The bridge between these ideas could be that good conceptual design helps you identify what “form” (in software) appropriately fits a given “context” (the user’s needs, workflow, existing mental models). By clearly articulating concepts and their purposes, you’re essentially:

1. Understanding the context—what problems users face, what they're trying to accomplish
2. Proposing forms—software concepts that resolve those problems
3. Testing the fit—whether the concept's operational principle aligns with how users would naturally think and work

So in my framing: the concept (not just “the tool”) would be the form, and the user’s actual practices, goals, and environment would be the context. A well-designed concept achieves “goodness of fit” between these.

The First 10 Minutes

Gifford looked at the user data and found that Instagram’s most devoted users all did similar actions. In fact, he found that these devoted users did the same things in the first 10 minutes of using Instagram. In the data, Gifford saw a clear pattern for successful onboarding. […] the Instagram team surfaced what worked best, and they re-designed the system to make those “first 10 minutes” behaviors the default, not just a happy accident.