<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <rss version="2.0" xml:base="https://knowledge.insead.edu"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
      <channel>
        <title>INSEAD Knowledge</title>
        <link>https://knowledge.insead.edu</link>
        <description>The business school for the world</description>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 10:21:36 +0800</lastBuildDate>
        <language>en</language>
        <item><title>Will AI Eat SaaS for Lunch?</title>
                  <link>https://knowledge.insead.edu/economics-finance/will-ai-eat-saas-lunch</link>
                  <description> <![CDATA["Software is eating the world", venture capitalist and entrepreneur Marc Andreessen famously declared in 2011. The ensuing 15 years proved him prescient. In February 2026, a Substack article by Citrini Research grabbed headlines and triggered a market sell-off of SaaS (software-as-a-service) firms, wiping out nearly US$1 trillion in market value in a matter of days. Citrini’s central thesis? A cannibalistic last feast where AI eats the very software industry that’s been eating the world. The argument is simple: If anyone can prompt an LLM (large language model) and vibe code a custom enterprise resource planning or customer relationship management system in an afternoon, the multi-billion-dollar SaaS industry becomes a dinosaur overnight. It’s a frighteningly plausible thought that puts the spotlight on Citrini and the article’s author, James van Geelen, but it is fundamentally naive because it assumes that we live in a world without friction.Why firms won’t build all systems in-houseAI tools like Anthropic’s Claude are incredible at instantaneous prototyping. But as any software engineer knows, writing code is 10% of the job; maintaining, scaling and debugging it for edge cases is the other 90%. Software isn't just a static pile of logic; it’s a living organism. Production-strength software requires auditability, 24/7 reliability, API (application programming interface) stability and security compliance, all at once and all at scale. These aren’t things that LLMs, which are random systems by nature, can replicate. The “AI eats SaaS for lunch” logic naturally leads to the conclusion that all firms will build all their software in-house – because now, with the help of AI, they can. But can they really? Will they really? I bet they won’t for two reasons. For starters, a primary reason why companies buy enterprise software is to transfer risk. When a Fortune 500 company uses specialised software by a SaaS provider for cybersecurity or HR, they aren't just buying code; they're buying compliance with security frameworks, GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) indemnity and ISO (International Organization for Standardization) certifications. If firms build systems in-house using general-purpose tools such as Claude or Google’s Gemini, what happens if (or when) things go wrong, such as data leaks? There will be no vendor to sue, no platform to blame and no security patch to purchase.Another reason relates to scale and interoperability. A third-party provider spreads the cost of high-level security and compliance across thousands of customers. An individual firm trying to replicate that in-house would find the "efficiency" of AI quickly eaten up by the massive overheads of self-certification and liability insurance.If all firms build all their systems in-house, we'll be back in the world of fragmented software with limited interoperability. Remember legacy systems? Firms will end up with isolated legacy piles of AI-written code that no one understands. Opportunities and challenges If the trend of building software in-house actually takes off and every company starts creating their own bespoke AI systems, the complexity of auditing those systems becomes exponential. Auditors would then become the most needed and sought-after profession on earth. If van Geelen really believes what he says, then he might consider auditing as a new profession to hedge against the apocalypse he hypothesised. Who knows, the auditing profession might be the answer to the problem of AI displacing jobs.Everyone can buy a shovel. Not everyone shovels their own snow. Summarising all the above, let’s not forget that AI is a general-purpose technology and software companies are specialists. It’s hard to argue that generalists will replace all specialists in the modern world, which is essentially what Citrini’s scenario argues. Everyone can buy a shovel. Not everyone shovels their own snow. What’s more, the "AI eats everything" narrative assumes that LLMs have access to all the world's intelligence. They don't. Besides every company’s proprietary data, there’s the paywall barrier, which keeps the most valuable data – highly structured, organised and predictable information required for professional-grade decisions – behind the moats of companies like LexisNexis, Thomson Reuters, Nielsen and the like. Without access to this information, generic models can’t generate deep insights; they risk simply recycling data that’s available in the public domain. Indeed, the owners of the data, not the owners of the models, hold the ultimate leverage.What will AI do to SaaS?SaaS won’t be eaten by AI, but it will be shaken and stirred by it. For instance, Block reduced its headcount by nearly half in February, culling over 4,000 positions. And in March, Atlassian, one of the SaaS companies hit hardest by the market sell-off, retrenched 10% of its staff.Gone is the cosy convention of per-user pricing and 5% annual price increases justified with the release of new features nobody asked for. Companies will need to be more discerning and can wield a credible threat to take business away from a SaaS provider (whether or not they follow through on it is another matter). This threat will inevitably shake up the SaaS industry. Those who can deliver measurable value will survive and thrive. Those who cannot will perish, and the industry will emerge leaner and stronger.A version of this article was published in The Business Times.]]></description>
                  <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
                  <guid isPermaLink="false"> 48491 at https://knowledge.insead.edu</guid>
                  <comments> https://knowledge.insead.edu/economics-finance/will-ai-eat-saas-lunch#comments</comments>
                <enclosure url="https://knowledge.insead.edu/sites/knowledge/files/styles/panoramic_large/public/2026-03/shutterstock_2210055765.jpg?itok=edLWRtz_" type="image/jpeg" length="879547" /><dc:creator>Lily Fang</dc:creator></item><item><title>Why Open Innovation Often Fails to Scale</title>
                  <link>https://knowledge.insead.edu/entrepreneurship/why-open-innovation-often-fails-scale</link>
                  <description> <![CDATA[Open innovation is no longer optional for organisations facing accelerating technological change. They must collaborate beyond their boundaries to access new capabilities and ideas. But while partnerships with start-ups and external innovators have become widespread, many initiatives still fail to deliver meaningful business impact.This was the focus of a recent webinar moderated by Vibha Gaba, The Berghmans Lhoist Chaired Professor of Entrepreneurial Leadership at INSEAD. In conversation with Giacomo Silvestri, executive chairman of Eniverse Ventures and group head of innovation ecosystems at Eni, and Benjamin N. Haddad, managing director of technology strategy at Accenture, she explored why the challenge is no longer finding innovation but integrating it.In industries undergoing rapid transformation, innovation has become an ecosystem activity, and companies can no longer rely solely on internal research and development. Yet, openness alone rarely delivers results. Many organisations still focus on launching pilots, accelerators or partnerships without building the structures required to scale promising solutions.How organisations can succeedAs Gaba highlighted, large organisations operate as complex systems. New technologies must fit into existing processes, data architectures and governance frameworks. Without clear ownership and alignment with business priorities, innovation efforts risk stalling in the so-called “POC death valley” – where proof-of-concept projects fail to transition into operational deployment.Artificial intelligence is raising the stakes. As AI tools make it easier to identify start-ups and emerging technologies, competitive advantage is shifting towards orchestration and execution. The organisations that succeed will be those that treat innovation as a disciplined business process, balancing experimentation with integration and long-term value creation.]]></description>
                  <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 02:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
                  <guid isPermaLink="false"> 48471 at https://knowledge.insead.edu</guid>
                  <comments> https://knowledge.insead.edu/entrepreneurship/why-open-innovation-often-fails-scale#comments</comments>
                <enclosure url="https://knowledge.insead.edu/sites/knowledge/files/styles/panoramic_large/public/2026-03/shutterstock_1887354130.jpg?itok=bJjOjEUz" type="image/jpeg" length="625694" /><dc:creator>INSEAD Knowledge</dc:creator></item><item><title>Getting Rich Quick May Not Guarantee Happiness</title>
                  <link>https://knowledge.insead.edu/career/getting-rich-quick-may-not-guarantee-happiness</link>
                  <description> <![CDATA[Many dream of living their best lives without financial worries. For some, this means hoping for a lottery win; however, a select few entrepreneurs achieve such a windfall through a successful exit from their start-up. After the challenges of building and scaling a business, they find themselves in the prime of their careers, enjoying financial freedom and with a lot of time on their hands.Although this might sound like bliss, it can bring unexpected emotional and existential challenges. Successful “exiters” can find themselves forced to transition from their old life to a new one, to find new directions and goals. Success brings enormous freedom, but greater ambiguity.This reality is drawn from interviews with entrepreneurs who successfully exited their start-ups, many of whom had participated in INSEAD’s Post-Exit Entrepreneurs Retreat. Examining how they deal with these challenges can offer valuable lessons for entrepreneurs getting ready for their own exit.Prepare for an emotional transitionAll the successful post-exit entrepreneurs we spoke to, many of them in their early 40s, experienced emotional turmoil. This manifested itself in several ways, including a profound sense of loss. For founders, their businesses are often deeply intertwined with their identity – years of time, effort and emotional investment make it difficult to separate the self from the venture. Letting go isn’t just a logistical or financial transition; it’s a psychological rupture. All of them described how disorienting it was to no longer lead something they had poured so much of themselves into.Beyond identity, there’s also the existential challenge of finding new meaning and purpose. One interviewee reflected, “Friends say, ‘You’re rich, what’s the issue?’ But for me, the real struggle now is meaning. Who am I without the business?” This quest, no longer defined by business metrics, becomes the less visible but no less demanding challenge of post-exit life. Some of our interviewees also experienced self-doubt. They questioned whether their success was down to skill or just luck. When some were unable to replicate their previous achievements, they began to question whether they really deserved their financial rewards.Connecting with like-minded people in a safe space to openly discuss your emotional struggles can help normalise these experiences – and build the support system you need to work through and overcome them.Reflect on your psychology of wealthFor many, a successful exit means freedom from financial pressure and the chance to create a legacy. While the technical aspects including wealth management, asset allocation, tax planning and so on typically receive considerable attention, the deep intra- and inter-personal work that comes with financial freedom is often overlooked. Understanding what we term the “psychology of wealth” involves exploring how money interacts with your sense of self and how it impacts your relationships.It means shifting your mindset from thinking about wealth as something to control or maximise to seeing it as a tool to create, maintain and renew relationships. This includes intimate relationships – such as with partners, children and close family – but also broader ties to community, society and social causes. Wealth becomes less about possessions and more about self-expansion and connection.Navigating the psychology of wealth involves reflecting on several deeply personal and sometimes uncomfortable questions, even if the answers may evolve over time. These questions range from “How much wealth is enough – and why?” to “What is the purpose of wealth” and “Why do I want to give back, and to whom?”The most resilient and fulfilling financial plans aren’t those crafted in isolation or alone with financial advisers. What’s needed are coherent wealth and philanthropy strategies that serve a larger purpose and legacy, grounded in honest conversations with yourself, loved ones and the relevant communities. They also need to be reviewed on a regular basis and should evolve to reflect your changing values and needs. Redefine success on your own terms To overcome the challenges that may come with achieving financial freedom, you need to redefine success on your own terms. This doesn’t have to be about building another business but can be about finding fulfilment in new and unexpected ways.Our interviewees generally took one of four paths as they searched for what really mattered to them. Some returned to entrepreneurship, either as serial founders or investors. One of our interviewees, Timothy (all names used in this article are pseudonyms), started another business with new partners. His desire to be involved in a new venture revealed a personal quest to affirm and revalidate his abilities.Others looked to maintain their sense of self by staying involved in the entrepreneurial ecosystem as advisers or mentors. Still others used their new-found freedom to make a social impact. Another interviewee, Clement, saw philanthropic efforts as a natural evolution of his entrepreneurial drive – still “building”, but now in service of social or environmental goals. He pursued climate and energy studies and palliative care training, and explored opportunities in local politics, climate-focused non-profits and philanthropic investments.Finally, some decided to prioritise personal interests and relationships – areas they may have previously neglected during their entrepreneurial years. To Rohan, for instance, his personal wellness and family are now his biggest priority. He chose to focus on being a full-time father and now measures success in terms of relationships and self-care. There are no templates to follow – the key is to define success in this era of life on your own terms. Give yourself permission to explore and discover which activities make you feel like you’re spending your time and money well and are utilising your talents in the most meaningful way. A word of caution: Be intentional about your time. Avoid diving into an all-consuming project unless it aligns with your priorities and remember that the first path you take may not be the one you stick with. For example, Rohan, although mostly content, did admit that being a full-time father can trigger feelings of inadequacy. That is normal and acceptable. In fact, he is already beginning to explore other paths.Beyond successful entrepreneurs, the challenges and potential paths we’ve outlined apply to other professionals who have achieved financial freedom and are looking to pursue something new. Importantly, you must be prepared to handle the emotional and existential challenges that this transition might present. Support from like-minded people facing similar issues can help you negotiate the process and navigate your newfound freedom with greater clarity and purpose.]]></description>
                  <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
                  <guid isPermaLink="false"> 48466 at https://knowledge.insead.edu</guid>
                  <comments> https://knowledge.insead.edu/career/getting-rich-quick-may-not-guarantee-happiness#comments</comments>
                <enclosure url="https://knowledge.insead.edu/sites/knowledge/files/styles/panoramic_large/public/2026-03/shutterstock_2446813659.jpg?itok=ws3pGi_g" type="image/jpeg" length="952912" /><dc:creator>Winnie Jiang</dc:creator><dc:creator>Balagopal Vissa</dc:creator></item>
      </channel>
    </rss>