Context, Interface, and the Hidden Forces of Consumer Decision-Making
How Agentic AI will redefine consumer choices
Inspired by the insights of Rory Sutherland, VP of Ogilvy UK
Introduction
I was recently inspired by a LinkedIn post by Rory Sutherland, one of the most well-known British Mad Men. In it, he recalled a conversation with an advertising executive in the early 2000s on the role of brand and the future of Amazon.
They believed people would buy books online from Barnes & Noble rather than Amazon because B&N had the stronger brand.
At the time, Sutherland wished the world worked that way. But it doesn’t. And as history has shown, he was right.
This post highlights a fundamental misunderstanding about how consumers make decisions. While brand strength matters, two forces sit even higher in the decision-making hierarchy: context and interface.
Rory Sutherland, Vice Chairman of Ogilvy UK, has spoken at length about this phenomenon. How people make choices is often dictated less by brand preference and more by the environment in which they find themselves and the method available to make the decision. And if you look at how the most successful disruptors of our time have won, it’s not by having stronger brands, but by changing these key factors.
The Role of Context and Interface in Consumer Decisions
Sutherlands makes this simple example:
If I’m walking down a street, hungry, and see both a McDonald's and an obscure café, I’ll probably choose McDonald's. It’s familiar, fast, and reliable.
But put me at home, in front of the TV, and my behavior shifts completely. I don’t search for "McDonald's near me." Instead, I open Deliveroo (where I have Platinum status, thanks to my kids) and make my choice from the available options there.
The same brand that might dominate in a physical setting loses relevance in a different interface.
This is why established brands often struggle when consumer behavior shifts. Their strength in one context does not automatically translate to another. Amazon didn't win over B&N because of its stronger brand; it won because it redefined the interface of book shopping. And this is also why Amazon's brand has not been that successful in its attempts to build a brick-and-mortar presence.
How Disruptor Brands Leverage Context and Interface
The most successful disruptors rarely compete head-to-head with incumbents. Instead, they shift the decision-making environment by introducing new interfaces or changing the buying context.
Look at these examples:
Argos: Shifted retail from in-store browsing to catalogue-based ordering.
Direct Line: Made insurance a direct phone purchase rather than broker-led.
easyJet: Prioritized online booking over travel agencies.
Rightmove & Hotels.com: Aggregated real estate and hotels, moving choices away from individual sellers.
Uber: Made "hailing a cab" obsolete by shifting control to the rider.
ASOS: Created a frictionless fashion retail experience without physical stores.
Nespresso: Reframed coffee as a premium at-home experience, reducing the need for cafes.
Amazon: Built an entire ecosystem around convenience, making storefront-based shopping an afterthought.
Google: Changed how people find information, eliminating phone directories and physical encyclopedias.
Zalando: Revolutionized online fashion retail in Europe by offering free shipping and returns, making online clothing purchases as risk-free as trying clothes in-store.
Veepee: Pioneered online flash sales, changing how people buy discounted luxury goods by creating time-limited exclusivity.
In each case, the winners didn’t just have a better product or stronger brand—they won because they altered the context in which choices were made and the interface consumers used to engage with the market.
Why This Terrifies Established Brands
This is an unsettling reality if you’re an incumbent with an established brand.
Legacy businesses assume their brand strength will carry them forward. However, brand strength becomes secondary if a new player changes people's choices.
Think of Blockbuster vs. Netflix: The former relied on in-store rentals, assuming consumers valued physical selection. Netflix redefined the interface, first through DVDs-by-mail, then through streaming.
Or Kodak vs. Digital Photography: Kodak’s brand in film photography was unmatched, but the shift to digital made its dominance irrelevant.
Established companies' real danger is their assumption that their existing interface and context will remain constant. History suggests otherwise.
AI: The Next Major Shift in Interface and Context
Which brings us to today’s shift: AI. Or what I called algorithms in my 2018 article, Extinction by Algorithm:
Because of this, certain notions are disappearing or are set to disappear in the near future. Consumers don’t distinguish between online and offline. Soon, we will have more applications for augmented reality, virtual reality and mixed reality and consumers will not be able to distinguish between one and the other — rather, it will be just a conjugation of reality.
This is very important. Because of #theBlur and because of this phenomenon, the most traditional brands methods and approaches to innovating will have to change. Moreover many of the brands who are less receptive to those changes, risk extinction by algorithm. Before explaining what it means and what it implicates, we need to provide a quick overview of the current promotional mechanics typical of points of sale. Promotional mechanics compromise two macro categories: the first one is seasonal sales, nothing but temporary price reductions occurring at the end of season, with the sole purpose of removing as much stock as possible from retailers’ inventories. They do so by reducing the prices of the products because they need to make space for the new season, or a new line. Everyone is familiar with the sales at the beginning or middle of the year, which is when the fashion, for example, changes from summer to winter or vice-versa.
In addition to this, there are on-going promo-mechanics, which are almost fully financed by brand owners, are very welcome by the retailers, and have the objective of increasing the rotation of the products and points of sales by promoting them. The notion is, that by changing the value equation of the product, the consumers will try them and eventually adopt the product within their repertoire of choice. Of course, some of these promotions also have the objective of loading the shop so consumers anticipate their shopping trips and hence are less likely to buy products from the competition. So, to this category belong temporary price reductions, products with gifts, or promotional activities with rewards, but also Valentine’s Day and Xmas promotional efforts. Moreover in the latter category, belong also ‘buy three/ pay two’ type of promotions or extra discounts for multiple purchases — e.g., buy 1 and get the second with 50% discount — aiming at shoppers who have certain familiarity with the products. The importance is, of course, that despite the brand positioning, consumers who are more mindful of convenience and pricing very often buy on promotion because they think it is better value. These consumers also often won’t return unless there is another promotion. This is why, while these promotions are very good for building audiences, they are often problematic especially when they are not accompanied by strong brand-building activities.
Not the buzzworthy LLM AI that generates creative content. But Agentic AI—AI that acts on the consumer's behalf, fundamentally changing purchasing decisions.
Now, imagine an AI agent that I could instruct:
"Find me ten different options for a 10-day holiday in the Canary Islands for two people, within my budget."
Suddenly, the interface of decision-making shifts. Instead of navigating websites or apps, I issue a spoken command.
But let’s take it further. What if the AI agent prioritized my interests over those of the seller?
Today, platforms like Booking.com or Google Flights optimize results for profitability, not necessarily for the user’s best experience. But if AI reverses that dynamic—placing consumer benefit ahead of advertising revenue—then the entire flow of commerce will change direction.
As Sutherland exemplifies:
This is the equivalent of turning the Chicago River in reverse. The flow of influence, which has always been seller-to-buyer, could become buyer-to-seller.
And if that happens, the power dynamics in advertising, branding, and decision-making will be upended.
The Future of Consumer Decision-Making
If AI agents become the primary interface for decision-making, brands may lose their traditional means of influence.
Think about it:
If AI handles price comparison, brand loyalty weakens.
Advertising loses impact if AI ranks hotels based on user satisfaction rather than paid placement.
If AI finds the best flights independent of airline marketing, brands must compete on real value, not perception.
Rory Sutherland has long argued that advertising isn't just about persuasion—it’s about setting the choice architecture in which people make decisions. But if AI reclaims that power for the consumer, the traditional role of advertising could collapse.
Could the consumer, not the brand, appoint the agency of the future?
As Sutherland suggests:
Maybe it’s time to dust off The Cluetrain Manifesto—because the radical ideas it proposed decades ago might finally become reality.
Conclusion: The Brands That Will Survive
The lesson from Amazon, Uber, and Netflix is clear: Brands don’t win by being the best-known; they win by being the best choice in the dominant context and interface of the time.
If AI fundamentally shifts how we make choices, companies that fail to adapt will meet the same fate as Blockbuster and Kodak.
Brands that survive will recognize the shift early—those that don’t just rely on brand equity but redefine their role within the new interface of decision-making.
AI won’t destroy brands. But it might change what a brand means.