Product switching is something every user has done consciously or not when using an application or platform. It occurs when a user starts an activity on one platform but, instead of continuing a related or another task there, even when the platform offers it, they choose to complete it on another platform.

Recently, I have been researching and reading more about this topic, and in this article, I will share some of my findings and perspectives, using stacked rocks as a metaphor along the way. This switching problem is well-known and experienced, particularly with many software products. There is no well-defined name for the problem, but it has been referred to as application switching in academia, feature leakage in the industry, and many other terms.

To clarify, before diving into the major reasons why users switch apps or products, I would say that application switching is closely related to user churn, but not entirely. It’s voluntary, and you aren’t losing users entirely.

**Churn (User Attrition) is a **broad metric, but it simply means a user stopped using your product.

**App/Product Switching **is a subset of churn. It happens when a user leaves Product A to start using Product B. This is a dangerous kind of churn because your loss is your competitor’s direct gain.

Now, for Process Abandonment, it’s a kind of churn whereby users start a process and abandon it along the way, mostly due to frustration. An example is Workday. A high-quality candidate starts an application on Workday but doesn’t continue due to the unintuitive application submission process. They would rather apply to a company that uses Ashby or Greenhouse because it’s easy, fast, and intuitive. Funny enough, every job seeker I have known hates Workday.

However, in this article, I’ll focus on a specific type of churn: when users leave your product to access a feature you offer more effectively on a competing platform.

There are many reasons why users switch products or apps, but based on a bit of my research, I’ve identified the three most common ones.

Once again, if your product has a poor user experience, users will likely move to another platform where completing their tasks is easier. The most common UX issues are users not understanding how to navigate your product and needing to spend several minutes figuring it out. Personally, I loathe it when I have to pause so much just to understand a feature or product.

Sometimes, moving from Feature A to Feature B isn’t intuitive enough. Your platform hasn’t been designed in a way that makes using both features obvious, seamless, synchronized, or “hard to ignore.” Instead, users leave for a competitor offering Feature B, because they see it as more familiar and easier to use. Additionally, with unclear communication regarding feedback on success, errors, or other matters, you’ve created a recipe for frustration.

Sometimes, this is unavoidable, and if there’s superior functionality elsewhere, users will opt for it. This can take many forms: better pricing, simplicity, familiarity, cultural fit, and more. Most of the time, I’ve seen users leave because of better execution and innovation.

A personal example I will share is that one of my hobbies is DJing, and I love using Tidal with Serato to mix music and practice before buying tracks. But I rarely use Tidal to create playlists. I prefer Spotify for that, and then use TuneMyMusic to transfer the playlists back to Tidal. It’s interesting, but Spotify has made it so seamless to find songs and organize them that it outperforms Tidal in that area. This type of application switching is solvable; it just requires rethinking the UX from the user’s perspective.

For me, this is also one of the main reasons I switch applications. If I see a free tier or a tier that ties to much value elsewhere, I switch immediately.

An example is Spotify Premium. I used to be a strong premium user, but I switched back to the free model. Now I use Spotify mainly to discover songs or listen to general tunes, and I go to other platforms to buy an artist’s music directly to support them. This way, I know I’m not paying a subscription for Spotify when I only listen to certain artists that month, and I can be sure the money actually reaches them.

The thing is that people are willing to pay for real, transparent value, especially when they know exactly where their money is going. If a superior product offers that clarity, users will jump ship immediately.

I chose stacked rocks as a metaphor for this article because I have always been marveled by them and what they could symbolize. Stacked rocks are also called Cairns and are mostly human-made. They hold different meanings across cultures and are built without necessarily requiring special talent or skills, but rather patience, good thoughts, and a can-do mentality to figure out how to make these rocks find a balance. That’s what makes Cairns awesome!

This brings me to the challenge of product switching. My perspective is that product teams must pay close attention and truly understand the flow and characteristics of each feature to see how they can balance effectively. While features and user expectations may differ, aligning them so they work in harmony like perfectly synchronized machine parts creates a seamless experience that keeps users engaged. In other words, teams can build features to flow together like carefully stacked rocks: each one unique, with its own shape and weight, yet balanced to form a stable and cohesive structure. When this balance is achieved, the likelihood of users switching to another product is greatly reduced.

For different product teams, there are countless strategies to prevent app switching, and I believe there’s no single universal rule; it all depends on your product. But speaking from experience, and as the admittedly grumpy user that I am, the main culprits are bad UX and unrecognized value. These are the biggest drivers of user churn: when an app is confusing, frustrating, or doesn’t clearly demonstrate its value, especially when users feel it’s not worth the cost. Users quickly lose patience and look elsewhere. Getting these right is often the simplest and most effective way to keep users engaged and loyal.

Personally, I always do low-fidelity wireframing, and it really helped me today to flesh out whatever ideas I have, whether features or other elements, and see how they all connect to flow seamlessly. Before adding any splash of color or polish, if I can’t enjoy moving the parts around in simple black-and-white wireframes, considering user empathy, user needs, clarity, straightforwardness, and many other important factors, then I believe I don’t have a product yet.

We’ve gotten to the end of this article, and just to quickly say that there are many reasons why users switch applications or products, I firmly believe that getting just one or two things *really right *can solve some deep, fundamental problems.

I’m glad to have shared a bit of my insights, research, and reflections on this topic. Once again, I’m truly passionate about products, and I love exploring why things happen the way they do!

Thanks for reading!

et…

À très bientôt !