow - What breaks and where do they get stuck?

6. Monetization Flow - Is pricing timing psychologically sound?

7. Retention Flow - Why would they return tomorrow?

8. Data/AI Flow - Does it get better with use?

9. Network Effect Flow - Does one user bring in others?

Each lens reveals different failure points. Together, they show you why users actually leave and how to fix it.

Don’t just identify problems. Fix them. One broken flow can kill the entire product.

The Challenge

You have the framework. Use it.

Take your current customer journey. Run it through these nine lenses. Be brutally honest about what’s broken. Prioritize the fixes that compound across multiple flows.

Do this properly, and you’ll find the 3-5 changes that could double your conversion or retention.

Don’t do it, and you’ll keep wondering why your “good” product isn’t growing. Or even better, hire a marketing agency so you can waste even more resources.

Your users are telling you where it breaks. The flows show you how to listen.

Now go fix it.

— Peter

Share

Solve customer bottlenecks. Boost metrics. Systematically.

I decode how people make decisions in your product or service, then architect solutions that boost metrics across your customer journey, using proven methodologies, AI, and cutting-edge behavioral insights, rather than guesswork or data alone.

Free Behavioral Diagnostic

I view business and humans as a set of mysteries that need to be solved. As chaos that needs to be managed to the best of our abilities. It’s a constant stream of ever-changing challenges and problems that never truly disappear - they just change form.

One area I specialize in is revealing the invisible and uncovering hidden behavioral misalignments, whether in your business or within your mind, to help you or your company get back on track.

I also see business as a system of visible and invisible patterns that must be recognized and shaped into architecture. Only then can you orchestrate a beautiful business symphony.

Systems, methodologies, frameworks, they’re clues, not maps. They show you better ways to approach a problem to increase your odds of success. They don’t point to where the gold is buried.

But builders often take them way too literally. And if someone is out there selling a “one-size-fits-all” blueprint for success, they’re simply lying.

If that blueprint existed, they’d be a billionaire, and we wouldn’t have a 90% failure rate among new businesses within the first two years.

When I get called in by builders or CEOs to help with their current company or product, the first thing I do, before building anything, is analyze the current situation. More precisely, the behavioral and business foundations it’s built on.

I need to understand both the visible and invisible forces, or systems, that the business runs on.

And, like everywhere else, if you look at enough problems, patterns start to emerge.

So that’s what this article is about.

I want to talk about the main invisible misalignments businesses often ignore, misalignments that, from a behavioral point of view, can make or break them.

Only then can we turn them into actionable frameworks.

TL;DR

1. Big Visions Can Kill Your Company

• Problem: Founders try to do everything at once, leading to scattered focus

• Key insight: "If you can whittle things down to just one thing, you become unstoppable" - Frank Slootman

• Solution: Break big visions into specific, sequential problems

2. Solve "Real Behavioral" Problems

• Problem: Building solutions for non-existent problems or problems no one will pay to solve

• Key insight: Watch what people do, not what they say they want

• Solution: Talk to actual users, find repeated pain points, validate willingness to switch

3. Meet People Where They Are

• Problem: Building the right solution for the wrong context (like Zume's robot pizza)

• Key insight: Speed doesn't always beat taste - context matters

• Solution: Understand timing, state of mind, and placement of your users

4. Start at the End

• Problem: Not understanding the behavioral change you're actually trying to create

• Key insight: Design for pressure shifts, not direct behavior change

• Solution: Use behavioral statements: "When [population] wants [motivation] and faces [barriers], they will [behavior]"

5. Vitamin vs. Painkiller Problem

• Problem: Presenting vitamins (nice-to-have) as painkillers (urgent needs)

• Key insight: Failed startups usually built vitamins thinking they were painkillers

• Solution: Be honest about whether you solve urgent pain or long-term improvement

6. Ignoring Inhibiting Pressures

• Problem: Only focusing on why people should use your product, not what stops them

• Key insight: "It's like stepping on the gas with the handbrake still on"

• Solution: Remove friction, build trust, reduce switching costs

Share

Big Visions Can Kill Your Company

Not just a common piece of advice, but literally an expectation in the world of startups.

Everyone wants to know how you will change the world.

Everyone wants to know how you’ll ensure rapid growth, how you’ll become the best product in your category, and, overall, a product that meets everything people need.

One of the invisible misalignments that a big vision can create is the fear of imperfection, and the perceived need to have a product that satisfies every target group from day one.

Throughout my career, I’ve seen hundreds of ideas, products, and startups. And time and time again, I’ve come across founders who refuse to show their product to anyone until it’s either “perfect” or packed with every feature they believe a real product must have.

They either don’t want to, they’re afraid, or they’re even ashamed to put an “imperfect” version in front of people.

The result? In most cases: a ton of money down the drain, painfully long development cycles, and a bloated list of features that customers don’t even care about.

It’s exactly because of this that so many tech companies have that famous quote plastered on their walls.

Adding features that don’t directly relate to the core problem the product is meant to solve, just to please a few early customers, is a classic startup mistake. And one that often comes back to bite hard.

The landmark paper “Feature Fatigue: When Product Capabilities Become Too Much of a Good Thing” (Journal of Marketing Research, 2005) explores how loading products with too many features can overwhelm users, making products harder to use and ultimately less satisfying.

The research shows that while consumers initially prefer products with more features (valuing capability over usability), their satisfaction drops after use due to increased complexity, resulting in “feature fatigue.”

The same thing happened with the startup MindBank, before I briefly joined as an advisor.

Their goal? To let everyone create their own digital self with the help of AI. The founder was definitely a visionary and wanted to build the best product in the space, which is completely normal. But from my point of view, it was more of a curse than a blessing.

He wanted to do everything, all at once, and as fast as possible. B2C, B2B, B2B2C, you name it. One week, it was about avatars in games in the Middle East, the next week, robots in Singapore.

There were tons of features users could explore, but without any deep thinking or strategic clarity. The result? Total confusion and a painfully high drop-off rate.

All of this scattered attention, diluted direction and led to a massive waste of resources.

This is the hidden misalignment: big visions often scatter the focus of founders and their teams.

A big vision isn’t a problem in and of itself. The real issue is that founders or builders often don’t know how to reverse-engineer that vision into a single, clear first step, let alone a single priority or solution.

The best take on this I heard from the CEO of Snowflake, Frank Slootman

„I found out early on that if you can whittle things down to just one thing, you become unstoppable. Unfortunately, people resist narrowing things down to one thing because it’s really hard to decide what that one thing is.

People have a very easy time telling you their top three or five things because hopefully, the right one is in there somewhere. But when you’re just throwing everything out there, I can’t tell you how many board meetings I’ve been in where the CEO puts up a PowerPoint slide with bullet after bullet of “top priorities.” You just know that when there are too many priorities, you’re going to be a mile wide and an inch deep, swimming in glue and moving like molasses. Just watching that long list of priorities is exhausting!

I’d rather have the conversation: “If you could only do one thing, what would it be?” Because that’s where you get to the heart of what really matters. What’s truly important? What’s less important? What’s not important at all?

In business school, they’re great at describing the entire waterfront. But I just want to know the one thing, and that’s such a hard, high-risk conversation because you could be wrong. But that’s the point! You could be wrong, but if you have 10 priorities instead of one, you’re already wrong. You’re devaluing what really matters because your attention is split.

So I like to do things in sequence. Even if you’re not sure, prioritize anyway. In the process of doing, you’re going to find out whether you’re right, wrong, or somewhere in between, and then you can adjust. Just pull it apart, sequence yourself, and start. Things will move much quicker because you’re working with a narrower focus, and the energy will pick up. Most importantly, you’ll figure out whether this was a good call or not as you go.“

Source: Snowflake CEO Frank Slootman explains why your company priorities are wrong

If you have a big vision, break it down into specific problems, so your team (and the whole company) stays aligned and not totally confused.

Even Elon Musk does this. His grand visions, like making humans a multi-planetary species with SpaceX or creating sustainable transportation with Tesla, are broken down into actionable steps.

Here’s a very quick, high-level reverse-engineering of Musk’s missions:

And I could do the same for Tesla:

And what would be my advice?

Solve one fundamental problem for a smaller target group first. Then solve their related side problems. Only then use that as a springboard to reach other segments.

That’s how Airbnb started, offering people a place to crash in someone’s apartment during a massive conference.

Vans were initially for skaters, then they became a trendy sneaker.

Louis Vuitton was luggage for wealthy travelers (not even just for wealthy people, but wealthy people who traveled, because at the time, they were considered the most important class).

As Michal Pastier, one of my favorite marketers, once put it: people want to be Vans for everyone, fast and at the beginning.

There are many such companies, and I’ll mention some below, but if you’re interested, here’s an article on 50 big companies that started with very little.

A case when a startup can afford to build a ton of features from the start is when it has a huge backer funding it or some amazing patents.

People don’t realize that a successful and great product doesn’t automatically mean success. Creating a product that people love means changing the current customer thinking and behavior of a broad group of people.

Changing behavior means fundamentally altering, or at least significantly influencing, a part of someone’s life. And today, that usually requires understanding very specific pain points and building the best possible solution for that one pain point.

Everywhere you look, courses, videos, articles, even some of my own content, you’ll hear talk about strategies, funnels, and how to “build for the customer.” But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

The rest of the iceberg? It’s the stuff no one wants to deal with: regulations, trademarks, patents, existing customer bases, brand equity, supporting tech, development costs, infrastructure, logistics, you name it.

This is exactly why so many companies trying to tackle complex problems end up running out of cash.

“The most frequently cited reason for startup failures is running out of cash or experiencing poor financial management.”

—CB Insights

I know of a Slovak company that spent months prepping a new product and nearly a year getting ready to launch it at the biggest expo in the country. Just a few hours into the event, a sales rep from a competing company walked up and said the product infringed on their trademark. It had to be pulled immediately. The result? Massive losses. And a year down the drain.

I’ve seen way too many examples, some even in my own life, where people tried to go big from the start, and it backfired hard. Honestly, I know way more of these stories than ones where going big worked out.

So start by solving one problem. And make sure it’s a real one.

And one last thought—odd, but always funny to me:

Whenever I hear that people don’t want to use a product, and the founders’ solution is to add even more “appealing” features…

It always reminds me of a dysfunctional couple trying to save their relationship by having a baby.

Solve “Real Behavioral” Problems

How many of us have seen a company build something to solve a problem no one actually has, with a solution no one needs?

Way too many times. It’s practically a startup rite of passage.

“Solve a real problem”—it’s probably the most basic piece of advice you’ll hear in business. And yet, despite that, people still:

• try to tackle multiple problems at once,

• build something “cool” and then go hunting for customers,

• or worse, they try to solve a problem they think exists, but are too afraid to roll up their sleeves and validate it with real people in the real world.

Why does this keep happening?

Because people listen to what others say they want, instead of watching what they actually do.

Because too many decisions are made in polished conference rooms, not out in the streets with customers.

And because very few people are actually using their own products or walking through their own customer journey.

In Billions, there’s a sharp scene where Bobby Axelrod (Axe) speaks to a young analyst and delivers one of his signature lines:

“Whenever you can, put a company in your mouth.”

What he means is this: fully understand the business. Don’t just look at numbers from a safe distance—go deep. Use the product. Talk to customers. Visit the stores. Feel what the company actually does. It’s a lesson in getting real-world context, not just relying on spreadsheets.

Classic Axe—direct, intense, razor-sharp in how he thinks about edge and insight.

That’s how he figured out the company was in trouble: they were cutting costs on the receipt ingredients, and as a result, the product literally started tasting worse.

Why do I keep repeating this? Because it’s almost unbelievable how detached builders and teams can become from their own product or business.

A few years ago, I made the same mistake. It cost me everything, my savings and, eventually, even my health. My digestive system collapsed from stress, and it’s never fully recovered.

By then, I’d been in business for a few years, advising companies on business models, financial strategies, and operations. That gave me confidence, more accurately, a giant ego, that I really understood how business works.

Behavioral economics, consumer psychology, and Dan Ariely were hot topics back then. So, I quit my job (another brilliant move) and started a behavioral consulting company. I spent months creating beautiful pitch decks and materials, and went out selling to pretty much every type of company.

When they asked how and where they could apply it, I told them it could be used anywhere. Huge red flag in hindsight.

About a year and a half in, I finally landed on a product: behavioral analysis for e-commerce businesses.

It was a great product. After countless rounds of testing and refinement, I knew it worked. But reality hit hard.

Small e-shops had too many other problems and would take years to implement my insights.

Medium-sized shops didn’t have the budget.

And large e-shops didn’t want just a slice, they needed a full-service agency.

So after two and a half years of grinding and stress, when I finally reached something that resembled product–market fit, I sat down and asked myself a brutally honest question:

What would it actually take to make this succeed, if I looked at it purely from the customer’s point of view?

I realized I didn’t enjoy it at all, and I wasn’t willing to keep going. So I shut the whole thing down and joined one of the best startups in my country, working on data analytics and marketing automation for some of the world’s biggest e-commerce businesses.

And after just one week there, I felt better than I had in those entire 2.5 years. (Now you can understand my drive to identify and fix invisible behavioral misalignments in business and in people’s heads)

First, I built solutions for a non-existent problem.

Then I finally found the real problem, only to discover that most companies couldn’t afford the solution.

A similar thing happened to another builder I know. After—you guessed it—2.5 years, he shut down his business too. I ended up writing an article titled:

The Physical Wallet Project Failed - Could 2.5 Years of Work Have Been Solved in 2 Weeks? Yes.

There’s a great trick for finding a real problem in any space you want to tackle:

Talk to a lot of people in that field, especially users of the competition, ideally customers of the biggest player.

Then ask: What really pisses you off about them?

At the same time, validate if that problem is painful enough that they’d be willing to switch if someone else actually solved it.

If you keep hearing the same complaints again and again, and there’s a clear willingness to move, you’ve probably found your pattern. Now you can get to work.

The same kind of blind spot killed Zume, the startup that wanted to use robots in trucks to make pizzas and boost delivery efficiency.

Cool idea.

Massive burn rate.

No real problem solved.

The company even got $443 million in venture funding and was valued at $2.3 billion. There were plenty of problems, but the biggest one was that they couldn’t get the cheese right — it kept melting and not holding together.

They discovered that people didn’t care as much about speed as they did about well-made cheese. In the end, this billion-dollar company was inventing a solution that no one asked for. And the pizza made by robots sank with it.

This created a thing called: value gap.

First, figure out if you have one and how big a problem it is. A few things to look out for that could indicate a big gap.

• Campaigns are not performing or underperforming.

• Conversion rates are low.

• Your churn rate is high.

• Problems with growing user base.

As Aggelos Mouzakitis, Growth Product Manager at Growth Sandwich, says:

The value gap expresses itself in different ways. You can have both a value gap and a good product fit for a segment of the market. At times, there can even be an antithesis in what's happening between the acquisition.

The biggest challenge most companies face is identifying the problem early enough to avoid burning cash on treating the symptom rather than the solution.

So, what’s one to do if you find that your user expectations don’t match the user experience? Start by identifying the problem with this two-part approach (credit to Aggelos for the framework).

1. Evaluate your strategy

   • Reflect on your product's positioning and the clarity of its copy. Misaligned positioning or unclear messaging can lead to mismatched user expectations.

   • Assess if you're underestimating or underselling your product. Startups often don't realize their product's true value compared to competitors.

   • Ensure your product delivers as promised. If there's a mismatch between your product's performance and customer expectations, it can lead to low conversions and high churn.

   • Consider if your product is being used differently than its original intent. The market evolves, and your product's value might differ from its current positioning.

2. Differentiate between fresh and power users

   • Understanding the difference in experience between fresh and power users can help you better identify and solve value gap problems.

     • A fresh user: Someone new to the product or has used it briefly (less than 10 minutes).

     • A power user: A loyal user who has fully adopted the product. Their usage might vary; some might find alternative uses for the product, while others might be brand ambassadors.

• Each user type has its perspective on the product. For instance, if Slack shifted from team communication to community-building, a Fresh User would likely still expect it to be a simple communication tool. Any deviation from this expectation can lead to churn and low conversion rates.

Now, once you know what the problem is, you can get to fixing it by:

• Collecting data: Gather feedback from both user groups. This can highlight discrepancies in expectations and experiences.

• Analyzing feedback: If Power Users expect one thing and Fresh Users expect another, there's a clear value gap. Use interviews, questionnaires, and data analysis to understand these expectations.

• Addressing subtle differences: Often, the differences between user expectations are not stark but subtle. Ensure your product's unique value is clear, and you're targeting the right demographic.

• Developing strategies: Based on research, devise go-to-market strategies and methods to bridge the identified value gap.

Source: How They Grow

Many people still try to identify problems, find solutions, or come up with better ideas through brainstorming. It’s a classic, very popular method, especially in corporations.

As I mentioned before. People lock themselves in a conference room and try to come up with ideas. Or even better, they go for a whole day to some cabin with team-building activities, hoping to come back with some truly revolutionary ideas.

In most cases, brainstorming isn’t just ineffective, it’s completely pointless.

Real ideas are born in the streets, while talking to customers, digging through research papers, or arguing with experts you’ve hired specifically to tear your ideas apart.

It happened to me twice in a row. Friends called me up for a coffee or dinner, classic setup, and then dropped the line:

“Let’s come up with some innovative marketing ideas or a new product for customers.”

Of course, with zero market research, no data, and no customer insights. Just pure wishful thinking.

Every time I hear that, my reaction is the same:

“This is literally the worst possible way to approach innovation. It’s basically a blueprint for failure.”

So why do people keep doing it?

Because it’s easy.

Because it’s predictable.

Because it feels productive.

But real work? Real validation? Facing harsh truths? That’s uncomfortable. And most people will do anything to avoid it.

Before we move on, let’s quickly look at two key areas to keep in mind when building successful products.

The next one ties directly into what we just covered.

I call it…

Meet With People Where They At

In other words, even if you’ve identified the right problems (like we discussed earlier), make sure you’re also choosing the right way to solve them.

And by “where they are,” I don’t just mean the physical world, I mean the mental space of your customers, too.

Let’s go back to Zume, the company that wanted to reinvent pizza delivery by putting robot kitchens inside trucks. The idea was to boost speed and logistics. Sounds smart, right?

But here’s the thing: speed doesn’t beat taste. Not in this category.

Every time you build something for customers, it has to be relevant to them. I briefly explained this in my Behavioral Guide: to make people care about your product, you need to understand three things—State of Mind, Timing, and Placement.

Let’s do a quick thought exercise.

When do people usually order pizza?

A lot of the time, it’s in the evening (Timing), during a party, a movie night, or when someone just doesn’t feel like cooking (Placement). They’re looking for something delicious, maybe a little indulgent (State of Mind).

In that context, speed isn’t the priority. Taste is. A pizza that pairs perfectly with a Netflix binge or deep late-night convos? Priceless. I’ll gladly wait a bit longer if it’s worth it.

Not to mention the social risk. You don’t want to be the one who ordered a shitty pizza. Nobody wants to look bad in front of friends, colleagues, or a date. It’s not worth the gamble.

But it’s a different story around lunchtime. During a short break at work, priorities flip: speed matters more than indulgence. People want something edible, ideally healthy, no need for the best taste or food presentation, and they want it now.

My friend nailed this insight when he launched Ordr, an express lunch delivery service that he later sold. It ran daily from 11:00 to 15:00 and offered three pre-packed, healthy meals delivered within minutes.

Here’s how he made it work:

• Meals were prepared and packed before orders came in.

• Scooters were placed across Prague, each covering its own zone.

• Orders were routed to the nearest courier, first by dispatchers, then later by software.

• He literally copied how emergency services operate.

The scooters were fast, didn’t get stuck in traffic, and carried large metal boxes that kept the food hot. I was genuinely impressed—not just by the idea, but by the execution. It solved a real problem in the right context.

Another great example? Cash App. Even in a crowded market of fintech and banking apps, they found a very specific niche: rural users, where the problem wasn’t complexity, it was connectivity and access.

So instead of pushing flashy UX or trendy features, they built a solution that worked via SMS.

Simple, fast, trusted. It fit the habits and limitations of their users perfectly.

They combined modern tech (speed + cost-efficiency) with old infrastructure and built a product around how people were already behaving.

Of course, you can read more about how they grew into a dominant fintech in Jaryd’s analysis on his blog, How They Grow.

Here’s one last example.

There was a company, I can’t remember the exact name, something like Cocoa Fit, that Alex Hormozi once talked about. A few other tech fitness products failed for the same reason.

They all tried to automate personal training by building all-in-one machines that tracked your workouts, counted reps, and told you what to do better next time.

On paper? Great concept.

In reality? The core assumption was completely off.

Their theory was: “People don’t get results because they don’t know what to do.”

But the truth? Behavioral misalignment.

People weren’t getting results because they weren’t even showing up to the gym in the first place.

Why?

Because people don’t hire personal trainers just for the knowledge.

They hire them for accountability. For connection. For someone who talks to them, pushes them, encourages them, or just listens to them bitch about life between sets.

Same reason why, even if a robot could cut hair perfectly, a lot of women would still go to the salon, for the human touch, the conversation, the ritual, the connection.

As I mentioned earlier: finding the right problem isn’t enough. You also have to uncover and address the invisible behavioral patterns and misalignments that drive human choices.

You have to meet people where they are, not where you wish they’d be.

The good news?

The model we’ll look at next is built exactly to help you identify those hidden behavioral patterns and actually do something useful with them.

Not Sure Which Way Is the Right Way? Start at the End.

Most of the ideas in this section come from the book Start at the End: How to Build Products That Create Change. It’s a really great read- highly recommended.

When we talk about designing for behavior change, what we’re actually talking about is creating pressure shifts that influence behavior, rather than trying to directly change the behavior itself.

That’s why, when I build products, I aim to guide people toward taking action, not by radically challenging everything they already do, but by asking simple questions like:

“What are the incentives here?”

“Why would people even want to do this?”

“Why aren’t they already doing it?”

This is behavioral science. And part of science is the willingness to be wrong. Human behavior and motivation are incredibly complex. That’s why the best product managers reward disproving an assumption just as much as confirming one.

Too often, coming especially from people building things that aren’t exactly good for users, I hear: “People have free will.”

That kind of thinking not only pisses me off, but it’s genuinely dangerous. Who the hell says that?

Let’s be clear: “But they have free will!” is a bad defense for any kind of manipulation. The moment you create something designed to influence behavior, you take on responsibility for the results of that influence.

It’s the same reason tobacco companies can’t just say, “People can quit anytime they want,” while they spend billions on new types of cigarettes and ads that are deliberately designed to make quitting harder.

Designing for habit, basically, rewiring the brain, is unethical when it bypasses intention. It exploits the brain’s natural drive to conserve mental energy and form shortcuts.

Successful interventions are about creating the world we don’t yet live in. That means working with thought experiments and living in imagined realities, sometimes ones we don’t even want, just to see more clearly the one we do.

One insight I discovered after dozens of user interviews is this:

Unfortunately, most of the time, people don’t know logically, and sometimes have a very hard time explaining why they behave the way they do.

One of the skills I keep refining is learning to filter what people say from what they actually mean. It sounds weird, but I only started noticing this after around my 30th user interview during a product test.

Quantitatively, we can start asking questions about people’s cognitive patterns, what trade-offs they’re willing to make, or where they wish they had more time. But at the end of the day, we have to take their answers with a grain of salt.

As social psychologist Tim Wilson said (borrowing from Nietzsche):

“We are strangers to ourselves, because our unconscious mind does so much of the work, and our conscious mind filters perception through countless biases.”

Recently, I was consulting a founder developing a product meant to replace fingerprint or facial recognition with EEG brainwaves. Really fascinating stuff.

Eventually, we realized that their first real customer might not be consumers or corporations, but the military. His initial idea was to take a “SafePass” approach, like a brainwave-powered password manager.

One exercise I like to use in situations like this is simple but powerful: mentally step into the shoes of the end user, imagine the final product, and simulate how it would actually be used.

Doing that, it quickly became clear the current setup wasn’t quite right.

Together with some cybersecurity experts, we came up with three alternative directions, options that made a lot more sense and gave the founder a solid foundation for making a better-informed decision.

They’d been building this for months.

It took me about an hour to realize the entire configuration needed to shift—from “corporate user at a desk” to “soldier in secure military base.”

Thankfully, the product was still early enough that adjusting course was relatively painless. And honestly, that’s exactly why you need to align product feasibility to the right behavior before it turns into an expensive mistake.

Sometimes, when behavior is hard to pin down or feels abstract, it helps to use something called a behavioral statement.

Behavioral Statement

Here’s a simple but powerful formula you can fill in:

The goal of a behavioral statement is to clearly define not only the behavior we want to influence, but also who we’re targeting and in what context. All behavior is shaped by the context it happens in, pressures interact with context, influencing not only their strength but, in extreme cases, even their direction.

Whether an intervention succeeds or fails depends heavily on how well we define our behavioral goal. The more specific and grounded it is in a real-world context, the more likely we are to create something meaningful.

Here’s a simple analogy:

Imagine you invite people over for dinner. If the intended outcome was to cook Indian food, and I show up with Thai curry, then I’ve clearly missed the mark. But if the true goal was to bring people together and connect, there are many ways to achieve that; the food just becomes one of many tools, not the only one.

That’s why being precise about behavior and intent is essential. Vague goals like “increase engagement” or “drive usage” often lead to vague solutions. But a clear behavioral statement helps your team align around what actually matters and design toward a tangible outcome.

Let’s take a few examples:

• When remote workers want to stay focused during deep work and they’re constantly distracted by notifications, they will turn off all alerts for 90-minute blocks (measured by app usage logs).

• When new gym members want to build a routine and they feel intimidated or unsure of what to do, they will attend at least two guided classes per week (measured by check-in data).

Each of these examples gives us a clear direction: who we’re helping, what’s driving them, what’s holding them back, what behavior we want to see, and how we’ll know if it’s happening.

So, before we move on, try to frame your own behavioral challenge using this structure. It might feel overly structured at first, but it’s one of the most effective tools for designing products that create real, measurable change.

Your App is a Vitamin, but You Present it as a Painkiller

One of the most important, and often overlooked, questions when building a product is not clearly clarifying whether:

Is your solution a pain reliever or a vitamin?

This classic analogy helps you figure out whether you’re solving an urgent, painful problem… or just offering something “nice to have.”

• Pain relievers solve immediate, real, and painful problems. Customers need them. There’s urgency, emotional weight, and often a willingness to pay.

• Vitamins are solutions that are good for you in the long run. They promise improvement, optimization, or “better living.” But they’re not always urgent. People often postpone them. Or forget them entirely.

The hard truth?

Most failed startups were building vitamins, not painkillers.

When someone has a migraine, they’ll do anything to make it stop. They won’t hesitate. They’ll Google, pay, download, sign up, whatever it takes.

That’s the kind of behavior you want to see when someone comes across your product.

Because if you’re solving a real pain, you won’t have to convince them it matters. They already know.

But if you’re building a vitamin, get ready to spend half your time just educating people on why they should care in the first place.

Now, that doesn’t mean vitamins are useless. Some vitamins do turn into painkillers, think fitness apps, productivity tools, and financial wellness platforms.

Once people build habits around them, it becomes painful not to use them.

But building that habit? That takes serious effort, patience, and a smart strategy.

So when you’re building your solution, ask yourself:

• What’s the painful problem I’m solving?

• Would my customer immediately notice if my product disappeared?

• Am I reducing stress, risk, frustration, or helping them avoid something painful?

• Or am I offering something that might be “nice” – but could easily be ignored?

If your answer leans toward “vitamin,” that’s not a dealbreaker, but you’ll need to work twice as hard to create urgency and habit.

If it’s a “pain reliever,” then double down and get laser-focused on delivering relief fast.

Bottom line?

Start with pain. And if you can relieve it, you’ll never have to beg for attention.

🩹 Painkillers (Solve urgent, painful problems)

• Uber – “I need to get home now, and taxis are a nightmare.”

• Grammarly – “I’m scared to send this email full of grammar mistakes.”

• 1Password – “I keep forgetting my passwords and I’m locked out again.”

• Stripe – “Payments are a nightmare to integrate, I need a clean API that just works.”

• Calendly – “Scheduling meetings takes 10 emails and it’s driving me mad.”

💊 Vitamins (Nice-to-have improvements)

• Headspace – “I should really try meditation someday…”

• Duolingo – “It’d be cool to learn Spanish one day.”

• Notion (at first) – “It’s a prettier, more flexible note-taking tool.”

• Apple Watch – “It tracks my steps and reminds me to breathe.”

• Clubhouse (when it launched) – “A new social app – interesting!”

Rule of thumb:

If your user says, “I need this now,” you’re building a painkiller.

If they say, “I should use this someday,” you’re building a vitamin.

Focusing Just on Promoting Pressures and Ignoring Inhibiting Pressures

When we’re building products, we often focus only on what might encourage someone to use it, what makes the product exciting, useful, or “better” than the alternative. These are called promoting pressures.

But here’s the thing:

It’s usually not the lack of promoting pressure that stops people; it’s the presence of inhibiting pressure.

Let me break it down.

• Promoting pressures are all the things that push a user toward the desired behavior. Benefits. Motivations. Promises. FOMO. Speed. Value.

• Inhibiting pressures are everything that holds them back. Fear. Confusion. Friction. Habit. Lack of trust. Inertia. Risk.

I asked ChatGPT to visualize this section, and it did a really great job, even better than I would do.

Most teams only double down on promoting pressure:

• “Let’s add more features!”

• “Let’s offer a discount!”

• “Let’s tell them how great this is!”

But that’s like stepping on the gas with the handbrake still on.

If someone doesn’t sign up for your app, maybe it’s not because your value isn’t clear, maybe it’s because your onboarding is confusing. Or they don’t trust your brand. Or they’re just stuck in their existing habit and can’t be bothered to switch.

Here’s a real-world example:

Imagine you’re trying to get someone to switch from an old spreadsheet to your sleek, powerful analytics platform. You promote speed, design, and real-time data. That’s your promoting pressure.

But they don’t move.

Why? Because they’ve used the old spreadsheet for five years. Their whole team knows it. They don’t want to migrate their data. They’re scared of learning a new system.

That’s inhibiting pressure.

So, what do you do?

You reduce the friction. Make migration simple. Offer guided onboarding. Show social proof. Lower perceived risk. Build trust.

If you want real change, don’t just ask:

“How can I make this more attractive?”

Also ask:

“What’s in the way?”

Promoting pressure gets attention.

Removing inhibiting pressure gets action.

And the most successful products?

They do both, relentlessly.

In product development, we often obsess over promoting pressures, flashy features, sleek design, and bold value propositions. But users don’t just make decisions based on why they should do something.

They also weigh what’s stopping them. These are inhibiting pressures, and in many cases, they’re what actually kill adoption.

Let’s bring this to life with a few real-world examples:

Dropbox – Winning by Removing Inhibition

• Promoting Pressure: “Easily sync your files across devices.”

• Inhibiting Pressure: “This sounds technical. What if I lose my files?”

In Dropbox’s early days, the value of file syncing was clear, but it wasn’t enough. People were afraid. Afraid of losing data. Afraid it wouldn’t work.

Solution: They built an insanely simple experience with zero learning curve. And their famous demo video showed exactly how it worked, in human terms. It built trust and clarity, removing the fear of trying something new.

Slack – Reducing Switching Costs

• Promoting Pressure: “Better team communication than email.”

• Inhibiting Pressure: “But my team already uses email. Setting up Slack sounds like a pain.”

Slack could’ve just said “We’re faster than email” and left it at that. But they didn’t. They invested heavily in onboarding, team invites, and pre-built integrations. They made switching feel easy, almost invisible.

That’s removing inhibiting pressure, not just selling benefits, but making adoption frictionless.

Airbnb – Tackling Trust

• Promoting Pressure: “Stay in beautiful homes for less than a hotel.”

• Inhibiting Pressure: “Stranger’s house? What if it’s sketchy? What if I get robbed?”

Airbnb didn’t win just by being cheaper or cooler. They won because they focused on reducing fear:

• Verified IDs

• Reviews from past guests

• Secure payments

• Insurance and support

They built trust systems into the product, tackling the biggest psychological blocker to staying in a stranger’s home.

Tesla – Removing “EV Anxiety”

• Promoting Pressure: “Electric cars are better for the planet and fun to drive.”

• Inhibiting Pressure: “What if I run out of battery on a road trip?”

Tesla didn’t just sell performance and sustainability; they aggressively built out the Supercharger network to remove the #1 concern for most people: range anxiety.

And they pushed constant over-the-air updates to reassure users they’d always be driving an up-to-date car. Inhibiting pressure? Handled.

Share

Last Words

I just showed you the baseline and the key frameworks that builders constantly overlook. And these are the exact misalignments that can end up costing you the entire business.

I check for them every single time I’m looking at a new product or company.

Honestly, I wrote this article for myself, too, so next time a client is missing the basics, I can just send them these sections directly. If they actually want to understand, it’s all here.

Like most frameworks or strategies, these aren’t something you look at once and forget.

You should keep them front and center every time you’re building something new, so you know the foundation of your solution is built on solid behavioral ground.

See you in the next article, until then, stay aligned!

— Peter

Think there might be some critical misalignments in your business? Let’s jump on a quick 30-minute call and bring some clarity to the complexity.

Book a Meeting

I believe that within the next two years, this System will start becoming a cornerstone for identifying misalignments, understanding chaos, and – most importantly—building companies, products, or innovations that put the human at the center of everything.

Share

With today’s breakneck technological progress and overwhelming content, we’re not just losing focus. We’re losing the why. We’re building tools that fragment people’s attention, sedate them with algorithmic dopamine, manipulate perception, and now – outsource decisions and soon autonomy entirely.

How do I know? That’s what I’ve spent the last decade studying, building around, and experiencing firsthand.

Most people don’t see it, caught in the weekly hype cycle of AI and “groundbreaking” tech. I’ve asked around – lot. No one really knows why we’re doing what we’re doing anymore.

We need to shift. First, by building products that embed AI into the journey, the experience – not just sprinkling in chatbots or automation triggers. Some companies already do this and are seeing insane growth.

Second, we’re heading toward a moment where a significant chunk of people will demand that tech empowers them – how they think, who they are, what they want to create. Not just track, control, or think for them.

That’s exactly what this System is built for. And more.

It helps identify what’s off, and then build solutions that deeply understand people–biologically, psychologically, even spiritually–while still being grounded and usable in today’s messy business world. It gives behavioral clarity amidst chaos, helping you stay aligned while everything else is in flux.

Because that’s the only way to build something with strong, lasting pillars.

Built From the Trenches: Story Behind the System

I’ve worked across industries, roles, and company types. At first, this made everything harder – always starting from scratch. But now? It’s my biggest advantage.

Why? Because I’ve developed a rare, hands-on understanding of how businesses really work. I can spot misalignments, patterns, behavioral loops, and internal dynamics that most overlook. It’s like that story:

A factory machine breaks down, and no one can fix it. They call a plumber. He taps once with a hammer, and the machine starts working. He sends a bill for $1,000. Shocked, the owner asks for a breakdown. The plumber replies:

“Tapping with a hammer: $1. Knowing where to tap: $999.”

A decade of trying, building, failing, correcting, and adjusting did not give me. Not perfect answers, but an instinct for where to look and where to tap.

That’s what the last decade did not give me: perfect answers, but an instinct for where to look and where to tap.

Here’s how it unfolded:

• Finance & Deal Advisory:

I learned how businesses function at their core – how to analyze fundamentals, map stakeholders, and assess competitors. But also? How brilliant people still make stupid decisions. How great ideas that clearly benefit the customer still fail. That led me to…

• My Behavioral Consultancy:

I dove deep into human behavior – biology, neurology, psychology, persuasion, and consumer decision-making. Applying this to startups and e-shops. What did it teach me? That what’s necessary or good isn’t always feasible. And one customer avatar? Rarely enough. No tracking? Even bigger problem. So I went to the industry that has the answers to that…

• Marketing Automation & E-commerce:

I saw how behavioral insights get tracked and applied. But also, the trade-offs – what works in the short term might mess up the bigger picture. But how to avoid that? I needed a more holistic view. After long research, I found the industry, it was...

• Venture Building:

Here I learned how to connect all the internal dots and what it truly takes to build a company. But the problem was, no time for human behavior. The complexity of business (legal, financial, development) swallowed the basics of customer-centricity: customer, product, experience. So, I went deeper into...

• Product Building:

I finally saw how to build with the customer at the center, while balancing tech feasibility and business logic. This is where I began creating systems, frameworks, and environments. But I also hit a painful realization:

Power dynamics, rigid methodologies, and self-interest often block common sense, even at the expense of a client or user.

From all the experiences I saw:

• Teams sticking to frameworks that clearly didn’t fit, because “this is how we do it.”

• Products built to please a client, knowing full well they wouldn’t serve them.

• Cowards avoiding new ideas because failure = personal risk.

• People building impressive-looking bullshit, totally disconnected from what the customer actually needs.

What startups and my own failures finally taught me was this:

The power of individuals & leaders. Everything hinges on their clarity.

If the founder or leader is off – blindspots, burnout, no sense of why, everything crumbles. That was the final piece. That’s the System.

The last piece of the puzzle

The final realization?

People are far less free in their decision-making than I once believed.

They’re shaped – sometimes fully steered – by external forces:

Money. Attention. Client demands. Public perception.

But also by internal systems:

Beliefs. Fears. Past traumas. Ego. Hidden agendas.

And I’m no exception. I want the best for my clients, but I also want to speak the truth as I see it. That’s why I set two clear principles for how I operate moving forward:

• I’ll write long-form articles that are not sponsored, not paid, and don’t represent my main income. If that ever changes, I’ll take clear steps to protect the integrity of what I say. Incentives must stay clean.

• I’ll develop frameworks, systems, and methodologies that are general yet specific, adaptable to individual contexts, but protected from the biases and bullshit that usually creep in. Some of these will be free. The most detailed ones will be paid. Why?

Because they deliver impact. And also because if people don’t pay, they often don’t value it, or worse, they don’t put in the effort.

This is what sparked a new mission for me:

Not just being a direct advisor to Builders (founders, innovators, creators, etc.), but also creating materials that support them independently, even if we never speak.

Especially those who are trying to build things that last.

Those who want to enhance, not replace, human capabilities.

The Behavioral Clarity System™

We can’t just put the customer in the center.

We must put humans in the center.

Us. Our biology, deficiencies, soul, purpose, our why.

Each time I failed, I marked it. Reflected. And made sure I’d know better next time. Then, I sat down for weeks, analyzed the years of my work, and started putting it all together – patterns, learnings, frameworks, tools.

That’s how The Behavioral Clarity System™ was born.

It’s built to bring clarity to ourselves, our companies, and our customers – and align everything in between.

And many more individual parts of this system will come.

System Explained

Let’s look at all the individual parts. This model is not special, is not something you haven’t seen, but it looks like it’s something we forgot.

Symbols

There are two main symbols → 🔺 and 🔵

• 🔵 Circle:

The circle symbolizes wholeness, timeless unity, and the infinite potential of visionary thinking.

• 🔺Triangle:

The triangle represents structure, balance, and the dynamic power of focused direction and strategic growth.

• Circle + Triangle:

Together, the circle and triangle symbolize the fusion of big-picture vision (circle) with focused execution (triangle) – the essence of sustainable, purpose-driven building.

The Two Polarities: Never-Ending Tension

• 🦍 Irrationality

Rationality represents the part of human behavior governed by logic, reason, and conscious thought. It reflects the belief that people are capable of making deliberate decisions, controlling their desires, and acting in accordance with long-term goals or moral values. Rationality is influenced by knowledge, planning, ethics, and social norms. Those who emphasize this side argue that, through self-awareness and discipline, individuals can overcome their impulses.

• 🤖 Rationality

Irrationality, on the other hand, reflects the influence of emotions, unconscious desires, and instinctual drives. Thinkers like Sigmund Freud and Edward Bernays believed that much of human behavior is shaped by forces beyond conscious control. According to this view, people often act based on hidden motivations, emotional reactions, or manipulative external influences like propaganda or advertising. This side emphasizes the power of the unconscious and the difficulty of resisting deep-seated urges.

At the center of these two forces is the self, the person making decisions and navigating life. Our system is constantly influenced by both rational and irrational forces, and behavior emerges from the tension between them. Some believe individuals can learn to strengthen their rational side and take control of their actions, while others argue that irrational drives remain dominant, even when we believe we are acting freely.

Although I agree that Irrationality often dominates, I believe we can create systems or strategies that keep it under control. We can design solutions that enhance people’s decision-making processes while keeping deep irrational forces in check.

Nevertheless, we must constantly consider both Rationality and Irrationality.

🧠 The Human-Centric Model

A blueprint for building behavioral systems that scale with clarity and alignment.

This model wasn’t designed to decorate a pitch deck or create a long report no one understands – it was built from the real, messy complexity of helping founders, product teams, and companies align what they’re building with how humans actually think, behave, and decide.

It’s a systems-based framework for understanding how ideas scale, succeed – or silently collapse.

At the center of it all is the Human – not just as a user or persona, but as a full being: soul, biology, and behavior.

🔺 The Inner Triangle: The Human Operating System

• 🧠 Mind

The internal logic – cognition, motivation, mechanisms, biases, and heuristics.

This is where decisions are made and clarity is formed (or not). It includes the founders’ mindset, users’ mental models, and how alignment or chaos originates from invisible thinking patterns.

• 👁 Perception

This is how people interpret what you’ve built. It’s not what you say – it’s what they see, feel, and assume.

UI, onboarding, trust cues, narrative clarity – all fall here. Perception mediates between product intention and lived experience.

• 🌍 Environment

The systems, incentives, interfaces, and external cues that influence behavior.

This includes everything from stakeholder expectations to interface friction, team culture to default settings – anything that nudges choices and actions from the outside in.

Together, these three form the internal behavioral engine. Most companies focus on one – usually “perception” – but sustainable product-market fit happens only when all three align.

🔵 The Outer Circle: Forces Around the Product

This model also connects the internal behavioral core with the external forces that shape or distort it:

• 🧑‍💼 Founders & Teams

Everything rises and falls at the top. It’s essential to understand the founder’s motivation, drive, vision, as well as the individuals within the team.

At the same time, it’s crucial to establish proper internal dynamics: how decisions are made, what narratives are being shaped, and who holds leadership responsibilities.

• 🌐 Users & Public

This helps us classify users based on personality types, understand their subconscious decision-making, consumer psychology, habits, motivations, incentives, and more.

It’s also about knowing how to conduct and apply research, both qualitative and quantitative, to classify behaviors and develop meaningful user profiles.

We must always consider how the product, company, and business are perceived by the public. It’s about how we craft stories, position ourselves, present the brand, and what image we’re actually projecting.

• 💼 Business & Stakeholders

Everything you’re building needs to be viable – it must make money or solve a real problem. You’re creating something tangible, which means it must account for regulations, laws, risks, and constraints.

There are always multiple stakeholders in the mix – investors, providers, partners, suppliers, and more – and each of them requires a different approach.

Every external group interacts with a different layer of the business, but ultimately, they all impact the human at the center.

🛠 Axes of Practice

The triangle is also surrounded by 3 core disciplines – the levers of influence I use in consulting and product building:

• Systems → how all parts move together (especially under pressure)

• Architecture → how these decision pathways and journeys are structured

• Technology → how tools, platforms, and logic affect experience

No part exists in isolation. A broken onboarding flow isn’t just a UX issue – it may stem from flawed assumptions in the Mind, conflicting stakeholder demands in the Environment, or misaligned growth incentives.

🧩 Why I Use This Model

In my work with clients, this model serves as a diagnostic tool and design framework. It helps uncover the visible, but more importantly, the invisible forces. For example:

• Why products aren’t landing even when they’re “functional”

• Where founders are misaligned with their own teams or users

• How to build systems that scale without breaking the human layer

If you build without honoring this structure, you create invisible debt: misaligned incentives, user confusion, team burnout, dissatisfaction, and eventually, collapse.

But if you design with it in mind, you build products that are clear, resilient, and trusted – not just usable.

✍️ Want more?

I’ll be unpacking each of these layers in future posts:

• How to identify misalignments in perception

• How leaders’ mindset shapes business

• Why systems thinking is essential for behavioral product & system design

• How to diagnose failure using this triangle

Subscribe now

Curious how this framework might apply to your product, team, or current challenge?

Let’s have a short call to explore it together:

Schedule here

See you in the next article.

— Peter

In the previous article, we focused on the area of Determination. It was one of my favorite topics, and as I mentioned, it is an area that we often leave unaddressed and replace with others because the level of determination is very difficult to measure or identify.

For those of you who want to explore the previous sections:

[1/6] Introduction to the ABCD Framework

[2/6] Attention

[3/6] Belief Formation

[4/6] Choice

[5/6] Determination

In this section, we will look at a campaign that was executed many years ago and truly changed behavior, even without knowing this model. It also illustrates how challenging it is to create such a campaign and what is required for a campaign to genuinely influence people’s daily behavior.

So, you have a choice: either use an extreme amount of resources and energy or apply this model.

Let’s conduct a brief analysis of the various parts of the campaign.

For those who would like to support this effort, you can find the entire study here for a symbolic price. It also includes examples and exercises that you won’t find in the article.

How It’s Done Right: The “Don’t be a pirate” Campaign by O2

One of the standout campaigns that genuinely aimed to influence human behavior effectively was O2’s “Nebuď pirát” (Don’t Be a Pirate) campaign, developed in collaboration with Elite Solutions, a full-service advertising agency, and the globally recognized Slovak GPS navigation company Sygic. The campaign was focused on encouraging responsible driving and reducing the use of mobile phones behind the wheel. While I believe that some behavior changes might be temporary, the execution of this campaign provides valuable lessons.

The App, Results, and Behavioral Change Among Slovak Drivers

O2 revamped their Extra benefits app, incorporating features of Sygic’s navigation to reward drivers for responsible driving. The results speak for themselves:

• The campaign reached over 5.6 million people on social media and generated 380,000 interactions.

• It achieved an organic cumulative reach of more than 12 million people.

• In the first month, over 30,000 responsible drives were logged, covering 500,000 kilometers.

• The campaign earned six awards at the advertising competition Zlatý klinec.

Why the Campaign Likely Worked and Key Takeaways. 

Creating a Strong Association 

1. Creating a Strong Association

The campaign was titled “Nebuď pirát” (Don’t Be a Pirate). Any successful brand, campaign, or product must feature distinctive elements that people can easily remember. These elements usually include a combination of a slogan, visual cue, and color.

Pirate metaphor: In Slovak slang, reckless drivers are often called “road pirates”, which made the word “pirate” a fitting and easily understandable choice. The term created a strong association with irresponsible driving behavior.

Pirate eye patch: The campaign used the iconic pirate eye patch as a central visual cue. Why did this work so well?

• It was adaptable for both online and physical applications.

• Memorable and tied directly to the slogan, creating a clear mental link between the message and the imagery.

• The red color symbolized prohibition or danger, a common visual language in road safety.

• The campaign also cleverly used the YouTube logo’s style—where the campaign was initially launched—enhancing its relevance for young people, the group most prone to the targeted behavior.

2. Gamification and Rewards

Incorporating gamification and reward systems into the app turned responsible driving into something engaging rather than just a moral obligation. By providing tangible rewards and making the experience fun, the campaign incentivized drivers to change their behavior, tapping into human psychology.

3. Multi-Channel Integration

The campaign’s design made it flexible across multiple platforms, especially on social media where younger audiences are most active. By using engaging visuals, rewards, and the pirate metaphor, the campaign managed to grab attention and maintain interest.

The Challenge of Replicating This Success

Although this campaign was well-executed, it’s not easily replicable for just anyone. Several key elements were uniquely tailored to the Slovak context:

• Cultural relevance: The “road pirate” term is a well-understood concept in Slovakia, and any campaign that tries to use similar metaphors elsewhere might need significant adjustments to fit the local culture.

• Strong collaboration: The partnership with Sygic and use of gamified technology in the app was critical. For companies without similar resources or technical partners, replicating this level of integration would be difficult.

However, the lessons from this campaign—clear associations, gamification, and a multi-platform approach—can inspire many future campaigns seeking to influence behavior meaningfully.

In conclusion, O2’s “Nebuď pirát” campaign successfully blended behavioral science, marketing, and technology, influencing real-world change in driving habits and setting an example of how thoughtful design and execution can lead to impactful results.

Thoughtful Selection of Influencers

Any campaign or company can either greatly benefit or get burned, depending on how wisely they choose influencers to represent their brand. In the case of the “Nebuď pirát” campaign, Elite Solutions employed a smart strategy by selecting a diverse range of influencers who reached the broadest possible audience. They did this in two ways: through official endorsements in the media, like quotes in newspapers, and through authentic support via Instagram stories, which extended their reach even further.

However, from practical experience, smaller and medium-sized businesses should be more cautious when choosing influencers. Rather than casting a wide net, they should focus on one major influencer or a few micro-influencers within a specific category that aligns with their target audience.

Official Endorsements Example:

1. Sajfa: The face of the campaign, a radio star, and one of the most popular and likable public figures in Slovakia without major controversies.

2. Branislav Deák: An actor in the most popular TV show and something of a heartthrob for older women.

3. Barbora Krajčírová: A TV and radio host, serving as a strong role model for women.

4. Pil C: One of the most beloved rappers among the youth.

As you can see, each of these influencers not only resonates with their specific demographic but also has a broad reach across various platforms. This strategy ensured that the campaign touched a wide range of audiences, reinforcing its message and appeal across different segments of society.

By choosing influencers carefully and ensuring they align with the brand’s image and values, businesses can maximize the effectiveness and reach of their campaigns, driving both engagement and results. 

Authentic Support and Gamification

In addition to official endorsements, a campaign can gain significant traction when other public figures support it authentically, especially through social media platforms like Instagram stories. 

This was the case with Ego, a rap legend known for his “bad boy” image, which only strengthened the message of the campaign. When someone with a “bad boy” persona supports something positive, it triggers a subconscious effect in people, making them believe that it must be something important. 

Another notable supporter was Exploited, one of Slovakia’s biggest internet stars, adding further credibility and reach to the campaign.

Choose influencers wisely! 

The lesson here is that the right influencer choice is crucial. Carefully selecting influencers based on their resonance with your target audience and brand values can make a huge difference. While large campaigns like this can benefit from a diverse group of influencers, smaller businesses should focus on a more targeted approach. Picking either one big influencer or several micro-influencers within a specific niche is often more practical and effective for smaller campaigns.

Addressing the Right Problem

Addressing the right problem is something that’s often talked about but not always followed. This oversight has caused many businesses to fail. The key here is to focus on a specific issue rather than trying to tackle everything at once. In this case, the “Nebuď pirát” campaign focused solely on reducing phone usage while driving, which is a major safety issue and one of the leading causes of accidents. The campaign’s creators likely chose this issue because they knew they could make a real, measurable difference in this area.

Elegant Integration of Online and Physical Campaigns

One of the standout features of the “Nebuď pirát” campaign was how it elegantly integrated both online and offline elements with a digital product. This kind of synergy is rare, but when done correctly, it can greatly enhance the impact of the campaign.

App with Gamification and Rewards

The integration of gamification and rewards into an application is a powerful approach, especially when it comes to driving behavior change through a campaign. Simply creating an app is not enough. As humans, we are naturally self-centered, and as highlighted by the cognitive bias “Reason-Respecting Tendency” by Charlie Munger, if you need people to do something, you must give them a valid reason for it.

One of the most common mistakes that people make is not asking themselves why users should use their product and what they stand to gain from it.

 I encountered this situation while advising a startup called MindBank, which aims to create your AI digital twin. Despite having a solid product and impressive conversion rates of over 20% on Facebook ads, the user engagement always dropped to zero after two weeks. When I asked the founder why users should keep using the app, he began listing typical differentiators, like how it’s better than the competition and its unique features. But none of these gave a compelling reason for why I would regularly return to it. 

This is understandable. When you’re deeply invested in a project, it’s easy to miss or overlook critical factors, or sometimes you simply don’t want to see them. It happens to everyone.

Every application, behavior change, or intervention must answer one fundamental question in depth: Why would a person actually want to do this?

In the case of the O2 campaign, the reward is data from one of the largest telecom operators. Data in Slovakia is a highly sought-after commodity, as many mobile plans offer limited amounts. This makes for a strong motivation to use the app.

Another element is the gamified aspect of the operator’s app. The app clearly shows what actions a user needs to complete to earn data. It rewards users with data for completing specific tasks, such as driving a certain number of kilometers or a set number of trips per month. These are activities that people would already be doing, and now they are incentivized to avoid illegal and dangerous behaviors, such as using their phone while driving.

It’s quite simple—when a person gets in their car, they open the app, start the navigation through it, and drive. At the end of the drive, everything is calculated and displayed neatly. One area that I didn’t find particularly well-executed is the way the average score is presented. Given that the target audience is the broadest population of drivers, everything should be straightforward and understandable without additional explanation. However, from a few screenshots I saw, I still couldn’t figure out how the score is calculated or why it shows “Average score for April.” I would have expected a more intuitive system, such as a growing percentage instead of some form of average calculation.

Details matter because if people don’t understand how they are rewarded, they will lose interest in using the app.

Another excellent feature is the immediate feedback users receive. After each trip, the score is updated right away, and the user can see their progress. If the user meets the conditions, they are instantly rewarded with data, eliminating the need for waiting, entering contests, or going through lengthy processes to claim their reward, which is often the case in other campaigns. This direct approach increases motivation and simplifies the process, making the user experience much more enjoyable.

In conclusion, gamification and instant rewards, when thoughtfully integrated, create a more engaging experience that keeps users motivated. However, it’s essential to provide clear explanations and intuitive feedback mechanisms so that users can easily understand their progress and remain motivated to continue engaging with the app.

Synergy of Giants

The synergy between major players in a project is one of the key reasons behind its success. Often, companies struggle to change behaviors, make a significant impact, or build great products because they lack essential resources—not just financial, but also time, expertise, creativity, and strategic planning. In many cases, even when a company identifies a genuine problem or area they want to change, they often overlook everything else that is necessary for success—technology, brand credibility, reach, infrastructure, compliance, customer base, and security, among other things.

Let’s take a look at the strong players who successfully tackled these challenges and created a campaign that genuinely impacted people’s behavior:

1. Elite Solutions: One of the largest and most successful full-service advertising agencies in the country, working with the biggest clients on the market.

2. O2: One of the largest telecom operators with its own network, physical infrastructure, over a million customers, and a pre-existing app that was simply adapted for the campaign.

3. Sygic: One of the most successful Slovak startups, recognized globally as a leading provider of GPS navigation systems.

These three companies leveraged their strengths to create a winning campaign. Elite Solutions provided top-tier creative and strategic expertise. O2 brought infrastructure, reach, and technological resources, while Sygic contributed its advanced navigation technology and expertise.

This collaboration exemplifies how the right partnerships can overcome many challenges and lead to the successful implementation of impactful campaigns. However, it’s important to note that when resources and expertise align, things can be executed far more efficiently and elegantly. By understanding these dynamics, you can now create solutions that operate on a higher level than before.

If the way I approach things resonates — or if your product, idea, or strategy feels even slightly “off” — I might be able to help.
Let’s have a quick 20-minute call to find clarity together:

Book a Meeting

Last Words

In conclusion, these insights are not meant to dictate exactly how you should design your products or structure them. Instead, their purpose is to enhance what you’ve already created, making it more effective, or to spark your creativity in generating new solutions.

Many people believe that creativity is an innate trait possessed by only a select few or that it strikes randomly like inspiration from a muse. While that might hold true for some major breakthroughs, in reality, creativity can be cultivated. It comes from thoroughly understanding your business, analyzing competitors, engaging in exercises like those mentioned earlier, and then connecting all these dots in ways that make the most sense for your specific situation.

Creativity is much like brainstorming—you can’t expect it to appear by locking yourself in a quiet room and thinking hard. It emerges when you expose yourself to new ideas, experiment, and explore.

For example, this article was originally going to be quite different and focused on a slightly different area. However, as I was writing, I realized there were more creative ways to approach it—ways that would better resonate with the audience. So, I reworked the entire piece to make it more engaging and effective.

Share

The takeaway? Stay open to new perspectives and remember that creativity is often built through experience, learning, and experimentation - but first, you need to understand what you’re actually doing. 

- Peter

For those who would like to support this effort, you can find the entire study here for a symbolic price. It also includes examples and exercises that you won’t find in the article.

Welcome to the fifth part of our series where we explore the ABCD Framework, either as a whole or in individual parts.

For those of you who want to explore the previous sections:

[1/6] Introduction to the ABCD Framework

[2/6] Attention

[3/6] Belief Formation

[4/6] Choice

In the previous article, we focused on the area of Choices. It was one of my favorite topics and certainly one of the key areas. We explored how to identify human decisions, understand them, and then work with them. Now, we will dive deeper into a field that people often confuse with choices, because our determination is difficult to measure, and for that reason, most behaviors in this area are labeled as ‘choices.

Just as a reminder, here’s the full model:

In this article, we will focus on the yellow section titled Determination.

Let’s dive in.

For those who would like to support this effort, you can find the entire study here for a symbolic price. It also includes examples and exercises that you won’t find in the article.

Area: Determination - Help People Overcome Own Biology 

The fourth area is Determination. The strength of our willpower is a limited resource that can easily be depleted. The less energy we have, the weaker our willpower becomes, and in turn, the less likely we are to engage in complex decision-making

People often think we have unlimited willpower, but they couldn’t be more wrong. Willpower is a finite resource that can be drained quickly, and it also requires certain competencies to be effectively utilized.

Some factors that drain our determination include:

• Self-blame

• Cognitive dissonance

• Mental fatigue from previous actions

• Inability to make decisions

• Procrastination

Imagine willpower like a battery, with every decision you make depleting a bit of that energy. As you continue, the reserve gets lower and lower.

Imagine willpower like a battery, with every decision you make depleting a bit of that energy. As you continue, the reserve gets lower and lower.

Even worse, the less willpower (determination) you have, the worse your decisions become, or the longer it takes you to do something.

Willpower is a precious resource, and we need to understand how to manage it. But it’s not just about managing our own willpower; we should be creating solutions that take into account this limitation—either directly or indirectly.

In this section, we’ll explore areas such as:

1. Make It Easy 

   1. Default Effect By Cognitive Avoidance 

   2. Work With Friction 

   3. Perceived effort 

2. Indirect Communication (Nepriama Komunikácia) 

   1. Implement Intentions 

   2. Feedback

   3. Psychology of Waiting 

   4. Operational Transparency 

3. Create Social Expectations 

   1. Create Commitments 

   2. Leverage Social Norms 

1) Make It Easy 

Make it simple – it sounds like a total no-brainer, to the point where you might wonder why I’m even mentioning it. But some sections don’t need revolutionary insights; instead, they serve as reminders to pause, reflect, and ensure you’ve addressed the basics properly. I’m also here to share a few methods on how to address simplicity.

People love to overcomplicate things, myself included, because it subconsciously makes us feel like we’re doing something more impressive, or it feeds our egos. For others, overcomplicating things can be a sign they don’t fully understand the subject, so they dress it up in complexity.

“If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.” – Albert Einstein

You really learn this lesson when you work in client-based businesses, where everything you do needs to be presented simply to your clients.

Here’s a short example: We recently built a simple app, and I created a straightforward customer flow. 

Of course, when you’re on alignment calls with clients, you have to translate things into even simpler designs and be ready with a clear, easy-to-follow story.

So when I joined the client call, I was prepared like this:

Even such simple interventions, where you simplify things for the client, translate into other areas of work, and you start applying them everywhere.

A lot of people don’t do this because it involves doing double the work – breaking down what you already did into simpler forms – but that’s the reality of working in services or consulting.

Now, let’s dive into some key insights and methods that will help you create simple, effective solutions.

a) Default Effect By Cognitive Avoidance 

The default effect due to cognitive avoidance refers to the phenomenon where individuals tend to stick with preset options or preferences because of the mental effort required to make an active decision. This effect leverages the human tendency to avoid complex decision-making processes, often leading people to accept defaults as the path of least resistance.

By strategically setting advantageous default options, you can guide behavior in a desired direction with minimal effort on the user’s part. This technique is widely used in both digital and physical products to influence user decisions and enhance user experience.

Many people will choose whichever option requires the least effort, or the “path of least resistance.”

It works not only with default options but also with recommended options. Let’s explore this with an example involving organ donation. 

Here’s a chart displaying the percentage of people in different countries who donate their organs posthumously:

The difference isn’t in culture, geopolitics, or various campaigns. The difference lies in the simple fact that in the blue countries, if you receive a letter and don’t check the box, you are automatically enrolled in the organ donation program. Conversely, in the red countries, you are not enrolled unless you actively check the box.

This is a beautiful way to use this method to save many lives.

However, many companies, especially in e-commerce, started using this method for marketing purposes. For instance, if you don’t want to receive a survey, you have to explicitly uncheck a box. Since most actions on the page involve clicking to say “yes” to things, these advertising interventions deliberately reverse the logic.

Of course, I advocate for ethical interventions and dislike when people are “manipulated” into a specific decision.

So, how can you apply this method in a way that feels unobtrusive yet still offers a sense of free choice?

Give users a clear choice upfront between “regular (recommended)” and “custom” options – similar to how it’s done when installing software or purchasing digital products.

Let’s look at some more real-world examples, because they help us understand things best.

Digital Products:

• Streaming services (Netflix, Spotify):

These platforms often use autoplay as a default. For example, Netflix automatically plays the next episode in a series unless the user opts out. This default setting keeps users engaged and watching longer.

• Email subscriptions:

Many apps and websites default users into receiving newsletters or promotional emails unless they opt out. This increases the likelihood that users stay subscribed and engaged with the content.

• Software updates (operating systems and apps):

Operating systems like Windows and macOS, as well as various apps, often have automatic updates set as the default. Users who don’t change this setting get the latest features and security patches without having to actively manage updates.

• Privacy settings (social media):

Social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram often have default sharing settings that dictate who can view your posts or profile information. Many users stick with these default settings, impacting their privacy and social interactions.

• Cloud storage:

Automatic backup: Services like Google Drive, Dropbox, and iCloud offer default settings for automatic backup of photos, documents, and other files. This ensures that users’ data is regularly backed up without the need for manual intervention.

Physical Products:

• Energy-efficient appliances:

Modern refrigerators and washing machines often come with default eco-settings. Users who don’t change these settings consume less energy, benefiting both the environment and their energy bills.

• Smart thermostats:

Pre-set temperature schedules: Smart thermostats, like those from Nest, come with pre-set temperature schedules designed to optimize energy usage based on common household routines. Users who don’t modify these settings still enjoy energy savings.

• Healthcare and medication:

Automatic prescription refills: Some pharmacies offer automatic prescription refills as a default service. This ensures that patients receive their medication regularly without needing to remember to reorder.

• Hybrid and electric vehicles:

Eco driving mode: Many hybrid and electric vehicles come with an eco driving mode as the default setting. This mode helps maximize fuel efficiency and reduce emissions without drivers having to make conscious adjustments.

• Grocery delivery services:

Default substitutions: Services like Amazon Fresh or Instacart often default to allowing substitutions if an item is out of stock. This means customers automatically receive similar products without needing to approve each substitution.

These examples illustrate how the default effect can be used to promote user-friendly and environmentally friendly behaviors, making user experiences smoother and more intuitive.

So, take a moment and think – how can you apply this in your own work?

b) Work With Friction (Pracujte S Trením) 

Working with friction and creating the path of least resistance is something all product architects, designers, or anyone crafting customer journeys know all too well. If you want to change customer behavior, you must ensure that the desired action is as easy as possible. Reduce obstacles and reshape the environment to make decision-making easier.

What are common causes of friction?

In other words, what makes decisions harder and the entire process more challenging?

• Decision-making difficulty

When dealing with complex products or customer journeys, a great exercise is to count how many decisions a person must make, and what types of decisions, to reach the final goal.

For example, if you have AI software for generating images, examine every point where the user has to make a decision, starting from clicking the ad to the moment they generate and save an image they’re satisfied with.

• The perception of high effort

We’ll discuss this in more depth in the next section, but in short, when the process feels overwhelming or too difficult, people often abandon the task altogether.

• Choice overload

Offering too many options at the start can overwhelm customers, whether it’s a variety of services, products, or even too many stimuli on a single page. Even when you offer just one product, there can be too many distractions on the page.

Here’s an example:

On this page, the customer is bombarded with many stimuli and potential decisions to make, even though they’re really only looking for one service. Each extra clickable element adds to the complexity, making the journey more cumbersome.

• Every extra step

Similar to counting decisions, it’s important to track every single step in the customer journey. This includes everything — every click, every form, every piece of information requested adds friction.

• Uncertainty

If a person feels unsure or confused, they often eliminate that uncertainty by avoiding change altogether. When does this tendency arise?

1. Dilemma: Multiple equally appealing choices can cause hesitation.

2. Stress: High-pressure situations can make decision-making harder.

3. Confusion: Lack of clarity leads to inaction.

Netflix, for example, anticipates and resolves key customer concerns even before they arise. They reduce uncertainty by making the experience as seamless as possible. 

Similarly, an e-commerce business might offer product-specific protection or warranties during checkout. One store, for example, offered a “first setup service” for new computers, which was so compelling that three members of my family decided to purchase from them specifically because of this offer.

My tip: Identify potential concerns your customers might have and address them before they even realize they have those concerns.

It’s not easy, but it’s far from impossible.

c) Perceived Effort 

The effort people actually put in and the effort they think they will need to put in can differ greatly. 

The key is to make sure the customer or client feels that the required behavior is easy to carry out. “Feel” and “perceive” are the crucial words here because perceived effort ≠(not equal) actual effort. Often, it looks like this:

If you show a customer a long form like this, they’re likely to have no interest in filling it out:

But if you break it down into a few smaller steps, suddenly it doesn’t seem as bad:

What are the most common reasons that cause confusion and a sense of greater effort in people?

1. Unstructured communication and unclear instructions

2. Using complicated language or a lot of foreign terms without explanations

3. Vague and overly complex information

4. Poorly presented data

Here are some quick examples of how you can change a sentence to have a dramatically different impact:

Before: “Please fill out this form to be registered.”

After: “Just 3 easy steps, and you’re registered!”

or

Before: “Hello, can I speak with you? I need some help.”

After: “Hi, I won’t take much of your time—just have two quick questions for you.”

Small adjustments like these can significantly reduce the perceived effort, making tasks feel more manageable for customers and clients.

2) Indirect Communication 

The title of this section has been adapted from the original, expanded with new subsections. The goal here is to teach how to create things that communicate effectively with the right person in the right way.

By communication, I mean how you present information, and it is indirect because this information doesn’t hold primary importance but instead supports or amplifies the effect of the initial interventions.

Let’s take a look at some ways to implement this effectively.

a) Implement Intentions 

Implementation Intentions are a powerful strategy to turn goals into actions by pre-planning specific steps and reactions to potential obstacles. 

This approach involves creating “if-then” plans that clearly outline when, where, and how you will act to achieve your goal. By specifying the conditions under which you will take action, you create these implementation intentions, which help automate behavior and increase the likelihood that you’ll follow through on your plans—even in the face of distractions or challenges.

This method has proven highly effective in achieving goals in various fields, from health and fitness to productivity and education.

Real-world examples:

Digital Products

• Fitness Apps (e.g., MyFitnessPal, Fitbit): These apps allow users to set specific goals like, “If it’s Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 7:00 AM, then I’ll go for a 30-minute run.” The apps send reminders and track progress, helping users stick to their workout plans.

• Task Management Apps (e.g., Todoist, Trello): Users can create specific tasks with deadlines and reminders, like “If it’s 9:00 AM on weekdays, then I’ll spend 10 minutes reviewing my to-do list.” These apps encourage users to check off and complete their tasks, reinforcing productive habits.

Physical Products:

• Meal Prep Containers: For people who want to eat healthier, using meal prep containers can support implementation intentions like “If it’s Sunday afternoon, then I’ll prepare and portion out my meals for the entire week.” This preparation helps ensure that healthier options are readily available.

• Reusable Water Bottles: To increase water intake, someone could use a reusable water bottle with time markers, setting an intention like “If it’s 8:00 AM, then I’ll fill my bottle and drink it by 10:00 AM.” The time markers serve as visual reminders to stay hydrated throughout the day.

b) Feedback 

This section is one of my favorites and by far one of the most important. It has taught me to think differently and to create great products, services, and applications.

In my opinion, this way of thinking shouldn’t be limited to behavioral interventions alone.

I use it by asking, for every product I work on—especially those meant for people—what kind of feedback it will provide and how that feedback will be communicated.

The best way to help people improve their performance is by giving them effective feedback. Well-designed systems clearly inform users when they are doing something right and when they are making mistakes.

Let’s look at a few examples:

• In my case study on Alza’s e-commerce, I demonstrated how, through design or UX/UI, we can significantly influence the customer experience by highlighting users’ errors in real time, showing exactly what mistakes they made:

• Fitness Apps (e.g., MyFitnessPal, Strava): These apps provide users with detailed feedback on their workouts, including metrics like distance, pace, calories burned, and progress over time. This feedback helps users stay motivated, identify areas for improvement, and track their fitness goals.

• Language Learning Apps (e.g., Duolingo, Babbel): These apps offer instant feedback on exercises and quizzes, correcting mistakes and providing explanations. This immediate feedback helps learners understand their errors, improve their language skills, and stay motivated to continue learning.

Let’s also consider some real-world examples:

• Cameras: When taking a picture, you first press the shutter button lightly to focus. Then, pressing harder triggers the actual capture, often accompanied by a slight click or a brief blackout in the viewfinder. One company tried to remove these features for smoother use but faced backlash from users, who complained and stopped buying their cameras.

• Wall Paint: A longstanding issue with white paint has been the difficulty in seeing where it’s already been applied, often leading to visible layers. One innovative company introduced a white paint that initially appeared slightly yellow when applied but faded to white after a few minutes. This paint became hugely popular.

• Induction Cooktops: Even after being turned off, these cooktops display an “H” to indicate that the surface is still hot.

• Wearable Fitness Trackers: Devices like the Apple Watch or Garmin Fitness Trackers offer real-time feedback on physical activity, heart rate, and sleep patterns.

A key type of feedback is the warning that “things have gone wrong” or, even more usefully, that “things are about to go wrong.”

• Computers warning of low battery

• Cars displaying warning lights

• Blood tests that reveal problems before they become serious—this is why regular check-ups are important!

However, as with everything, there’s a downside to feedback.

If you’re designing warning systems, avoid falling into the trap of “the boy who cried wolf.”

The Aesop’s fable tells the story of a boy who repeatedly cried “Wolf!” falsely, causing the villagers to stop responding to his calls. When a real wolf came, no one believed him, and the wolf attacked his flock.

One moral of the story is that lying leads to a loss of trust, but another lesson is relevant for us: you can’t give so many warning signals that people start ignoring them!

Here are some examples:

• Antivirus Software: Constant pop-up alerts about security threats or updates can lead users to ignore these warnings, potentially compromising the safety of their device.

• Cars: Modern vehicles may have various alerts, like persistent beeping when the seatbelt isn’t fastened or warnings about low tire pressure. If these alerts happen too often or without reason, drivers may start ignoring them.

• Smartphones: Continuous notifications from apps, social media, and emails can cause “notification blindness,” where users stop paying attention or responding to important alerts.

• Computer Programs: Applications or operating systems that constantly remind users about updates or trivial messages may lead to users ignoring all notifications, potentially missing critical updates.

• Healthcare Devices: Wearable health devices that constantly track and alert users about various metrics (e.g., heart rate, blood oxygen levels) may overwhelm users, causing them to ignore important warnings.

If you think carefully about this method or insight, you can create products that are far superior to the competition.

c) Psychology of Waiting 

The psychology of waiting is something we don’t often think about, despite its significant importance. After all, there’s almost always a situation where we have to wait for something.

What can you do to keep people satisfied with your services, even when they have to wait longer than expected?

Here are some examples from the digital world:

• Budget flight service Pelikán displays a progress graphic while searching for flights. This visual shows users what’s happening behind the scenes and how much effort is involved in finding the best deals.

• Loading screens (e.g., Google, YouTube): These platforms use progress indicators during loading times. For instance, YouTube displays a spinning wheel or progress bar, helping manage user expectations and reducing the anxiety of waiting.

• Food delivery apps (e.g., Uber Eats, DoorDash): These apps provide real-time updates on the status of your food delivery, including estimated delivery times and the current location of the driver. This transparency reduces uncertainty and keeps users informed and engaged.

• Revolut implemented a small but effective intervention by showing the steps happening during international money transfers. It’s a simple touch, but it had a profoundly positive impact on me.

• A new modern twist on this method was also used by OpenAI in its ChatGPT service. Instead of a loading bar, the text being generated gradually appears as if it’s being typed out. This subtle yet effective design is now being implemented in various text generation tools. 

Examples from the physical world:

• Streetpong at traffic lights: In some countries, pedestrian crossings have installed devices for playing pong while waiting at long traffic lights. People enjoy it, often smiling, making new connections, and some visitors come just to play.

• Airports: Many airports purposely place baggage claim areas far from gates to reduce the perceived wait time for luggage.

• Theme park queues (e.g., Disney World, Universal Studios): These parks use interactive elements, like videos and themed decor, to make waiting more enjoyable. They also provide estimated wait times to manage visitor expectations.

• Call centers and bank lines: Many call centers and banks inform customers of their position in line and the estimated waiting time. Some even offer a callback option, reducing the frustration of being on hold.

These examples show how understanding the psychology of waiting can lead to better user experiences by keeping users informed, engaged, and satisfied during delays.

Here are 8 key factors that make waiting feel longer:

• Unoccupied time feels longer than occupied time: If you have something to distract you, time passes faster. Some hotels even place mirrors in elevators because people like to look at themselves.

• People want to get started: That’s why restaurants often hand out menus while you wait for a table.

• Anxiety makes waiting feel longer: If you think you’ve chosen the slowest line at the grocery store, or you’re worried about missing a flight, waiting feels even longer.

• Uncertain waits feel longer than known waits: People are calmer when told, “You’ll see the doctor in 30 minutes” compared to “The doctor will see you shortly.”

• Unexplained waits are longer than explained waits: We’re more patient waiting for pizza during a storm than when it’s clear outside.

• Unfair waits feel longer than fair waits: People want fairness in waiting. For instance, there’s tension when waiting on a crowded subway platform, unsure who will get on the train first.

• The more valuable the service, the longer people are willing to wait: You’ll wait longer to see a doctor than a salesperson, and longer in line for an iPhone than for a toothbrush.

• Solo waiting feels longer than group waiting: When people chat with each other, they become less aware of the wait.

So, don’t make people wait. But if they must, make the wait as pleasant as possible.

d) Operational Transparency 

I really like using this method, and it’s one of my favorites.

Operational transparency involves openly sharing information about the processes and efforts behind a service or product, which can significantly increase user commitment and trust. 

By making behind-the-scenes activities visible, organizations can build credibility, reduce uncertainty, and boost user engagement. 

Transparency helps customers appreciate the work involved and fosters a sense of involvement and trust. This can motivate users to remain loyal to the service or product as informed and valued participants in the process.

Here are some examples from the everyday world:

Digital Products

• Uber was the first service to impress me with this technique when they introduced the visualization of drivers in the app. This feature shifted my preferences so drastically that I exclusively switched to Uber and never used a traditional taxi service again.

• Domino’s Pizza also jumped on this trend when they began showing the various stages of pizza preparation, including the current status of your order. This feature allows you to track the entire process, from dough preparation to delivery, which enhances satisfaction and reduces uncertainty while waiting.

• Amazon Order Tracking: Amazon provides detailed order tracking information, showing every step of the delivery process from the warehouse to the customer’s doorstep. This operational transparency reassures customers that their orders are safe and efficiently handled, keeping them engaged throughout the waiting period.

• Spotify Wrapped: Spotify offers an annual summary called “Spotify Wrapped,” providing users with an overview of their listening habits over the past year. By transparently sharing music consumption data, Spotify boosts user engagement and satisfaction, encouraging them to keep using the platform.

Physical Products

• Tesla frequently shares updates on its manufacturing processes, including videos and insights about their Gigafactories. This transparency builds trust with customers by showcasing the complexity and effort involved in producing their electric vehicles, fostering loyalty and enthusiasm among Tesla owners and fans.

• Open Kitchens in Modern Restaurants: Many modern restaurants have adopted the concept of open kitchens, where guests can watch chefs prepare their meals. This operational transparency enhances the dining experience by displaying the skill and care put into meal preparation, increasing customer appreciation and satisfaction.

This technique is quite similar to the previous one, psychology of waiting and the two often overlap in many cases.

That wraps up this section—let’s move on to the final one!

3) Create Social Expectations 

Not only do you know this method, but I’ve also mentioned it several times. We are social creatures, and the principles of social proof can be used in various ways, which we’ll break down now.

One example I heard during a workshop in Denmark is one I not only regularly apply in my life but also used during a serious accident in the U.S.

The name of this research is “Professor Moriarty Goes to the Beach,” and as you might have guessed, it was conducted by Professor Moriarty himself.

Moriarty conducted an experiment on a crowded beach. He laid out his belongings and stayed there for a while. The essence of the experiment was that Moriarty would leave his blanket for a while, at which point a “thief” (who was in on the experiment) would come and steal his things, then run away.

The experiment had two different setups:

1. Control Group: Moriarty didn’t say anything and just left.

2. Implementation Group: Moriarty asked people nearby to watch his things while he was gone.

The goal was to measure how many people from each group would run after the thief, and here are the results:

The goal was to measure how many people from each group would run after the thief, and here are the results:

1. In the control group, where Moriarty said nothing, only 20% of people chased the thief.

2. In the implementation group, where Moriarty specifically asked for help, 95% of people ran after the thief.

This simple request created a sense of social responsibility. Once people were directly asked, they felt accountable. Without that direct request, most people assumed that it wasn’t their problem.

There are many real-life examples of this phenomenon. In one well-known case, a woman was beaten to death on a street in broad daylight. Even though she screamed for help, no one called the authorities because everyone assumed someone else would take action. This is known as the bystander effect, which later became a significant subject of psychological study.

The same can happen in professional settings. If tasks and responsibilities are not clearly assigned to individuals, nothing gets done properly because everyone assumes someone else will handle it.

When I was studying in the U.S., I had a car accident. I was in a car with a close friend, and as we were turning onto the main street, another car ran a red light and crashed into us. Glass was everywhere, my friend was hysterically screaming, and people around us were just standing, staring, and taking photos. Only when I began shouting at specific people, telling them what to do and who to call, did everyone spring into action and help.

I still find it remarkable how such a simple act of assigning responsibility was so incredibly effective. It’s even more powerful when you assign tasks in front of others, as it creates social pressure and accountability.

This section got a bit lengthy, so let’s dive into more specific techniques you can use in practice.

a) Create Commitments 

Creating Commitments is a powerful strategy to enhance dedication and foster behavioral change. When people make commitments, especially in public or social contexts, they are much more likely to follow through. This stems from their desire to remain consistent with their promises and maintain a positive self-image.

Commitments act as a strong motivational force, helping us stay the course on our goals, even when challenges arise. Encouraging a sense of responsibility and accountability significantly increases the likelihood of achieving desired outcomes.

Here are some real-life examples:

Digital Products:

We’ve already touched on some digital products, but now we’ll look at them from a slightly different angle:

• Fitness Apps (e.g., Strava, Fitbit Challenges):

These apps encourage users to set fitness goals and participate in challenges with friends or community members. Publicly committing to these goals and sharing progress with others increases accountability and motivation to stick with workout routines.

Goal-Setting Apps (e.g., Habitica, StickK):

• Habitica turns goal-setting into a game where users commit to tasks and earn rewards for completing them.

• StickK allows users to create commitment contracts with financial stakes, where users pledge to donate money to a cause they dislike if they fail to meet their goals. These mechanisms increase commitment by adding social and financial accountability.

Physical Products:

• Reusable Shopping Bags:

Many grocery stores offer discounts or rewards to customers who bring their own reusable bags. By committing to this eco-friendly practice, customers are more likely to consistently remember and use their bags, reinforcing sustainable habits.

• Subscription Services (e.g., Meal Kits like HelloFresh, Blue Apron):

These services require users to commit to regular meal deliveries. This commitment motivates users to prepare and consume healthier, home-cooked meals, promoting better eating habits while also helping reduce food waste.

These examples demonstrate how creating commitments can effectively support goal achievement by fostering accountability and increasing motivation—whether in digital or physical contexts.

b) Leverage Social Norms 

Leveraging Social Norms is a powerful way to influence commitment and guide behavioral change. Social norms are unwritten rules that dictate acceptable behavior within a group or society. By highlighting these norms, individuals can be encouraged to adopt positive behaviors and feel a sense of belonging and approval.

When people see others engaging in a particular behavior, they are more likely to adopt it themselves. This can be especially effective in promoting healthy habits, environmentally friendly actions, or any behavior that benefits individuals and society. Using social norms can create a collective momentum that reinforces the desired behavior.

Here are some examples from the digital and physical worlds:

Digital Products:

• Social Media Platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram):

These platforms leverage social norms to encourage engagement by showing users what their friends and peers are liking, sharing, and commenting on. Seeing friends engage with certain content can motivate people to interact with similar content, increasing participation and adherence to community standards.

• Energy-Saving Apps (e.g., Opower):

Opower partners with utility companies to provide reports to customers comparing their energy usage to that of their neighbors. By showing users that their neighbors are using less energy, the app uses social norms to encourage people to reduce their own consumption, promoting more energy-efficient behavior.

Physical Products:

• Towel Reuse Programs in Hotels:

Many hotels place signs in bathrooms stating that most guests reuse their towels. These messages use social norms to encourage new guests to do the same, promoting environmentally friendly behavior and reducing water and detergent consumption.

• Recycling Bins in Public Spaces:

Placing recycling bins in prominent locations with clear signs about how many people in the area recycle taps into social norms. When individuals see that many others are recycling, they are more likely to participate in recycling efforts themselves.

By utilizing social norms, businesses and organizations can influence commitment and behavior change, motivating individuals to adopt positive behaviors that align with societal expectations and collective actions.

Conclusion on Commitment: Understanding How Motivation Works

As we wrap up this section on commitment, it’s essential to touch on motivation—the driving force behind commitment. While knowing how to foster commitment is crucial, often commitment is powered by the ability to motivate others or ourselves.

This brings us to an essential quote:

“If you would persuade, appeal to interest and not to reason.” — Ben Franklin.

There is a fantastic book titled “Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us” by Daniel H. Pink, which dives deep into the subject. From that book, I’ve gathered key insights that I believe are important to share here.

Pink divides motivation into three categories:

1. Motivation 1.0: This is basic survival motivation—our need to fulfill primal urges like hunger, safety, and reproduction. It was dominant in the earliest stages of human evolution.

2. Motivation 2.0: This type of motivation is based on rewards and punishments. For most of human history, society relied on extrinsic motivators to drive behavior—such as bonuses for high performance or penalties for poor performance. However, this carrot-and-stick model doesn’t always work for more complex tasks.

3. Motivation 3.0: This is built on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), which states that humans have an innate desire to be autonomous, self-directed, and connected to others. To truly unlock this motivation, you need to create environments that allow people to experience autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

The key elements of Motivation 3.0 are:

• Autonomy: The need to direct our own lives and have the freedom to make decisions.

• Mastery: The urge to get better at something that matters and to continually improve.

• Purpose: The need to feel that what we are doing is meaningful and contributes to something greater than ourselves.

Breaking down all of these areas in depth would require an entire book, so for those truly interested in understanding motivation, I highly recommend reading “Drive”. But these are the fundamental elements to keep in mind when trying to motivate yourself or others effectively.

If the way I approach things resonates — or if your product, idea, or strategy feels even slightly “off” — I might be able to help.
Let’s have a quick 20-minute call to find clarity together:

Book a Meeting

Final Thoughts

This concludes not only the section on commitment but the entire ABCD model we’ve explored in this article. By now, you should have a much better understanding of what influences human behavior, how to interpret it, and how to design interventions that resonate with people at a deep level.

And as promised, in the next article, I’d like to showcase an exceptional campaign that not only succeeded in influencing behavior but also brilliantly linked a campaign for a good cause with product execution. This connection truly contributed to changing behavior—a rare example where such success wasn’t just PR for a major company or a marketing budget spend, but a real case of impactful behavioral change.

Share

I hope this journey through behavior, decision-making, and motivation has provided valuable insights, leaving you better equipped to understand and influence human behavior in your projects and ventures.

- Peter

For those of you who want to explore the previous sections:

[1/6] Introduction to the ABCD Framework

[2/6] Attention

[3/6] Belief Formation

[4/6] Determination

For those who would like to support this effort, you can find the entire study here for a symbolic price. It also includes examples and exercises that you won’t find in the article.

Welcome to the fourth part of our series where we explore the ABCD Framework, either as a whole or in individual parts.

We’re already past the halfway point, but we’re not slowing down—not at all.

For those of you who want to explore the previous sections:

[1/6] Introduction to the ABCD Framework

[2/6] Attention

[3/6] Belief Formation

In the previous article, we explored the topic of Belief Formation. It was likely one of the shortest sections, primarily because a lot of resources and information on this subject have already been written and explained in detail online. That’s why I opted to include links instead. However, that won’t be the case with the other areas—quite the opposite, in fact. In these sections, I’ve added content that’s missing from the official model.

Just as a reminder, here’s the full model:

In this article, we will focus on the red section titled Choice.

Let’s dive in.

For those who would like to support this effort, you can find the entire study here for a symbolic price. It also includes examples and exercises that you won’t find in the article.

Area: Choice - Help People To Decide

The Choice area is particularly tricky because problems that appear to be matters of choice or decision-making often aren’t fully under our control. Let’s quickly summarize the aspects we’ll go over together:

• Social motives and meanings

• Sensitivity to framing

• Adherence to the status quo

• Uncertainty, disappointment, and regret

Our decisions are not entirely our own.

People often argue, “he chose to pick up the phone while driving, eat unhealthily, ignore my health app, or even join a cult and commit suicide.” But that’s only partly true. We act impulsively, influenced by stimuli or social norms.

For example, when the phone rings, we often grab it subconsciously, unaware of all the risks, because dopamine hijacks our brains. We respond automatically, without realizing it.

Choices are influenced by contextual signals, the arrangement and framing of options, as well as preferences and stimuli. Many factors affect how we decide, including social motives, sensitivity to the framing of choices, the difficulty of changing the status quo, doubts, and regret.

How can we address this area and influence decisions in a way that can help change behavior?

Here’s a summary of methods we’ll explore to influence decisions and guide behavior change:

1. Make It Attractive 

   1. Understand Incentives 

   2. Consider Motives & Perspectives 

   3. Trigger Emotions 

2. Frame Prospects 

   1. Arrange Choices 

      1. Anchoring 

      2. Contrast

      3. Golden middle choice 

   2. Framing Prospects 

3. Make It Social 

   1. Connect With Social Identities 

   2. Create a Sense Of Community 

1) Make It Attractive 

Let’s start with the most obvious: Making a choice attractive is a key strategy in influencing behavior and guiding decisions. By increasing the appeal of an option, you can motivate individuals to prefer it over other alternatives.

This can be achieved in various ways, such as visual appeal, rewards, and positive associations. When an option is designed to be visually appealing, offers immediate benefits, or is associated with desirable outcomes, it becomes more attractive. Effective use of aesthetics, incentives, and emotional triggers can significantly sway decisions, making the attractive option the preferred choice.

A prime example is Apple’s design philosophy, which focuses on creating visually stunning and user-friendly products. The sleek design of iPhones, iPads, and MacBooks, combined with an intuitive interface, makes these products highly appealing to consumers.

Similarly, Tesla vehicles are designed with futuristic aesthetics and advanced features like autopilot and electric propulsion. The blend of cutting-edge technology and sleek design makes Tesla cars highly attractive to environmentally conscious and tech-savvy consumers.

Now, let’s delve deeper into all these methods—both the well-known and the lesser-known ones—in greater detail.

a) Understand Incentives 

From the dawn of history, humans have always been driven by two primary forces: seeking pleasure or avoiding pain. This fundamental truth has shaped behavior throughout evolution, and it’s still the core of how we make decisions today. As you go through behaviors, at their root, it’s always about pleasure or pain.

So, what do people really want? Only two things: to feel good or to eliminate pain. Nothing more. It’s a simple concept but not an easy task to address.

This drive has helped us survive since the time of cavemen. But here’s a question for you—can you guess which is stronger? Pain—of course. Pain is more powerful than pleasure.

If you want to use this principle in daily life, simply pause and ask yourself questions like:

• What do they gain from this?

• How will they benefit?

• What are they definitely trying to avoid?

A simple marketing example:

Imagine two statements on a pair of running shoes:

1. The technology in our shoes helps you run longer.

2. The technology in our shoes prevents long-term ankle damage, so you can run longer.

Which would you be more likely to buy, especially if you’re not a professional runner? Probably the second one, because it addresses pain avoidance (avoiding injury) more than the first one, which focuses on pleasure.

Going deeper: Four key questions for understanding incentives

One way to start thinking about incentives is by asking four specific questions about a decision:

1. Who uses it?

2. Who chooses it?

3. Who pays for it?

4. Who benefits from it?

Let’s go through an exercise. Imagine a family—Fero and Silvia, both aged between 40-50, with two high school-aged kids, Martin and Veronika. These are some of the decisions they face:

Now, answer the four questions for each of these purchases or decisions:

Now, answer the four questions for each of these purchases or decisions:

1. Who uses it?

2. Who chooses it?

3. Who pays for it?

4. Who benefits from it?

How did you answer? If you’re like most people, you probably had different individuals for each question.

Let’s take the car as an example:

• Who uses it? Mostly the mom, since she drives the kids around.

• Who chooses it? Dad, with input from their son.

• Who pays for it? Dad.

• Who benefits from it? The whole family.

Why is this important?

It’s not enough to know the incentive itself—you also need to understand who the incentive is targeted at.

Paradoxically, as we’ve seen, many decisions that shape our lives are often made by someone else. This is critical to remember when you’re influencing behavior. Never forget that.

In my work, this framework helps me navigate conversations with management—whether with current or potential clients. You need to know who will use the product, who is responsible for it, who makes the key decisions, and which department holds the budget. Especially for big firms.

Based on this understanding, we tailor conversations—and of course, the incentives.

Remember, if you want to change people’s decisions, identify and change the incentives.

And if incentives alone aren’t enough, then there’s something even stronger: people’s motives and perspectives. We’ll dive into that next.

b) Consider Motives & Perspectives 

Even though the title of my blog wasn’t originally based on this method, the name “Why and Actually How” largely addresses it.

Before we dive into motives, let’s first discuss the importance of perspectives, best explained by the phenomenon of selective perception.

Selective perception is a form of bias that causes people to interpret messages and actions according to their own frame of reference. It leads individuals to overlook or forget information that contradicts their beliefs or expectations. In other words, people see in media what they want to see and ignore opposing views.

For example, if you’re a smoker and a huge football fan, you’ll likely ignore negative ads about smoking because you already smoke and believe it’s okay. But if an ad about football appears, you’re more likely to notice it because you have a positive view of football. This demonstrates how we perceive the world through our subconscious filters, selectively absorbing what aligns with our interests.

This is where sayings like “seeing the world through pink glasses” come from. It’s a broad term describing how people tend to “see things” based on their unique reference points. It also explains how we categorize and interpret sensory information in a way that favors one interpretation over another. In other words, selective perception is a form of bias because we interpret information in line with our existing values and beliefs.

Psychologists believe this process happens automatically.

Anytime someone makes a decision, two questions instantly come to mind:

• Why are they doing it? (Motives)

• What frame of reference are they coming from? (Perspective/Perception)

So, always try to understand the perspective of the person.

The first question—“Why are they doing it?”—basically addresses their motives. From behavioral economics, we know a well-known tendency that directly relates to this topic, known as the Reason-Respecting Tendency.

Before we act, we want to know why. That’s why, when delegating tasks to others, you should always share why the task is important.

You can get people to act in their best interest if you give them a reason, even if the reason is sometimes trivial.

Simply put, you can increase agreement with a request, favor, or command if you provide a reason.

Simon Sinek, in his book and a famous TED Talk, codified what others do wrong and how the best win by starting with Why—which sits right at the center of his famous Golden Circle.

This reinforces the idea that understanding human motives is not just important but crucial. Even in criminal cases, judges seek motives behind the crime and use this “subjective” factor to determine the severity of the punishment.

For instance:

Imagine you’ve killed someone, and you’re in front of a judge. The judge asks, “Why did you do it? What was your motive?” Here are two different responses:

1. “The man tried to rape me, so I grabbed the nearest object and hit him. He died.”

2. “Because there’s nothing more beautiful than the sound of a dying person’s scream.”

Who do you think will receive a harsher punishment?

I know it’s an extreme example, but it illustrates how important motives are.

So, if you’re trying to change a decision, ask yourself this simple question repeatedly:

• Why would people do it?

• Why should they buy, use, or offer it?

You’d be surprised how many people give surface-level answers like, “because it’s healthy, useful, cheaper, or better than the competition.”

These are not sufficient reasons. Dig deeper to understand their true motives and address them directly.

Wanting to be healthy is a good motive, but wanting to be healthy enough to travel to places you’ve always wanted to visit or to play with your future children is a much stronger one.

Once you understand the motives, your next task should be to trigger emotions. 

c) Trigger Emotions 

Emotions play a crucial role in decision-making, often influencing choices even more than logical reasoning. By triggering specific emotions, you can effectively steer behavior and decisions.

For instance:

• Positive emotions like joy and hope can encourage people to take actions that align with these feelings, such as trying new things or embracing changes.

• Negative emotions like fear or guilt can push individuals to make decisions aimed at avoiding threats or correcting mistakes.

There are various ways to trigger emotions, including storytelling, imagery, or evocative language. Using emotional triggers effectively requires a deep understanding of the experiences and cultural background of your target audience. Shaping your messages to touch on emotional chords that resonate with your audience can profoundly influence their decision-making process.

Remember, the most effective emotional triggers are those that feel authentic and create a sense of connection and relevance.

A Fun Example:

In a fascinating experiment published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, researchers tested whether the music playing in a wine shop would influence the type of wine customers bought. The assumptions were:

1. When French music played, customers would be more inclined to purchase French wine.

2. When German music played, customers would be more inclined to buy German wine.

And this was the result:

Sure enough, the results supported this assumption: the music significantly affected wine choices! This experiment shows how subtle emotional triggers like background music can shape purchasing behavior. 

It’s similar to why supermarkets place commonly bought items like alcohol or bread at the far end of the store. The idea is that customers walk through the entire store, increasing the chance that something else will catch their eye and prompt them to buy.

Now, let’s take a look at emotional influence from another angle—through the lens of my favorite cognitive biases and tendencies. 

i) Indentifiable Victim Efect

This phenomenon, known as the Identifiable Victim Effect, occurs when individuals are more emotionally impacted by the problems and struggles of a single, identifiable person than by a large, anonymous group facing the same or even worse problems. It’s a powerful cognitive bias frequently used in advertising, marketing, sales, and any form of communication to evoke emotional responses.

This bias highlights how people tend to feel more connected and emotionally moved by a personal story rather than overwhelming numbers or data.

Let’s look at real-life examples to demonstrate how this works and why it’s so effective:

Which image stirs more emotion?

Imagine being presented with two images:

1. A large crowd of people suffering from hunger.

2. A close-up image of a malnourished child with a direct appeal for help.

or

Most people will feel more emotionally affected by the second image, where the personal story is visually and emotionally more relatable.

Another example:

or

Which one is more likely to evoke a stronger emotional response? 

Why does this happen?

This bias is deeply rooted in our psychology. We naturally relate to individual stories because they make the issue tangible and personal. When the human mind is faced with statistics or large groups, it struggles to process the emotional depth of the situation, and people feel disconnected.

This is why yearly award-winning photographs often feature individuals or small groups that tell a powerful story through a single image. These images resonate deeply because they reflect personal experiences, which we instinctively empathize with.

How can this be used in the real world?

Here are a couple of ways organizations utilize the Identifiable Victim Effect:

1. GoFundMe: Crowdfunding campaigns on platforms like GoFundMe often highlight individual stories with specific needs. Medical campaigns, for example, frequently showcase a single patient’s journey, including photos and personal updates. This creates an emotional connection that motivates donors.

2. World Wildlife Fund (WWF): WWF’s adoption program allows donors to “adopt” a specific animal, like a panda or tiger. Donors receive photos and details about their adopted animal, making the donation feel personal and emotionally significant.

Key Takeaway:

To effectively influence behavior and evoke emotions, focus on personalizing your message. Highlight individual stories or experiences to tap into the power of human empathy. Whether you’re raising funds, marketing a product, or advocating for a cause, the more relatable and human the story, the stronger the emotional impact.

2) Frame Prospects 

Framing Prospects is a powerful tool, influencing how people perceive life, and it’s something I use in everything I do. 

There’s no such thing as an “objective” reality—it’s always about how you choose to frame or view things from a certain perspective.

To make this concept clearer, let’s look at a simple example. When I analyze a product, service, or business to identify and manage risks, I also focus on how it’s presented. Depending on the size of the company, the same service can be framed differently:

• Small company? “You’ll receive top-notch personal service tailored to your needs.”

• Medium-sized company? “We can efficiently cover most of your needs with speed.”

• Large company? “We offer tried-and-tested methods refined over years with hundreds of clients.”

It’s the same product or service, but the framing of it shifts depending on the target. That’s the power of framing—it’s about leveraging your strengths effectively.

Now, let’s dive into some techniques you can use for better framing:

a) Arrange Choices (Usporiadajte Výbery)

The way you arrange options or present choices is key. Some people feel uneasy about using these techniques, thinking they don’t want to influence choices or manipulate people.

However, not doing anything is also a choice. Everything we do influences or guides a decision. Even by not presenting options, you’re nudging people not to make a choice or purchase.

Here are three techniques from the behavioral space that are incredibly effective in framing choices:

1. Anchoring

Definition: This involves giving people a reference point (anchor) to base their decisions around. It’s why sale prices always show the original, higher price next to the discounted one.

Example: When people see a pair of shoes marked down from $200 to $120, they’ll feel like they’re getting a bargain, even if the shoes’ real value is closer to $120.

2. Contrast

Definition: Highlighting differences between options can make one option seem more appealing in comparison.

Example: A luxury car dealership may show a basic model alongside a fully loaded one to make the upgraded model seem like a better deal, even though it’s more expensive. The basic model is there to provide contrast and push people toward the pricier option.

3. The Golden Middle (Compromise Effect)

Definition: When given three options—low, medium, and high—people tend to go for the middle one, as it feels like the “safe” choice.

Example: If you’re selling software subscriptions, offering a basic plan at $20, a premium plan at $50, and an elite plan at $100, most users will gravitate toward the premium plan, viewing it as the “safe middle ground.”

4. Ladders (Bonus)

Definition: This technique involves providing a sequence of progressively higher-value options that guide customers toward upgrading.

Example: Start with a basic service, but show users how they can improve their experience by adding features or moving up to a more comprehensive package—essentially guiding them up a ladder of value.

i) Achoring

People typically rely on the first pieces of information they receive—regardless of how reliable those pieces of information are—when making decisions. The first bit of information has a huge impact on our brain.

For example, if you’re asking someone to guess how tall something is, and you suggest whether it’s higher or lower than 1,200 meters, you’ll influence their judgment more than if you let them guess without any context.

You can try this for yourself. Researchers conducted a simple experiment where they asked people two questions: “How happy are you these days?” and “How many dates have you been on in the past month?” For one group, they first asked how happy they were, and for the other group, they asked how many dates they had been on first.

In the group where they asked about the dates first, the correlation between happiness and the number of dates was as psychologically strong as it could get.

If you want to see a masterclass in anchoring in real life, check out a video where Steve Jobs presents the pricing for Apple products.

Having high-priced main dishes on a menu increases a restaurant’s revenue—even if no one orders them. Why? Because even though people usually don’t buy the most expensive dish on the menu, they tend to order the second most expensive one. By having a pricey option available, the restaurant can entice customers to order the second-highest-priced dish (which might be cleverly designed to have a higher profit margin).

The anchoring effect isn’t just a laboratory curiosity; it can be just as powerful in the real world. In an experiment conducted several years ago, real estate agents were asked to assess the value of a house that was actually on the market. They visited the house and studied a comprehensive brochure of information, which included an initial price. Half of the agents saw an initial price significantly higher than the listed price; the other half saw an initial price significantly lower. Each agent then gave their opinion on the reasonable purchase price of the house and the lowest price at which they would be willing to sell the house if they owned it. Afterward, the agents were asked what factors influenced their judgment. Remarkably, the initial price was not one of the factors they mentioned; the agents were proud of their ability to ignore it. They insisted that the initial price had no influence on their answers, but they were wrong: the anchoring effect was 41%. In fact, the professionals were almost as susceptible to anchoring effects as business school students with no real estate experience, whose anchoring index was 48%. The only difference between the two groups was that the students admitted to being influenced by the anchor, while the professionals denied it.

Now, let’s move on to the next point.

ii) Contrast

People tend to make decisions based on comparisons rather than evaluating each situation on its own. 

Take today’s world, for example. Most people in first-world countries live better than any king from hundreds of years ago, in terms of the technology they own and the comforts they enjoy at home. But are we happier? Not really, because we evaluate things relative to other things rather than measuring them in absolute terms.

You could argue that this is how the entire world operates—especially markets and economies. Value is derived by comparing something to something else or by creating categories. Both of these methods can be quite dangerous and misleading.

This is why it’s so easy for someone to add $200 to a $5,000 catering bill for soup, while that same person will clip coupons to save 25 cents on a can of condensed soup that costs $1.

Similarly, it’s easy for us to justify spending $3,000 on leather seat upgrades when buying a new $25,000 car, but it’s much harder to spend the same amount on a leather couch (even though we know we spend more time on the couch at home than in the car).

Bentley figured this out and stopped going to normal car shows, because then the car is too expensive, and started showing at yacht or private plane shows. Because when you looking at multi-million dollar planes or yachts, 300k car looks like a bargain now. 

The same principle applies to how we perceive value. We don’t measure the value of things in a vacuum. Instead, we often notice value by comparing it to something else. Retailers take advantage of this by setting an artificially high price for their product and then offering a deep discount.

Want to make a house seem large? Compare it to a smaller house next door.

Here’s a fun tip if you want to annoy someone when they ask you to estimate anything: say a wildly exaggerated number in a serious voice. This hilarious video at the start illustrates this idea perfectly.

iii) Golden Middle Choice (Compromise effect)

I talked about these choices, including the “golden middle choice” concept, and showed a real-life example in a case study from one of the most successful e-commerce companies.

The compromise effect, also known as the tendency towards the middle option, refers to the consumer’s preference for the middle choice among a set of options. This happens because the middle choice is often perceived as the safe, moderate option that avoids the extremes of the cheapest or most expensive alternatives. By strategically positioning products or services, businesses can influence consumer decisions and boost sales.

Understanding the compromise effect can help in designing product offerings that cater to this natural tendency, leading customers to make more balanced decisions.

Digital Products:

1. Subscription plans for streaming services (e.g., Netflix): Netflix offers several subscription tiers (Basic, Standard, Premium). The Standard plan, often positioned as the middle option, is the most popular because it strikes a balance between features and price, appealing to users who want more than the basic service but find the premium option too expensive.

2. Software subscription models (e.g., Adobe Creative Cloud): Adobe Creative Cloud offers multiple pricing tiers for its software. The middle option, which usually includes the most essential tools, is often the most popular because it effectively balances cost and functionality.

Physical Products:

1. Coffee sizes (e.g., Starbucks): Starbucks offers coffee in three sizes (Tall, Grande, Venti). The Grande size, being the middle option, is often the most selected by customers because it is perceived as the most reasonable amount—not too small, not overly large.

2. Car models (e.g., Toyota): Car manufacturers like Toyota offer their vehicles in several trim levels (Base, Mid-range, Premium). The mid-range trim, which typically includes basic features at a reasonable price, is usually the best-seller because it balances affordability and appeal.

Sometimes, like with the XXXL popcorn at movie theaters or Venti or Trenta sizes at Starbucks, the largest option is there merely to push customers toward buying the next largest option (in this case, Grande). It’s often obvious when the largest version is so enormous that almost no one would actually order it.

iii) Ladders

The Power of Ladders: Guiding Customers to Upgrade

The ladder technique is a powerful strategy used in sales, marketing, and product design to guide customers through a series of progressively higher-value options, ultimately encouraging them to upgrade.

Imagine it like climbing a ladder—each rung offers more benefits, features, or value, prompting customers to see the next step as a natural progression. By showing incremental improvements, you give customers the sense that upgrading is the right choice for maximizing their experience.

Here’s how it works:

1. Start with a Base Option

At the bottom rung, you offer a basic product or service. It’s affordable and provides the essential features a customer needs. However, it subtly hints that more value is available if they go higher.

2. Introduce the Upgrade

As customers experience your base option, present the next step up the ladder—a premium version with additional features or better functionality. Because they’re already invested in the first level, the perceived value of upgrading becomes more attractive.

3. Highlight Benefits

Make it clear what customers gain by moving up. More convenience, greater efficiency, or added perks? Show them how each step adds significant value, making the higher tier seem like the smarter investment.

4. Guide them to the Top

At the top, your elite offering awaits. This is the version for those who want the full package and are willing to pay for it. You’ve guided them through each step of the journey, making it easy for them to see why upgrading to the best option is a natural conclusion.

Example in Action:

A SaaS company might offer three pricing tiers:

• Basic Plan ($20/month): Core features.

• Premium Plan ($50/month): Core features + analytics and integrations.

• Elite Plan ($100/month): Everything in Premium + dedicated support and custom features.

The basic plan hooks users in, but the additional benefits of the premium and elite plans entice them to move up the ladder for greater value.

Why It Works:

The ladder approach taps into human psychology, making upgrades feel like a logical progression rather than a splurge. Customers are already invested, so moving to the next level feels like they’re enhancing their initial choice.

By structuring your offerings as a ladder, you maximize customer engagement and increase revenue through strategic upselling—while keeping the customer feeling satisfied and in control.

How Apple Organizes Phone Choices

Apple creates what can be called “ladders,” where you start with a basic product that is perfectly sufficient for over 90% of people. It’s probably the one you should choose. But if you look just a little further, you’ll find a model that’s slightly shinier and a bit more expensive.

For instance, let’s look at the iPad lineup. You have the base model for $330, which is great for most users. But then there’s a $450 model that has a sleeker design, USB-C, a better display, and is slightly larger, making you think, “I could get that one instead.”

However, this model only comes with 64GB of storage, so you might consider the version with more storage, which costs $599. But wait, the iPad Air is also $599. So, naturally, you think, “Maybe I should just get the iPad Air,” but now the iPad Air also comes with limited storage, and you can see where this is heading.

Essentially, Apple gently guides you up the ladder, from one product to the next, encouraging you to keep upgrading.

This strategy is how I ended up buying the most expensive Samsung at the time, the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra.

b) Framing Prospects 

The framing effect is a type of cognitive bias where people respond differently to the same choice depending on how it is presented—either as a loss or a gain. 

When presented with a positive frame, people tend to avoid risks, but when presented with a negative frame, they are more likely to take risks. The definitions of gain and loss come from how outcomes are described (e.g., number of lives saved or lost, patients treated or untreated, lives saved or lost during accidents, etc.).

It’s not about what you say, but how you say it.

Who is right? Both

For example, in a study by Levin and Gaeth (1988), participants enjoyed beef more when it was described as “75% lean” compared to “25% fat.”

Similarly, when people were shown two kinds of milk—one labeled “99% fat-free” and the other “1% fat”—they chose the first one as healthier. Even when presented with milk that was “97% fat-free” and “1% fat,” most still chose the first option, despite it having more fat. This illustrates how subtle wording can impact perception, a common form of framing.

In marketing and everyday communication, the framing effect is everywhere. Declining stock prices are called “market corrections,” and overpaying for a company is labeled as “goodwill.” A “problem” in business becomes a “challenge,” and a person getting fired is “re-evaluating their career” or “spending more time with family.”

One classic example involves the way risk is communicated: imagine reading that a “vaccine that protects children from a deadly disease carries a 0.001% risk of permanent disability.” That seems small, right? Now consider this: “1 in 100,000 vaccinated children will be permanently disabled.” The second statement makes the risk feel more real, evoking an image of that one child who might be affected, while the 999,999 children who are safely vaccinated fade into the background.

So, what can you do? When framing a message, write down all the different ways you can present the same information from various perspectives. Are there alternate ways you can propose, suggest, or implement an intervention?

By exploring different frames, you can influence how people interpret your message, whether in business, marketing, or everyday conversations.

3) Make It Social 

Leveraging Peer Influence in the Digital World

The concept of making choices social isn’t new, but it’s more relevant than ever in today’s connected world. 

As social creatures, our behaviors and decisions are often influenced by what others around us are doing. Incorporating social behavior in digital environments is a powerful way to guide actions and decisions. I’ve detailed this concept in my case study analyzing Amazon, and here’s a look at how this can be applied more broadly.

Why Make Choices Social?

By leveraging social proof and peer dynamics, you can make certain behaviors more attractive. When people see their peers engaging in specific activities, they are more likely to follow suit. This is due to a natural desire to fit in and seek social validation.

How can this be implemented in the digital world? By integrating social elements into the decision-making process, such as showcasing what others are doing or encouraging social sharing, organizations can nudge users toward desired behaviors. This approach taps into our human need for connection and recognition, making it more likely that people will adopt new behaviors.

Here are a couple of examples:

• Strava

Strava, the fitness app, has mastered the use of social influence by allowing users to share their workouts, follow friends, and participate in challenges. By seeing their friends’ activities and achievements, users are more motivated to stay active and reach their fitness goals.

• Coca-Cola’s “Share a Coke” Campaign

Coca-Cola’s iconic campaign personalized bottles with people’s names, encouraging customers to find bottles with their friends’ names and share pictures on social media. This campaign brilliantly tapped into social connections to boost sales and engagement, making the product more personal and shareable.

Source: https://thebrandhopper.com/2023/06/09/branding-case-study-success-of-share-a-coke-campaign/ 

Incorporating social proof into your product or marketing strategy can significantly increase engagement by aligning with one of the strongest human motivators—the desire to connect with others.

a) Connect With Social Identities

Linking choices to social identities is a highly effective strategy for influencing decisions and behaviors. People often make decisions that align with the communities they identify with, whether those are cultural, social, or professional groups. By understanding and appealing to these social identities, you can create messaging and interventions that deeply resonate with your target audience.

For example, when promoting a new product, framing it in a way that emphasizes how it aligns with the values and norms of a specific community can significantly increase its appeal. 

This approach leverages the innate human desire to belong and be accepted, making it more likely that individuals will adopt behaviors that reflect their social identity. Effective use of this strategy requires empathy and thorough research into your target group to ensure that your messaging feels authentic and relevant.

A well-known case study that exemplifies this approach is the “Don’t Mess with Texas” campaign, a public service advertising effort that successfully tackled the state’s littering problem. Let’s dive into the key elements of this campaign:

Overview of the “Don’t Mess with Texas” Campaign

Background:

• In the mid-1980s, Texas was facing a serious littering problem, costing the state around $20 million annually to clean up roadside trash. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) needed a highly effective strategy to curb littering.

The Campaign:

• Slogan: The now-iconic slogan, “Don’t Mess with Texas,” was created by the advertising agency GSD&M in 1985. It aimed to tap into Texas pride with a strong, almost rebellious message against littering.

• Target Audience: The primary target group was young men aged 16-34, who were identified as the most frequent litterers. The slogan was crafted to resonate with this group by appealing to their sense of state pride and masculinity.

• Execution: The campaign included a series of TV commercials, radio spots, and print ads featuring famous Texans, such as musicians Willie Nelson and actors like Chuck Norris. These ads portrayed littering as un-Texan and emphasized personal responsibility for keeping Texas clean.

• Cultural Impact: The slogan quickly became a cultural phenomenon, embraced by Texans and widely recognized. It appeared on bumper stickers, t-shirts, and other promotional items, helping to further spread the message.

Results: The campaign was highly successful:

• Within the first few years, roadside littering dropped by about 72%.

• The slogan became synonymous with Texas pride and environmental responsibility.

• The campaign won numerous awards and is often cited as one of the most successful anti-littering campaigns in history.

Key Takeaways

• Cultural Resonance: The success of the campaign highlights the importance of understanding and leveraging local culture and values in public service messaging.

• Clear and Memorable Messaging: The slogan was simple, catchy, and easy to remember, which made it extremely effective.

• Influential Figures: Featuring respected public figures helped legitimize the message and influence behavior.

• Targeted Approach: Identifying and specifically addressing the primary demographic of litterers made the campaign more focused and impactful.

This case study illustrates how strategic messaging, rooted in cultural understanding, can effectively change public behavior and tackle societal issues.

b) Create a Sense Of Community 

When individuals feel like they are part of a community, they are more willing to engage in activities that benefit the group and align with its norms and values. 

This sense of belonging fosters loyalty, collaboration, and a willingness to support the community’s initiatives. To cultivate a sense of community, encourage interaction and connection among members through events, forums, or shared activities. 

Emphasize common goals and celebrate collective achievements to strengthen mutual bonds. By building a strong community, you create an environment where positive behaviors are encouraged and sustained, leading to more cohesive and motivated groups.

Facebook communities have been around for years and are one of the best ways to drive sales for businesses that manage to build and maintain these groups. Nowhere will you find more loyal customers. Various community-driven approaches have become popular in recent years. One example is crowdfunding platforms like Crowdberry or community-driven investment platforms for charitable projects like Donio.

I even wrote a case study on this type of investment, where I reflected on why I believe the startup Take Up failed to raise any money despite being a social app.

Another exciting project that has caught my interest is Skool, a platform that gained attention after a major investment from one of my favorite YouTubers and entrepreneurs, Alex Hormozi, who now promotes it everywhere.

Skool is an educational platform that combines online courses, community discussions, and interactions to enhance learning experiences. The platform focuses on creating an engaged and supportive community where participants can motivate each other, share their knowledge, and grow together. It’s designed to facilitate learning and development across various areas, from professional skills to personal growth.

Communities centered around small, shared interests are one of the strongest assets in business and a fantastic way to start.

If the way I approach things resonates — or if your product, idea, or strategy feels even slightly “off” — I might be able to help.
Let’s have a quick 20-minute call to find clarity together:

Book a Meeting

Final Words

We’ve reached the end of the section on decision-making. I hope you now understand why your decisions aren’t truly your own.

In the next article, we’ll move on to the next topic, Determination, which includes some of my favorite (and highly underrated) methods for influencing human behavior, motivation, and determination.

Share

See you in the next article.

- Peter

For those of you who want to explore the previous sections: