The End of the Software Productivity Tax: From SaaS to Software-as-an-Agent

Most CEOs are currently making a fatal strategic error: they are treating AI as a better version of the software they already own. They are buying "AI-powered" tools to help their people work faster.

This is not a strategy; it is a subsidy.

If you are paying for software that requires your employees to sit in front of a screen to produce an output, you are paying a "productivity tax." You are competing on the same field, using the same tools, and achieving the same incremental gains as your rivals. Andrej Karpathy recently identified the tectonic shift that most consultants are missing: we are moving from Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) to Software-as-an-Agent (SaaA).

For the executive who refuses to compete, this isn't just a technical update. It is the architectural opening required to build a defensible monopoly.

The Problem: The SaaS Commodity Trap

For two decades, SaaS was the gold standard. You "rented a tool" to improve human productivity. But SaaS has a fundamental flaw: it requires human labor as the primary input. The software is inert without a user.

In a SaaS-driven world, your competitive advantage is tied to your ability to hire, train, and manage people to use those tools better than the company next door. This is a game of thin margins and high friction. When everyone has access to the same Salesforce or ServiceNow instances, the software itself provides zero defensibility. It is a utility, not a moat.

Most "AI transformations" are simply layering LLMs on top of this broken model. They are giving your workers a slightly faster shovel. But in the age of the agent, the goal isn't to shovel faster—it’s to automate the excavation entirely.

The Insight: Hiring Outcomes, Not Renting Tools

Karpathy’s thesis highlights the core distinction: SaaS is about productivity (doing the work better); SaaA is about delegation (getting the work done).

When you shift to Software-as-an-Agent, you stop paying for seats and start paying for outcomes. You aren't "renting a tool" for a human to use; you are "hiring a worker" to execute a workflow autonomously.

Think about a global logistics firm managing complex customs brokerage.

• The SaaS approach: Give 500 agents a co-pilot to help them categorize shipments faster.
• The SaaA approach: Architect an agentic system that ingests manifests, classifies goods, and files documentation with 99.9% accuracy without human intervention.

The former is an incremental improvement. The latter is an Operating System for the industry. Once you have built an agentic system that handles the complexity of your specific proprietary data, you haven't just improved a process—you’ve created a competitive escape hatch.

The Architecture: The Autonomy-to-Moat Framework™

To turn this shift into a monopoly, you must move beyond "tools" and toward "proprietary systems." We use the Autonomy-to-Moat Framework™ to evaluate where a company can stop competing and start owning.

1. Level 1: Assisted Tooling (The Commodity Zone) Humans use AI to draft emails or summarize meetings. This is the "SaaS+AI" model. It is easily copied and offers no long-term defensibility.
2. Level 2: Workflow Augmentation (The Efficiency Zone) AI handles specific sub-tasks within a human-led workflow. Better, but the "human-in-the-loop" remains a bottleneck for scaling the moat.
3. Level 3: Autonomous Agents (The Monopoly Zone) The system is the worker. It owns the end-to-end outcome. Defensibility is built here because the agent is trained on your proprietary data, your "sacred cow" workflows, and your unique market constraints.

The "Last Mover Advantage" belongs to the company that doesn't just adopt AI first, but architects the most autonomous system last. By the time your competitors realize they are still paying for "tools," you have already built an autonomous engine that compounds your data advantage every hour it runs.

From Thinking to Creating: The Architectural Shift

Building a "Software-as-an-Agent" monopoly requires more than a tech stack; it requires a leadership psychology shift. You must be willing to re-architect workflows that have existed for decades.

01 - Think: Diagnose the Human Tax Identify the high-value workflows where humans are currently acting as "glue" between different software systems. These are your prime candidates for agentic replacement. Where is your data proprietary, and where is it currently being wasted in manual entry or "context switching"?

02 - Define: Architect the Proprietary Agent Don't buy a generic "Agent Platform." Architect a system that mirrors your specific competitive advantage. If your advantage is in complex insurance underwriting for the energy sector, your agentic architecture must be built around the specific edge cases and data moats of that industry.

03 - Create: Deploy and Compound Production deployment of agentic systems is not a "proof of concept." It is the installation of a new internal capability. As the agent operates, it generates a feedback loop of proprietary data that makes it increasingly difficult for any competitor—using generic tools—to ever catch up.

The Strategic Takeaway

Competition is a tax you pay for failing to differentiate your architecture.

If your AI strategy is focused on "productivity," you are still trapped in the SaaS mindset. You are making your people more efficient at doing things that your competitors will soon be doing for near-zero marginal cost.

The companies that win the next decade will be those that stop renting tools and start building autonomous operating systems. They will be the "last movers" who architect agentic moats so deep that the competition becomes irrelevant.

The question for your executive team: Are you building a better tool, or are you architecting a monopoly?

---

Secure your last-mover position. If you’re ready to stop competing and start owning your industry’s operating system, schedule an AI Monopoly Audit™. We identify where your data leverage lies and blueprint the agentic architecture that turns your execution into a defensible monopoly.