“Comfort debt” is such a sharp way to name the slow erosion that happens when we stop adapting. I’ve found that creative fields aren’t immune either, sticking with what works over what's changing can quietly make you irrelevant.
Sometimes the riskiest move is waiting too long to evolve.
Thank you ,indeed relevance is everything. What worked yesterday can become your anchor today if you’re not careful. And the scariest part? The erosion is almost invisible while it’s happening, "Waiting too long to evolve" might be the most underrated risk of all. Appreciate you adding that perspective, it’s spot-on.
I see it happening a lot in the creative fields, esp in my niche. Many creatives are still significantly resistant to AI, but a lot of the non-adopters are already suffering.
First: Thank you, Jens! I love that it got you curious enough to pull out the dictionary—that’s always a sign the ideas are landing with real impact. Now you’ve got me wondering… which words caught your attention? I’d love to know what sparked that moment of curiosity!
Second: Regarding your question about killing off a profitable product, such a great one. It’s one of the hardest (and most misunderstood) innovation decisions a business can make. The key idea is this: profitability isn’t always a sign of long-term viability. A product might still be generating revenue, but if it’s:
Losing relevance with emerging customer segments,
Locking your team into outdated tech or workflows, or
Taking up resources that could be fueling future-growth bets,
…then keeping it alive can quietly become a form of strategic stagnation.
The companies that stay ahead are the ones that make room for what’s next, even if that means cannibalizing what’s currently working. Think of Apple discontinuing the iPod while it was still a hit, or Netflix phasing out DVD rentals to go all-in on streaming. It’s uncomfortable, but that discomfort is often a sign you're heading in the right direction.
So true. Applies to our personal lives, too. The one thing I have some discomfort with is using Amazon as an example of innovative success. I don't dispute that they have been incredibly successful in diversifying, and that is kinda the problem. Bezos wants to control everything about the economy and he is willing to use predatory and toxic means to do so. No company should control sectors as far apart as groceries and media streaming, health care and kitchen gadgets. His strategy has been to offer everything cheaply even at a loss, in order to destroy the competition. That's why there are no more small mom-and-pop stores on Main Street, few independent book sellers, small local chains of hardware stores, etc. Then he offers them a 'marketplace' where they can sell through Amazon, and Amazon takes a whopping percentage of their revenues. All in service of Bezos ego.
Really appreciate this, (I hear you) and I’m glad you brought it up. You’re absolutely right that Amazon’s story is a double-edged one. From a pure business mechanics standpoint, they’re often cited as an example of relentless iteration and market expansion, but the how of that expansion absolutely deserves scrutiny. Strategic discomfort doesn’t have to mean unchecked domination, and innovation shouldn't come at the cost of ecosystems or ethics. You’ve raised a critical point: when disruption becomes extraction, and scale becomes control, it stops being innovation and starts being consolidation. That tension is something I think more business leaders need to wrestle with not just what can be done, but what should be.
Dear Farida, this is a good article. I think that the Spanish-speaking community can be also interested. Is it possible to translate part of this post, with credits and links to your newsletter and to you? Many thanks in advance.
Thank you so much for your kind words, I'm really glad the article resonated with you. I'd be honored to have it shared with the Spanish-speaking community. Yes, you're absolutely welcome to translate part of the post, as long as you include credit and a link back to the original newsletter. I truly appreciate you helping spread the ideas further—muchísimas gracias! 🙏
I like the Comfort Debt framework. It’s a wake-up call for companies to stay agile and innovative. The audit questions are a great tool for self-assessment. Well done, really enjoyed this!
Absolutely nailed this.
“Comfort debt” is such a sharp way to name the slow erosion that happens when we stop adapting. I’ve found that creative fields aren’t immune either, sticking with what works over what's changing can quietly make you irrelevant.
Sometimes the riskiest move is waiting too long to evolve.
Thank you ,indeed relevance is everything. What worked yesterday can become your anchor today if you’re not careful. And the scariest part? The erosion is almost invisible while it’s happening, "Waiting too long to evolve" might be the most underrated risk of all. Appreciate you adding that perspective, it’s spot-on.
I see it happening a lot in the creative fields, esp in my niche. Many creatives are still significantly resistant to AI, but a lot of the non-adopters are already suffering.
There are many amazing things being said in this article! I love it when I have to go and look up words in the dictionary :o)
In relation to innovation velocity, can you expand on your thinking behind killing off a profitable product?
First: Thank you, Jens! I love that it got you curious enough to pull out the dictionary—that’s always a sign the ideas are landing with real impact. Now you’ve got me wondering… which words caught your attention? I’d love to know what sparked that moment of curiosity!
Second: Regarding your question about killing off a profitable product, such a great one. It’s one of the hardest (and most misunderstood) innovation decisions a business can make. The key idea is this: profitability isn’t always a sign of long-term viability. A product might still be generating revenue, but if it’s:
Losing relevance with emerging customer segments,
Locking your team into outdated tech or workflows, or
Taking up resources that could be fueling future-growth bets,
…then keeping it alive can quietly become a form of strategic stagnation.
The companies that stay ahead are the ones that make room for what’s next, even if that means cannibalizing what’s currently working. Think of Apple discontinuing the iPod while it was still a hit, or Netflix phasing out DVD rentals to go all-in on streaming. It’s uncomfortable, but that discomfort is often a sign you're heading in the right direction.
Great answer, thank you!
So true. Applies to our personal lives, too. The one thing I have some discomfort with is using Amazon as an example of innovative success. I don't dispute that they have been incredibly successful in diversifying, and that is kinda the problem. Bezos wants to control everything about the economy and he is willing to use predatory and toxic means to do so. No company should control sectors as far apart as groceries and media streaming, health care and kitchen gadgets. His strategy has been to offer everything cheaply even at a loss, in order to destroy the competition. That's why there are no more small mom-and-pop stores on Main Street, few independent book sellers, small local chains of hardware stores, etc. Then he offers them a 'marketplace' where they can sell through Amazon, and Amazon takes a whopping percentage of their revenues. All in service of Bezos ego.
Really appreciate this, (I hear you) and I’m glad you brought it up. You’re absolutely right that Amazon’s story is a double-edged one. From a pure business mechanics standpoint, they’re often cited as an example of relentless iteration and market expansion, but the how of that expansion absolutely deserves scrutiny. Strategic discomfort doesn’t have to mean unchecked domination, and innovation shouldn't come at the cost of ecosystems or ethics. You’ve raised a critical point: when disruption becomes extraction, and scale becomes control, it stops being innovation and starts being consolidation. That tension is something I think more business leaders need to wrestle with not just what can be done, but what should be.
Thanks again for pushing the conversation deeper.
Great writing as Always Frida.
This reminds me this short story on How do Lobsters grow?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcUAIpZrwog
Love the analogy, such a powerful reminder that growth comes through discomfort. Appreciate you sharing it! and totally agree !
Dear Farida, this is a good article. I think that the Spanish-speaking community can be also interested. Is it possible to translate part of this post, with credits and links to your newsletter and to you? Many thanks in advance.
Thank you so much for your kind words, I'm really glad the article resonated with you. I'd be honored to have it shared with the Spanish-speaking community. Yes, you're absolutely welcome to translate part of the post, as long as you include credit and a link back to the original newsletter. I truly appreciate you helping spread the ideas further—muchísimas gracias! 🙏
Of course, Farida. Many thanks !!!
Hola David , con mucho gusto, por fa adelante.
Saludos 👋🏼
Love this article. Check out the 3 Horizon Model for aligning resources. It's a favorite 🌟
would you mind share a link?
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi0.wp.com%2Fsteveblank.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F10%2Fthree-horizons.png%3Fssl%3D1&tbnid=nwPTCiVR8uKauM&vet=1&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsteveblank.com%2F2019%2F01%2F08%2Fthe-fatal-flaw-of-the-three-horizons-model%2F&docid=4Xv8C90DFIbV9M&w=1647&h=697&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim%2Fm4%2F2&kgs=08185565cd0cdc69 - this gives an insight
The Steve Blank version
I like the Comfort Debt framework. It’s a wake-up call for companies to stay agile and innovative. The audit questions are a great tool for self-assessment. Well done, really enjoyed this!
Thank you