Incumbent corporations are investing in and incorporating AI, yet most fail to fundamentally alter their operating models or achieve strong ROI as a result. The root of this failure is not technological. It is macroeconomic and organizational. US enterprises are attempting to execute a paradigm-shifting technological transition within a market environment that offers them no structural shock absorber, in the way a formal industrial policy can. These enterprises must navigate the AI transition while addressing a rapidly changing market environment and the AI Stakeholder Squeeze.
AI Inverts Porter’s Five Forces
For decades, corporate strategy relied on Porter’s Five Forces. Today, digital and embodied AI neutralize these forces. Industry lines blur into ecosystems where firms are simultaneously partners, platform participants, and competitors. The five forces often operate within a platform rather than between discrete firms. Corporate strategy must transition from defending a position inside a well‑defined industry to controlling key AI assets (data, models, compute), shaping ecosystems, and deciding where to deploy AI to rewrite cost and capability structures.
Threat of new entrants: AI dramatically lowers the cost of intelligence and makes experimentation easier for everyone. As a result, new entrants appear faster. Data, proprietary models, and distribution become new mega‑barriers.
Bargaining power of suppliers: AI shifts strategic dependencies. Compute, core models, and key datasets are controlled by a few hyperscalers and model providers. In autonomous systems, integrated platforms become chokepoints. Therefore, supplier power concentrates rather than diffuses.
Bargaining power of buyers: AI-based comparison engines and agents cause switching costs to approach zero while corporations try to lock in the customer through hyper-personalization, resulting in a perpetual tug-of-war. Customers are no longer willing to pay a premium for human inefficiencies.
Threat of substitutes: AI substitutes entire operating models (coding, design, consulting, customer service, etc). Substitution comes from general‑purpose technologies that cut across sectors.
Rivalry among existing competitors: AI enables competitors to continuously iterate on products, pricing, and marketing. Traditional sustainable advantages become harder to hold, even if, in some cases, strong AI network effects may push markets toward a winner‑take‑most structure.
The AI Stakeholder Squeeze
In addition to addressing AI’s impact on Porter’s five forces, corporate leaders must also address the AI Stakeholder Squeeze. In the absence of the patient capital offered by venture investors to AI startups and an industrial policy that can address AI’s impact on labor, the corporation must absorb the friction generated by the:
Shareholder Paradox: Public markets demand the quick and sizable ROI promised by AI, yet punish the significant CapEx required to change legacy processes and retire technical debt. They demand the yield without funding the seed.
Employee Paradox: Corporate workforces may possess deep domain expertise but lack AI literacy. Driven by fears of displacement, they resist structural changes, leading to ineffective AI pilots and delays in new process and system rollouts.
Three Corporate Archetypes
We identified three corporate archetypes based on the way they deal with the AI-inverted Porter forces and the AI Stakeholder Squeeze.
Archetype 1: The Digital Natives. These companies do not “adopt” AI. AI is embedded in their DNA. Their business processes are algorithms. They are born in the cloud with unified data. They strive to constantly optimize their algorithms. Examples: Amazon, Netflix, Airbnb, Uber, Tesla.
Archetype 2: The Incumbent Innovators. These enlightened legacy companies are executing a high-wire act. While they have massive brownfield technical debt, they built a Corporate Industrial Policy, instead of falling victim to the Porter force inversion and Stakeholder Squeeze. They change their culture, create patient capital to fund their AI efforts, bypass their rigid bureaucracies and organizational structures, and manage their path to scale, deliberately determining which processes to enhance and which to redesign with AI. Examples: JPMorgan Chase, Intuit, Walmart, Delta Airlines.
Archetype 3: The Traditionalists. These companies are victims of the squeeze. Paralyzed by legacy technical debt and rigid hierarchies, they view AI purely as an IT procurement exercise. They launch dozens of unmeasured, fragmented AI pilots across disconnected departments and hope for Random Acts of Innovation. Examples: the majority of the automotive industry.
I’m most excited about the companies that fit the second archetype because they can show the traditionalists how to effectively harness AI to their advantage and overcome the Stakeholder Squeeze.
The Enterprise AI Maturity Matrix
How exactly does a Traditionalist company transition to become an Incumbent Innovator? They must execute along four dimensions that form the Enterprise AI Maturity Matrix.
Digital Natives
Incumbent Innovators
Traditionalists
Technology & Data Foundation
Greenfield: Cloud-native. Unified data architecture. Business processes are built as software.
Actively Managed Brownfield: Decades of tech debt, but aggressively funding the hard work of breaking down data silos for AI readiness.
Rigid Silos: Trapped in disconnected systems. Waiting to buy AI off the shelf from enterprise software vendors.
Execution & Scaling
Systems Thinking and CI/CD: AI is deployed via systems thinking and continuous iteration and algorithmic optimization.
Intentional Scaling: Pilots are designed to eliminate business frictions. A funded path to enterprise scale exists before the pilot begins.
Random Acts of Innovation: FOMO-driven “science fair” projects across departments with no governance.
Metrics &Capital Allocation
Real-Time Telemetry: Millions of automated A/B tests. Capital flows instantly to models that drive algorithmic yield.
Stage-Gated ROI: Pilots achieve business-value KPIs to unlock the next tranche of scaling capital.
Vanity Metrics: Measuring activity rather than outcomes (e.g., “We have 40 AI pilots running”).
Talent &Culture
Engineering DNA: Native agility. The structure is inherently flat, built on a culture that assumes constant disruption.
Entrepreneurial Evolution: Shifting from rigid silos to flat, cross-functional pods to drive rapid experimentation. Heavy focus on upskilling the middle.
Rigid Hierarchies: Risk-averse and siloed. Deeply entrenched in a “that’s not my job” mentality. Heavy reliance on external vendors.
Architecting the Corporate Industrial Policy
Corporations must ask a difficult question: Are we committing random acts of innovation, or are we intentionally scaling?
Tesla avoids the squeeze because they have no past. BYD avoids the squeeze because the Chinese government guarantees its future.
Legacy incumbents have neither of those luxuries. In the AI era, the Stakeholder Squeeze will crush the Traditionalists. Labor and shareholders will remain obstacles, while digital natives and incumbent innovators will become uncatchable.
Becoming incumbent innovators is the only viable path. The transformation requires rearchitecting the enterprise technology to fight the external market and managing capital and labor through self-funding loops and entrepreneurial pods to survive the internal squeeze.
