Why Excitement Doesn’t Equal Habit: The Missing Link Between AI Discovery and Customer Loyalty

I was reading a piece from Adaline Labs about growth and retention in an AI-first world, and they wrote: “Excitement doesn’t equal habit.”

I must have read it three times.

Last week, I wrote about the three-layer framework for AI-era product design: machine-readable identity, human-discoverable story, tactile signature. That framework explains what you need to build. But the Adaline piece finally gave me language for why habits actually form.

And the answer isn’t what I expected.

Key Takeaways

The Gap Between “Wow” and “Again”

We’ve all experienced this as consumers. You discover a new product—maybe an AI agent recommended it, maybe a friend texted you about it. You try it. You’re impressed.

And then… nothing.

You don’t order again. You don’t think about it. The initial excitement fades, and you go back to whatever you were using before.

Here’s what Adaline nails: retention depends on how often users naturally need your product, not on how brilliant it is.

Ooh, Harsh reality sinking in for a product manager.

Read that again.

It’s not about building something amazing. It’s about building something that fits into the rhythms people already have.

My initial reaction to this was defensive. But Trevean Spice IS amazing. The sourcing, the freshness, the NFC experience—it’s genuinely better.

Then I realized I was thinking like a product person, not like a habit-forming designer.

Being better is necessary. It’s not sufficient.

The Three Conditions for Habit Formation

Adaline’s framework identifies three things that actually create lasting user habits:

  1. Natural usage frequency. Your product has to show up when people are already doing something. Not when you want them to do something.
  2. Shared utility. Products grow when they solve problems for groups, not just individuals. The social layer creates accountability and reinforcement.
  3. Alignment with existing workflows. Forcing new behaviors backfires. The product has to slide into what people already do.

When I mapped these against how I’ve been building Trevean Spice, something clicked.

Why Spices Have a Built-In Advantage (That Most Companies Blow)

Spices have natural usage frequency baked in—literally. People cook. Multiple times a week. The behavior already exists.

But here’s where most spice companies completely miss the opportunity.

They optimize for purchase frequency instead of usage frequency.

Big jars. Bulk pricing. “Stock up and save!”

Wrong move.

If someone buys a 16-ounce jar of cumin, they won’t be back for eight months. That’s eight months of silence. Eight months for the habit to atrophy. Eight months for them to forget how they felt when they first opened that lid.

I’m deliberately keeping Trevean Spice portions smaller. Not because I want to nickel-and-dime customers—but because I want them to run out while the sensory memory is still fresh.

Every business instinct screams “maximize transaction size.” Every spreadsheet model looks better with bigger orders. I had to fight the urge to actively offer bulk discounts.

But the Adaline insight flipped my thinking. The goal isn’t to maximize what they buy today. The goal is to make sure they’re still buying in two years.

Higher usage-to-repurchase ratio. Shorter feedback loops. Stronger habit formation.

Why Solving Shared Problems Creates Stickier Products

Here’s the second Adaline insight that changed my thinking: AI products succeed by being useful to groups, not by being brilliant on their own.

When I first read this, I thought it only applied to SaaS tools and collaboration software. Team products. Network effects.

Then I thought about cooking.

Early in my discovery phase for Trevean Spice, I built the strategy around three pillars: technology for freshness discovery, farmer origin stories, and bringing back the ancient traditions of spices. My good friend Stephanie Dietrich—a brilliant marketer—saw right through this. “Dan, you’re describing features,” she said. “What problem are you solving for the table, not just the cook?”

She was right. She told me cooking is inherently social. You make dinner for your partner or family. You host friends. You teach your kids. The spice doesn’t just solve your problem—it solves the table’s problem.

This is where the NFC content and recipe cards become strategic rather than nice-to-haves.

When someone taps the lid and watches a 30-second video of the farmer who grew their coriander, they don’t just absorb that story silently. They turn to whoever’s sitting at the table and say, “Did you know this comes from a single family in Kashmir?”

That’s not content consumption. That’s a conversation starter.

And conversation is how individual habits become shared rituals.

I wrote about this in my Infinity Loop piece—our “time-to-advocacy” is 72 hours. Within three days, the average customer has recommended us to at least one other person. But I was thinking about advocacy as a growth mechanism.

The Adaline frame is different. Shared utility isn’t just about acquisition. It’s about habit reinforcement. When you cook with something that gives you a story to tell, the act of cooking becomes more meaningful. The spice becomes associated with connection, not just flavor.

That association is what turns a product into a habit.

Why Forcing Engagement Backfires

The hardest part of designing for habits isn’t the product. It’s resisting the urge to force the habit.

My early plans for the NFC experience included a lot of engagement features—usage tracking. Recipe recommendations pushed to your phone. Freshness notifications. Gamification around trying new blends.

All that stuff looks great in a product roadmap. “Driving engagement.” “Increasing stickiness.” “Building habit loops.”

But the Adaline piece calls this out directly: forcing engagement backfires.

People don’t want to be manipulated into using your product more often. They want to use it when they naturally need it—and have it be great when they do.

So I killed most of those features.

The NFC tap now does exactly two things: shows you the origin story, and surfaces one recipe you can make tonight. That’s it. No tracking. No notifications. No gamification.

If you tap the lid, you get value. If you don’t tap the lid, the spice still works.

The habit forms from the cooking, not from the app. The technology should support the behavior that already exists, not try to manufacture new behavior.

The Framework Connecting Everything

Here’s how I’m now thinking about the relationship between my previous posts and the Adaline insights:

The Three-Layer Framework (from last week) tells you what to build:

The Infinity Loop tells you how growth happens:

The Adaline Framework tells you why habits form:

These aren’t competing ideas. They’re layers.

The three-layer framework creates a product worth using. The infinity loop creates a community that amplifies it. The Adaline principles ensure the behavior actually sticks.

Miss any one of them, and you’ve got a leaky bucket.

What does this change for Trevean Spice?

A few specific decisions I’m now more confident about:

Smaller portions, faster repurchase cycles. Not a pricing strategy—a habit formation strategy. Keep the sensory experience fresh enough that reordering feels like continuation, not a restart.

NFC content is designed for sharing, not consuming. Every video should end with something you want to tell someone else. The story isn’t for you alone—it’s for your dinner table.

No forced engagement. The app supports cooking. It doesn’t replace it. If our tech ever feels like an obligation instead of an enhancement, we’ve failed.

Recipe cards that fit existing behavior. We’re not trying to teach people to cook. We’re trying to make the cooking they already do more interesting. Meet them where they are.

Why AI Discovery Makes Habit Formation Harder?

I’ve been thinking about why AI-driven discovery makes habit formation harder, not easier.

When you discover a product through an algorithm, the relationship starts transactionally. The AI agent compared attributes, checked reviews, and optimized for your preferences. You didn’t stumble onto it—you were handed it.

That’s efficient. But efficiency isn’t what builds habits.

Now, this framework resonates clearly with products that get consumed regularly—spices, coffee, and skincare. But what about products with longer replacement cycles? Computer systems. Furniture. Appliances.

The principle still holds, but the application shifts. For infrequent-purchase products, habit formation isn’t about repurchase—it’s about ecosystem stickiness and recommendation behavior. You’re not trying to get someone to buy another laptop next month. You’re trying to make their experience so integrated into their workflow that when someone asks, “What laptop should I get?” they become an evangelist. The habit isn’t buying—it’s recommending and staying within the ecosystem.

Apple understands this. The habit isn’t purchasing a new iPhone every year. The habit is living inside iMessage, iCloud, AirDrop—behaviors that happen daily and make switching unthinkable.

For any product, ask: what’s the daily or weekly behavior my product enables, even if the purchase itself is infrequent?

Which means the burden of habit formation falls entirely on what happens after discovery.

This is actually good news for brands that understand it. If you design the post-discovery experience for natural frequency, shared utility, and workflow integration, you have a structural advantage over competitors who only optimize for algorithmic recommendations.

Most companies will spend all their energy on getting discovered. The ones that win will spend equal energy on getting remembered.

Your Turn

If you’re building a physical product right now, here are the questions I’d sit with:

On natural frequency: How often do people already do the thing your product supports? Are you designing to match that rhythm, or fighting it?

On shared utility: When someone uses your product, does it create something they want to share? A story? A meal? An experience? Or is it purely individual?

On workflow integration: Does your product slide into existing behavior? Or does it demand new behavior? (Be honest—most founders overestimate how much new behavior customers will adopt.)

The AI will handle discovery. Your job is to design for what comes next.

Excitement gets you the first purchase. Habit gets you the next twenty.

Frequently Asked Questions

What’s the difference between customer retention and habit formation?

Retention measures whether customers come back. Habit formation explains why they come back without thinking about it. You can retain customers through discounts, reminders, and loyalty programs—but that’s manufactured behavior. True habits form when your product becomes part of someone’s natural routine, used automatically because it fits their existing life patterns.

Why does forcing engagement backfire?

When you push notifications, gamify usage, or track behavior to “drive engagement,” you’re signaling that the product isn’t naturally valuable enough to use on its own. Customers feel manipulated rather than served. The Adaline research shows that products succeed by aligning with natural workflows, not by manufacturing artificial reasons to engage.

How do I know if my product has natural usage frequency?

Ask: how often do people already do the activity your product supports? Spices benefit from cooking (multiple times per week). A wedding planning app doesn’t—people only get married occasionally. If your product supports infrequent behavior, habit formation is structurally harder. You may need to expand into adjacent, more frequent use cases.

What does “shared utility” mean for physical products?

Shared utility means your product solves problems for groups, not just individuals. For spices, this means the meal you cook feeds your family, the origin story gives you something to discuss at dinner, and the recipe card becomes a shared activity. Products with shared utility get reinforced through social interaction, which strengthens habit formation.

How do the Three-Layer Framework, Infinity Loop, and Adaline Framework work together?

The Three-Layer Framework (machine-readable identity, human-discoverable story, tactile signature) tells you what to build for AI-era products. The Infinity Loop explains how community-driven growth happens. The Adaline Framework explains why habits form. Together: build something worth using, amplify it through community, and ensure the behavior actually sticks through natural frequency, shared utility, and workflow integration.

Should I offer smaller product sizes even if it reduces average order value?

Consider it if habit formation matters more than single-transaction revenue. Smaller sizes mean faster repurchase cycles, which keeps the sensory and emotional experience fresh. Eight months between purchases is eight months for habits to atrophy. Two months between purchases maintains continuity. Run the math on lifetime value, not just cart size.