Thoughts

The Agency Model Is About to Split in Two

AI will separate commodity implementation providers from outcome-focused operators who can own ambiguity, judgment, and delivery consequences.

The agency model is about to split in two.

Not disappear.

Split.

On one side will be commodity implementation providers.

On the other side will be outcome-focused operators.

The middle will become uncomfortable.

The old model

For years, many agencies sold access to skilled labor.

That made sense.

Engineering capacity was scarce. Hiring was slow. Internal teams were overloaded. Companies needed people who could build.

So agencies sold:

  • developers
  • QA engineers
  • designers
  • delivery teams
  • managed squads
  • technical specialists

That model is not dead.

But it is under pressure.

AI reduces the amount of human effort required for certain parts of software delivery. It accelerates implementation. It helps smaller teams produce more. It changes how clients think about staffing volume.

If fewer people can produce more output, selling more people becomes harder.

The exposed middle

The most vulnerable agencies are the ones that sit in the middle:

  • not cheap enough to compete on cost
  • not strategic enough to sell judgment
  • not accountable enough to sell outcomes
  • not specialized enough to defend a niche
  • not trusted enough to advise leadership

These firms may still have good people.

But the positioning becomes weak.

If the client believes AI can reduce implementation effort, why pay premium rates for generic capacity?

That question will become more common.

The commodity side

Some agencies will compete on cost and speed.

They will become AI-enhanced delivery engines.

That can work.

There is nothing shameful about efficient implementation. Some clients need exactly that. If the work is well-defined, low ambiguity, and execution-heavy, a lean AI-assisted delivery model can create value.

But margins may compress.

Differentiation will be difficult.

Clients will compare more aggressively.

The operator side

The other side of the split is more interesting.

These firms and individuals will not primarily sell hours.

They will sell:

  • diagnosis
  • technical judgment
  • ownership
  • vendor assessment
  • delivery recovery
  • AI adoption discipline
  • stakeholder alignment
  • execution leadership

They will help clients decide what should be built, who should build it, what risk exists, and how to create momentum.

AI makes this more valuable, not less.

Because when implementation becomes easier, the cost of building the wrong thing becomes more embarrassing.

Work versus insight

This matters for companies that primarily sell work.

If a company’s value proposition is “we provide engineers,” AI creates pressure.

Not immediately everywhere. Not equally across all domains. But directionally, yes.

Clients will ask whether the same output can be achieved with fewer people, more automation, or a smaller senior team.

The firms that respond by only defending headcount will struggle.

The firms that move toward insight, ownership, and outcomes will have a better path.

What clients should demand

Clients should ask agencies better questions:

  • What decisions are you helping us make?
  • What risk are you reducing?
  • What outcome do you own?
  • How do you use AI without lowering quality?
  • Where do you need our judgment?
  • What should we not build?
  • How would we know if this engagement is failing?

Those questions separate labor providers from true partners quickly.

What agencies should admit

AI will not remove the need for software delivery.

But it will reduce tolerance for inefficient delivery.

Agencies need to be honest about where they create value.

If the value is implementation speed, optimize for that.

If the value is deep judgment, prove it.

If the value is accountability, carry it.

But pretending that nothing is changing is not a strategy.

The split

The future agency market will likely have:

  • low-cost AI-accelerated implementation
  • specialized technical boutiques
  • high-accountability execution partners
  • strategic operators who help decide what should happen before delivery begins

The generic middle will be squeezed.

This is not bad news for everyone.

It is bad news for firms that never understood what they were really selling.

When this matters

How will AI change the software agency model?

Execution, not consulting.

If you are looking for another strategy deck, Safyron is probably not the right fit. If you need someone who will still be there when the difficult work starts, read how Safyron operates.

Learn how Safyron works Discuss this problem

Bring the problem

If this sounds familiar, let’s find the blockage.

Send me the short version. I will tell you whether I can help and where I would start.