---
type: "synthesis"
sources: ["attention"]
tags: ["authors", "research-program"]
related: ["cross-habit-moat-vs-agentic-rationality", "cross-power-and-intermediation-inversion"]
id: "cross-cui-van-esch-kietzmann-program"
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-attention"
originDay: 4
articleStem: "hbr-seg-attention"
sourceUrl: "(unified vault: 8 sources)"
sourceTitle: "HBR — Demand Ⅰ-B · Attention economy / GTM shift & habit-moat"
---
A007 and A069 are best read as **two movements of one argument** by the same authors ([[entity-yuanyuan-gina-cui]], [[entity-patrick-van-esch]], [[entity-jan-kietzmann]]; A069 adds practitioner voice [[entity-john-furner]]).

**Movement 1 — the offense (A007):** how to *win* the AI era by owning customer habits. Capability depreciates ([[claim-capability-depreciation]]); the durable prize is the [[concept-habit-moat]] built through [[concept-ambient-utility]], [[concept-behavioral-intervention]], and the [[framework-habit-playbook]]. Watchword: 'Capability earns the demo. Habit earns the default' ([[quote-capability-demo-habit-default]]).

**Movement 2 — the defense (A069):** what *destroys* incumbents who fail — agentic delegation strips advertising ([[claim-ad-revenue-collapse]]), fees ([[claim-fee-race-to-bottom]]), subscriptions, and ecosystems, and inverts moats into liabilities ([[contrarian-moats-become-liabilities]]). Watchword: 'Platforms see behavior; agents discern intent' ([[quote-behavior-vs-intent]]).

**Shared spine:** both center on **the moment the customer reaches for you** and both argue the incumbent's real risk is *intermediation*, not employee replacement ([[contrarian-ai-not-for-employees]]). Both prize *intent/holistic* data over *fragmented* platform data ([[concept-holistic-intent-vs-fragmented-inference]]). The prescriptive difference is timeframe: A007 is 'build the moat now'; A069 is 'the walls you already built are turning against you.' Together they define the corpus's core dialectic, examined in [[cross-habit-moat-vs-agentic-rationality]].