A strategy usually starts from the assumption that a customer runs into a problem in a certain way and therefore comes to you. That assumption often goes unquestioned for years. But when a customer now uses AI to do a task that used to sit with you -- an initial analysis, a draft, a comparison between providers -- something fundamental changes about the reason that customer needs you. Not because the customer is disloyal, but because part of the work they came to you for is now being done elsewhere, faster and cheaper. That is already happening with some of your customers today, and not yet with others, and that difference is itself information.
Whether a customer takes this step depends on a few recognizable factors: how standardizable the task is that they are taking over, how well the AI tools in their own sector are already set up for that work, and how big the risk is if something goes wrong. A customer who uses AI to compare quotes takes little risk. A customer who uses AI to prepare a legal or financial decision often still wants a human to review it and approve or reject it with reason. That same three-way split -- AI takes over, AI works toward an outcome with human oversight, or it remains human work -- also plays out on your customer's side, not just within your own organization. Anyone who lays this alongside their own situation often sees that the shift among customers runs a few steps ahead of or behind the shift in their own sector, and that difference is exactly where what suppliers are building in AI functionality into their own product usually becomes visible first.
If a substantial share of your customers is taking over a task themselves with AI, that means the assumption underlying your pricing model, your service, or your sales conversation needs to be checked. Not necessarily adjusted -- first checked. It means the conversation with the customer about value may shift: from the task you used to perform to the judgment, the responsibility, or the exception that remains. It also means that competitors who pick up on this signal earlier may build a lead in how they reposition their offering, which makes it worthwhile to track competitors' announcements about AI applications on the same cadence as the customer signal itself.
It does not mean the customer relationship disappears, and it does not mean your service becomes redundant. Customers who do part of the work themselves often have a greater need for someone who reviews the outcome, resolves the exception, or carries the responsibility that AI cannot take over. Nor is it a workforce signal: what this means for your own team is a separate question with its own legal requirements, and it does not belong within this signal. This is solely about whether the assumption underlying your strategy -- why a customer needs you -- still holds.
Customer behavior doesn't change noticeably every week, but the tools customers work with do. A quarterly rhythm is sufficient for most sectors: looking too often produces noise, looking too seldom lets a shift go unnoticed. Sectors with fast technology adoption among end users -- such as sectors where AI tools are directly consumer-facing -- would do well to look more often than sectors where the customer itself is an organization with slow procurement cycles. Anyone who wants to know exactly what that rhythm looks like for their own situation will find a detailed answer at how often a strategy needs to be recalibrated.
The decision is not whether you should apply AI, but whether the assumption underlying your strategy -- that customers come to you for this task -- still holds as it did when it was first established. If a measurable share of your customers is doing that work themselves, that is reason to determine which part of your own offering still rests on that assumption and which part already rests on something else. That is also exactly the question that resurfaces once the market itself moves faster than your own planning cycle, as described in what to do when the market changes faster than your plan. The underlying question of which work in your own company can genuinely be taken over by AI is answered task by task with FTE TO AI's work scan.
You can start by naming the two or three assumptions your strategy relies on most heavily, and checking when they were last tested against what your customers are actually doing. That is exactly what the free assumption check helps with: a short round in which you name your key assumptions and see, for each one, when it was last confirmed. The full stress test, with sector data, a self-plot for the leadership team, and an ongoing assumption list, is under development.
Stel uw vraag. Vaak zit de echte vraag een laag dieper — daar mag ik naar vragen.
Answers come from this site’s knowledge base. Not tailored advice, and not a scan of your company.