# Switching friction
- Updated: 2026-04-28
- Tags: switching, friction
- Canonical: https://archive.citrusgate.com/themes/switching-friction
Migration cost and workflow disruption feel bigger than the stated upside, even when the product case looks credible.
## Angle
For this cohort, a broad platform story needed a narrow adoption wedge that proved value before the buyer committed to deeper migration.
## Diagnostic Questions
- What can the buyer adopt without ripping out the current workflow?
- Which incumbent, bundled tool, or internal process must be displaced first?
- What migration proof reduces perceived switching cost before the full platform decision?
## Patterns
### In selected cases, bundled tools created a good-enough fallback.
Some buyers already had budget, workflow familiarity, and security approval for bundled capabilities, even when the standalone product looked stronger.
### In selected cases, phased adoption reduced re-platforming anxiety.
A seller could lower risk by letting buyers start with one workflow, one team, or one proof path before committing to a broader platform move.
### In selected cases, internal build remained a credible fallback.
Where buyers had technical teams and existing building blocks, the seller needed to prove that the paid layer was safer and cheaper than maintaining a solution internally.
## Featured Weekly Memos
## Featured Notes
- Switching cost kills momentum before product fit (https://archive.citrusgate.com/notes/switching-cost-kills-momentum-before-product-fit)