People commit to an organisation for what it believes more than for what it makes; the product works as proof of the belief.

The claim

Customers, employees and supporters commit most durably when they share an organisation's belief, and the products then function as evidence of the belief rather than as the reason to commit. This would explain why an organisation with a recognised cause can move into categories where it has no structural advantage while equally capable rivals without one cannot. The evidence offered is a handful of consumer-electronics cases picked after the fact (one firm's move from computers into music players and phones succeeded, two rivals' similar moves failed). That is survivorship, and it cannot separate a shared belief from accumulated brand, ecosystem lock-in, distribution or simply better products. The conjecture is worth holding because it names a mechanism that differs from brand, not because the cases establish it.