Competitive strategy in the era of AI and Agents: Startups, SMEs and Corporations

How to build adaptive value generation systems in an environment of permanent disruption, exponential speed and decentralized competition.

If you are the owner of an SME, Director of a Multinational, Founder of a Startup, or are interested in understanding the brutal change that is happening in business, you should read this article. This text applies to technological and non-technological companies alike, that division loses strength in the face of the new.

What we observed as disruption—the emergence of a company with new technology and/or new business model that changes the rules of the game by displacing the market leader—is taking on renewed speed and dynamics.

The change is so rapid that entire industries lose their competitive advantage overnight. New players emerge daily, barriers to entry are blurred, and exponential technologies such as artificial intelligence with its autonomous agents are changing the very foundations of competition.

The most accepted business theories become insufficient, and traditional tools stop offering answers. Artificial intelligence, for its part, does not yet have the necessary autonomy to adapt them or create new ones: it can only operate on previously generated knowledge.

In that sense, today more than ever the adaptation and generation of renewed, actionable theory that can be turned into practice is relevant.

In this article I try to make a contribution, starting from the question: how do the different actors compete today? What is your value generation strategy in an environment of permanent disruption?

To understand it, we need to analyze the incentives, capabilities and limitations of each within an ecosystem where innovation, execution and value capture occur in a decentralized and accelerated way.

It's no longer about which company offers the most features or who scales the fastest.

What is at stake is who best designs their strategic architecture: a configuration that integrates vision, culture of innovation, dynamic customer-centric business models, flexible and adaptable operating models, technological leverage (data science, automation, personalization, scale, scope and continuous learning) and growth mindset (learning organizations, with people in continuous development of intellectual, emotional and relational skills).

And for Startups, SMEs and large corporations, choosing where to play is key.

From Functionality to Value System: Redefining Competitive Advantage

For decades, technological competition revolved around who offered the best tool: more powerful functionality, a more intuitive interface, or a more specific solution. The advantage was in what each product did.

That paradigm is no longer enough. Today, functionalities are easily replicated: integrated as open APIs, embedded in broader flows, or become part of modular solutions. In this new scenario, what matters is not the isolated tool, but the system to which it belongs. Competitive advantage shifts to how: how different functions are articulated into coherent, efficient, adaptable and scalable operating models.

Autonomous agents, like Manus, represent this emergent logic. They do not require direct human interface or a sequence of clicks. They execute complex processes from a single instruction, orchestrating multiple tasks that were previously dispersed across different platforms and roles.

But this technical capacity, by itself, does not guarantee competitive advantage. Value arises not only from what the technology can do, but from how it is integrated into a clear strategy and value generation system. The central questions are not technological, but strategic: What need does it solve? What market are you targeting? What actors does it displace or complement? What business model supports it? What value architecture allows it to scale?

In this new dynamic, the differential is not in the technology per se, but in its strategic articulation. Competing is no longer about having the best tool, but rather about building validated business models and flexible and automated operating models that respond with agility to the environment. Only in this way is it possible to play with an advantage in terms of speed, efficiency and continuous learning.

Business Models and Value Strategies in the New Competitive Dynamics

In contexts of accelerated change, strategy can no longer be formulated as a rigid long-term plan. Instead, it becomes a continuous practice: a clear direction that dynamically adjusts in the face of new learning, validation, and input from the environment.

The business model is the tangible manifestation of that strategy: it defines what is delivered, to whom, and how value is captured. From there, the operating model takes shape as its enabler: it organizes how it is executed, with what resources, under what processes and with what degree of flexibility.

The operating model encompasses five key dimensions that, interconnected, allow you to convert a strategic intention into tangible results:

* Technology and platforms, which make up the digital infrastructure on which value flows are built, automated and scaled.

* Processes and work flows, which define the core activities, their sequence, their efficiency and their ability to adapt to change.

* People and organization, which express the way in which teams are structured, coordinate, develop capabilities and make decisions.

* Information and decision-making systems, which allow data to be captured, generate actionable knowledge and operate with real-time intelligence.

* Alliances and ecosystem, which expand operational boundaries through integration with strategic partners, platforms and collaboration networks.

Together—business model and operating model—they form the architecture from which value is built and the competitive environment is responded to. This strategic articulation is what allows us to analyze how different types of actors—startups in opportunistic mode, profitable startups, SMEs and large corporations—design their competitive path based on the incentives they face, their technological capabilities and their structural restrictions.

1. Startups and opportunistic Solopreneurs: strategic arbitrage

In the traditional theory of disruption, as proposed by Clayton Christensen, startups started in small niches, leveraged on still immature technologies. As these technologies matured—crossing the Gartner curve—they were able to access more profitable markets and eventually compete with incumbents (the market leaders). It was a long-term, progressively escalating game.

Today, that game changed. Technologies such as generative AI, autonomous agents, and no-code tools are evolving with such speed and accessibility that entrepreneurs and agile teams can apply these tools directly to real problems, designing powerful functionalities and launching products with immediate impact. It is no longer about inventing new technologies, but about detecting a neglected Job to Be Done and solving it with what is already available, before the big players can adapt.

Thus a new category emerges: Startups and opportunistic individuals. They do not develop their own technologies, but they use them with focus, speed and empathy, connecting with the client better than the incumbents, who due to culture, processes and structures take time to react. These startups arbitrate a competitive gap: they act just when a solution is already technically possible, but has not yet been massively implemented.

In this context, the advantage is temporary. Corporations tend to adapt, and when they do, they bring with them scale, reputation, and resources. The technology that allows us to differentiate today will be a replicated standard tomorrow. Therefore, the objective cannot be to scale at any cost. Disorderly growth destroys value if it is not supported by an advantage that is difficult to imitate.

It is also unrealistic to assume that they will be acquired automatically. If they don't develop tangible differentials beyond technology—such as a strong community, a loyal user base, unique data, proprietary design, or a powerful brand—there is nothing clear to buy. Technology alone is not enough.

Therefore, these startups must act intelligently: prioritize early profitability, capitalize on the opportunity, and build real strategic strengths from day one. If an acquisition is part of the game, they must design from the beginning what will make them valuable and desired (beyond the technology that is being democratized).

Disruption, in this new environment, no longer ends in replacing the leader.

Many times, they will be incomplete disruptions, but disruptions nonetheless: solutions that erode dominant positions, fragment markets or create new product expectations. And what threatens incumbents most is that they do not face a single disruption at a time, but dozens, on different fronts, driven by different teams, tools and product drivers. It is the competitive equivalent of a hundred wolves attacking a single lion. The complexity of adaptation, internal wear and tear, and reorganization costs are real and increasing.

In this new game, capturing value at the right time is a strategic success. And doing it with focus, without burning resources, building something valuable beyond technology, is the new intelligent way of entrepreneurship.

2. Ambidextrous and orchestrating corporations: designing the response to multiple and incomplete disruptions

While hundreds of Opportunistic Startups launch simultaneous attacks on different sides of the market, large corporations face a completely different challenge. They operate with complex structures, multiple decision layers, reputational risks and systemic responsibilities. But they also have unique advantages: privileged access to data, positioned brands, distribution channels, customer relationships and an invaluable installed base.

In an environment where disruption is no longer linear or singular, but fragmented, simultaneous and often incomplete, corporations must adopt a new logic: be strategic orchestrators of change. This involves actively observing the ecosystem, identifying which innovations capture real value, and quickly deciding what to integrate, what to imitate, what to buy, and what to pass up.

The answer is not to act in all directions at once, but to develop an ambidextrous structure, capable of exploiting what exists while exploring the new. In this regard, Geoffrey Moore's Four Zones framework is especially useful:

* Productivity Zone: where the core business is optimized through digitalization, automation and operational efficiency.

* Profitability Zone: where core performance is maximized, exploiting existing assets with a focus on growth and return.

* Incubation Zone: the strategic space to explore emerging disruptions and design new business models capable of representing at least 10% of future turnover. This zone is not random experimental: it should focus on opportunities that directly challenge the current model or enable high-impact expansions. Here products, services, spin-offs and alliances are incubated that can become defensive weapons against external threats, or offensive movements to capture new verticals. The systematic support of startups, venture building programs or the acquisition of opportunistic players with strong traction are key strategies to strengthen this area. Success lies in strategically selecting what to incubate, how to scale it, and when to integrate it.

* Transformation Zone: where validated innovations with evidence of impact are integrated into the core. This area must be able to absorb new solutions and adapt them to the corporate scale and culture, whether for defensive purposes (reacting to disruptions) or offensive (leading new business categories).

Each area requires different mindsets, processes and metrics. The real challenge is to achieve fluid articulation between them: detecting when an incubated innovation must scale, when a transformation puts the core at risk, and how to adapt the organization without paralyzing friction.

Corporations that achieve this orchestration will become dominant players not because of their size, but because of their capacity for structured adaptation. They will understand that they do not need to create all the innovations, but they do need to be the ones that best identify, absorb and capitalize on those that arise around them.

It is no longer about defending a position, but about designing a dynamic strategic architecture capable of responding, integrating and converting a continuous stream of partial disruptions into competitive advantage.

3. Startups or Solopreneurs with a virtuous model: profitability, purpose and strategic design from the beginning

In contrast to the tactical arbitrage approach of Opportunistic Startups, there is another equally powerful way: the construction of startups with a virtuous business model, aligned with a strategic purpose. This path, promoted by the Scalabl® methodology, suggests that it is possible—and desirable—to undertake from the base with structural intelligence, designing profitable, sustainable businesses without dependence on external capital.

These startups do not compete for speed or hype, but for clarity, purpose and real value. Their approach is strategic from day one: they choose underserved niches—many times in non-consumption areas, where there are still no accessible or adapted solutions for certain segments—and design a value proposition aligned to a specific Job to Be Done, validated directly with real customers.

The business model is built light, iterative and financially healthy: with a minimum cost structure, limited economic and financial risk, and profitability from the first sale. They do not depend on investment rounds, nor do they need to scale prematurely. Instead, they finance their growth with their own customers, which reinforces the focus on value and loyalty.

Technology—especially AI—plays a key role in this approach, but not to scale fast without control, but to scale intelligently and efficiently. AI makes it possible to automate tasks, accelerate validations, generate content, personalize proposals and build processes that previously required large structures. Thus, the startup can maintain its light essence, while gaining operational capacity and sophistication.

The strategy is clear: start with a specific niche (visionaries), with a well-defined Job to Be Done, to differentiate yourself based on perceived value. Instead of entering saturated markets, they choose blue oceans: low-competition, high-value spaces, where they can sustain healthy margins, grow by referral, and validate before scaling.

Furthermore, the current context provides a unique advantage: the possibility of applying advanced technologies to design pioneering solutions in spaces not yet exploited. AI, combined with no-code tools and intelligent agents, allows agile teams to create high-impact proposals in specific verticals, but still neglected or made invisible by the mass market. Thus, the startup does not need to run towards open competition, but rather detect opportunities where there is no competitive pressure, and from there build a solid, sustainable model with real growth potential.

This phenomenon breaks the classic sequence of the adoption cycle. The technical and distribution barriers are so low that a well-designed startup can break in directly, without sacrificing financial principles or compromising its sustainability. The strategy is no longer waiting for technological maturity, but rather anticipating it with structural intelligence, clear purpose and an impeccable value proposition.

In short, these startups show that disruption can also be planned. That scaling is not mandatory, and that success is not in the amount of capital raised, but in the quality of the value created and sustained over time.

4. Strategic and light SMEs: focus, validation and exploration from the base

Small and medium-sized businesses operate with significant constraints: legacy structures, limited resources, and heavy dependence on established businesses. However, in the new competitive environment, where agility, validation and strategic design are key differentials, its size can become an advantage. If they manage to rethink themselves with focus, method and flexibility, they can be profoundly transformed without losing their essence.

The starting point is the strategic focus: clearly identifying which business units really work, that have already been validated or that have a clear potential for validation in the current market.

Everything that does not respond to this logic must be discarded. It is not about doing more, but about doing it with focus and maintaining flexibility.

From there, the way is to redesign lightly:

* Reducing the operational structure, eliminating costs, assets and processes that do not generate direct value.

* Automating what has already been validated, incorporating accessible digital tools to scale without overloading.

* Exploring intelligently, based on its validated base, its deep knowledge of the client and its accumulated operational experience.

This exploration can—and should—be inspired by the style of Opportunistic Startups: identify opportunities, test with low risk and apply mature technologies to solve new emerging needs.

In the case of SMEs, this approach gains even more strength, because it relies on existing strengths of their business model and already validated operational capabilities.

Unlike startups, which are often left out when the big ones react, SMEs already operate in their own niches and also have influence in other ecosystems and adjacent markets. Their reputation, relationships (allies), brand, installed base, cash flow, operational synergies, distribution channels and other strengths can give them the necessary legitimacy to sustain these arbitrations.

If they integrate this exploration logic with strategic intelligence, they can not only innovate, but also retain the created market, beating even larger and less agile leaders, and strengthening their position in the long term.

In an environment of permanent disruption, the SME that strategically reinvents itself can become a highly competitive actor: profitable, agile, customer-focused and with a real capacity for sustainable innovation.

If you read and think this is crazy! I have good news: you don't have to make this fantastic, just a little better than current and future competitors.

Strategic Architectures: the new unit of competence

In an environment where technologies evolve exponentially, where autonomous agents begin to execute complex tasks with minimal human intervention, and where access to computational power and strategic capabilities has been democratized, what competes are no longer companies, but systems: strategic architectures that integrate technology, business model, operational design, purpose and continuous learning.

The advantage is no longer in controlling assets, but in designing a system that learns faster, scales frictionlessly, adapts intelligently, and better serves its key players. The biggest and the fastest don't win. Those who design the best win.

These architectures are not static. They are reconfigured with each new input, validation or change of context. With a clear purpose as an anchor, they can expand, cross verticals, build modular solutions, and capture value from different positions in the system. Its strength lies in internal coherence and structural flexibility.

What was once the privilege of large corporations—data, infrastructure, talent, reach—is now increasingly within the reach of startups and individuals. And in the coming months, the integration of exponential technologies (general AI, quantum computing, biotechnology, robotics, brain-machine interfaces) will change the game even more.

This is not just another revolution. It is the beginning of a new competitive order, marked by a dynamic of increasing shocks, where those who understand first how to design value will have the advantage.

Compete from strategic architecture

The game changed. Products, not even companies, no longer compete. Systems designed to learn, adapt and grow with purpose compete.

Each actor—startup, SME, corporation, even individuals—can build their own strategic architecture. You will do it with what you have: capabilities, relationships, knowledge, technology. But the key is not how much you have, but how you integrate it, how you iterate, and how you respond to what the environment presents to you.

In this new scenario, the strategy is no longer choosing a path. It is building a system that can go many ways: explore and implement, scale and adapt, automate without losing human connection, and create value in a sustained way in the midst of change.

The real question is no longer what are you selling?, nor how much can you grow? It is deeper and more urgent:

What system are you designing to create and sustain value in a world that changes every week? Because the future will belong to those who design it strategically

I would love to accompany you as a consultant in this challenge. Don't stop writing to me.

Francisco Santolo

What the big guys don't see (yet): Opportunistic Startups and disruption

Opportunistic Startups: Incomplete Disruptions to Exploit

In an environment where innovation is accelerated and technology is democratized: investment, technology development and scale are put in check.

As part of my article The New Competitive Game in the Age of AI I proposed a new strategic category within the framework of Clayton Christensen's theory of disruption: Opportunistic Startups.

In general, these do not replace industry leaders with complete disruption, since the democratization of the technology they arbitrate can also be adopted slowly but successfully by leaders. The delay is usually not such that it does not recover from the disruption.

These Startups capture the market until the reaction of the leader, and they do not try to scale, but rather make cash and move quickly towards a new opportunity. Unless the competitive scheme of the industry allows them to grow and not be stopped (see examples that follow).

But the multiplicity of attacks by Opportunistic Startups, eroding competitive advantages from different angles, requires leading companies to be agile, (flexible) strategic prioritization and precision in execution. It is the attack of 20 hyenas on a Lion.

• ? What are Opportunistic Startups?

They are small teams or solopreneurs that:

1. They detect a function enabled by accessible technology (generative AI, no-code, automation, agents) that the incumbents have not yet integrated.

2. They solve the Job to Be Done (progress) demanded by the leader's consumers with solutions that provide greater value (in functional, social, emotional attributes, or at a lower price)

3. They build light business models, with a focus on early profitability and without the need for external capital. They are not aiming for scale, but rather to capitalize on the attack.

4. They move with focus and speed, before the incumbents react.

• ? The disruption they generate may be incomplete, but if it is well capitalized, with a good business model, it becomes a powerful source of cash flow to move on to another opportunistic attack.

• ? Real examples, analyzed with the Scalabl® approach

• ? Zicofy – Empathic AI for mental health

Two Argentine entrepreneurs, based in Seville, launched Zicofy in 2023. Their proposal: democratize access to emotional well-being through an empathetic AI called ZicoAsis, clinically validated by the University of Seville. This AI listens to the user, detects emotions and generates pre-diagnostic reports compatible with the DSM-5.

* Feature enabled: Advanced emotional processing.

* Job to Be Done (progress) replaced: Repetitive history taking (collection of patient data), clinical documentation and initial emotional examination of the patient.

* Defensive strengths of the Startup: Scientific validation, clinical integration, demonstrated efficiency. (they allow you to survive longer, or eventually open a door to not be replaced by leaders. There are markets where leaders do not have the strength and dynamism to react and the delay is very long)

* Did the incumbent react? No. Providers such as OSDE, AXA or Sanitas have not yet adopted similar technologies. The window is still open, who will win?

• ? Cluely – AI for interviews and exams

From his dorm room at Columbia University, Chungin Lee created Cluely, an AI that assists users during exams or interviews in real time, displaying answers through a hidden window in the browser. Its discreet interface and efficient operation skyrocketed its popularity… and its controversy.

Cluely raised $5.3M in investment before its first year, while universities and companies rushed to react.

* Feature enabled: Browser extension + Real-time UX.

* Job to be done (progress) replaced: Cognitive preparation for interviews or tests. Cluely allows you to "perform without mastering the content." (Or simply, cheating).

* Defensive strengths of the Startup: Fluid user experience, perfect timing, viral growth, investor support.

* Did the incumbent react? In this case there is no market leader for cheating. But the incumbents are the ones who prepare you for the exams. Together with the owners of the exams, they implemented blocking, detection and sanctions without success.

• ? Scalabl® Strategic Reflection

These startups are not looking to kill the lion. But like a pack of hyenas, they erode their dominance with precise attacks. Each one detects a blind spot, acts with speed and capitalizes on the moment.

The challenge: the advantage is temporary. If they do not build strategic assets—community, data, design, brand—they will be easily replicable. What is a disruption today may be the standard tomorrow.

• ? At Scalabl® we teach to go beyond that tactic. To design virtuous business models, with strategic direction, continuous validation and the ability to scale without burning resources or depending on external investment.

• ? And the incumbents?

Leaders who understand change are mutating towards ambidextrous and orchestrating structures of the ecosystem. They no longer seek to innovate everything behind closed doors. They learn to observe, absorb, incubate and acquire what emerges.

Whoever achieves this will not dominate by scale, but by the capacity for intelligent integration.

Are you starting out with technology already available?

The question is: Are you designing a strategic architecture that can integrate them

Thanks for reading and sharing!