Loss aversions are truly rooted in a customer’s subjective value rather than any sort of objective value, meaning that a buyer is going to consider a product’s value in relation to similar services/functionalities they can already execute with what they have and habits they are accustomed to. Something that’s assumably innovative may not actually align with consumer needs/expectations. The core example brought up in this case was Webvan. While the product’s services eliminated the need for physical in-person shopping trips for a consumer, it took away that tangible experience that many would prefer, so that they can cherry-pick the best cuts of meat or the perfectly ripe avocado. The “loss” in this scenario outweighed the benefits, diluting adoption.
The crux of a good strategy for PMs to facilitate here to ensure adoption lies in the principles of familiarity retention, meaning that a new feature should not necessarily take away what’s already intuitive and second nature across human behavior. This strategy is exemplified by Google’s success, where a search algorithm was significantly revamped without disrupting the familiar search UI users were already accustomed to. To expect adoption on a new feature means that the transition between what’s accustomed to and what’s new should be seamless. No extra layers of complexities and learning curves would heighten the chance of percieved objective improvements over subjective losses.
