After two decades in technology, I’ve learned to be cautious with predictions.
I’ve watched “revolutionary” platforms fade quietly. I’ve seen incremental improvements reshape entire industries. And I’ve learned that the most dangerous words in tech are usually: “This time it’s different.”
Agentic AI is different in meaningful ways—but not in the way hype narratives suggest. The future won’t belong to the loudest demos or the most autonomous agents. It will belong to the organizations that understand where agentic systems genuinely create leverage—and where they introduce unacceptable risk.
Here’s what I’d bet on. And what I wouldn’t.
What I Believe Will Win
1. Composable Agent Architectures
The future is modular.
Monolithic agents that try to do everything will struggle under real-world complexity. Enterprises don’t operate as single workflows; they operate as layered systems of responsibilities, permissions, and constraints.
Composable agent architectures—where agents are built from smaller, well-defined components—scale better because they mirror how organizations already function.
In practice, this means:
- Separate agents for planning, execution, validation, and reporting
- Shared services for memory, retrieval, and observability
- Clear boundaries between reasoning and action
Composable systems are easier to debug, govern, and evolve. They also allow teams to replace parts without rewriting the whole system when models, tools, or regulations change—which they will.
This isn’t just an architectural preference. It’s a survival strategy.
2. Strong Governance Layers
Governance is not optional. It’s inevitable.
As agents gain the ability to trigger real-world actions—updating records, approving transactions, provisioning infrastructure—organizations will demand control mechanisms that match the risk.
The winning systems will treat governance as a first-class layer, not an afterthought.
This includes:
- Tool access control and permission scoping
- Audit logs of decisions and actions
- Approval workflows for high-impact operations
- Policy enforcement at runtime, not just at design time
Agentic AI without governance may work in demos. It will not survive compliance audits, security reviews, or executive scrutiny.
The future belongs to agents that are powerful because they are constrained—not despite it.
3. Hybrid Human–AI Workflows
Pure autonomy is overrated. Collaboration is underappreciated.
The most effective agentic systems I’ve seen don’t aim to eliminate humans. They aim to amplify them by removing friction, surfacing insights, and handling routine execution.
Hybrid workflows recognize a simple truth:
Some decisions benefit from speed. Others benefit from judgment.
In mature deployments:
- Agents act independently at low risk
- Agents propose actions at medium risk
- Agents escalate at high risk
This mirrors how strong teams already work. Junior staff handle execution. Senior staff handle exceptions and judgment calls.
Agentic AI doesn’t replace the org chart—it operationalizes it.
4. Domain-Specific Agents
General intelligence is fascinating. Domain intelligence is useful.
The agents that will deliver real business value are deeply grounded in specific domains: finance, healthcare operations, logistics, compliance, customer support, engineering workflows.
These agents understand:
- Industry-specific data structures
- Domain rules and constraints
- Regulatory requirements
- Organizational context
They don’t need to “know everything.” They need to know enough about one domain to make consistently good decisions.
This is where retrieval, context curation, and knowledge boundaries matter far more than model size.
Specialization beats generalization when stakes are real.
5. Enterprise-Owned Intelligence
This is one of my strongest convictions.
Organizations that treat intelligence as a rented commodity will eventually regret it.
Models will change. Pricing will change. Terms will change. Regulations will change.
What shouldn’t change is ownership over:
- Business logic
- Decision frameworks
- Institutional knowledge
- Operational memory
The future belongs to enterprises that build and own their agentic intelligence—using models as interchangeable components, not foundational dependencies.
This doesn’t mean building models from scratch. It means owning the system around the models.
That distinction matters more than most people realize.
What I’m Skeptical About
1. Fully Autonomous General Agents in Critical Systems
I don’t doubt we’ll see increasingly capable general agents.
I doubt we should trust them with critical systems without tight oversight.
Complex environments are full of edge cases, conflicting incentives, and incomplete information. Even highly capable agents can fail in subtle, high-impact ways—especially when goals are underspecified or contexts shift.
In low-stakes environments, that’s acceptable. In regulated or safety-critical systems, it’s reckless.
Autonomy should be earned incrementally, not declared upfront.
2. One-Size-Fits-All AI Platforms
Generic platforms promise speed and simplicity. Businesses deliver complexity and exceptions.
Every serious organization has:
- Legacy systems
- Custom workflows
- Internal politics
- Regulatory obligations
Platforms optimized for the “average customer” inevitably fail the moment real constraints appear.
They don’t fail because they’re poorly built. They fail because abstraction always leaks.
The future isn’t one platform to rule them all. It’s adaptable systems designed around specific organizational realities.
3. “No-Code” Agent Builders for Complex Businesses
No-code tools are valuable—for experimentation.
They are dangerous when mistaken for production-ready systems.
Complex businesses require:
- Precise logic
- Explicit contracts
- Robust error handling
- Deep integration
Abstracting these concerns away doesn’t eliminate them. It just hides them until they break—often at the worst possible moment.
Agentic systems are not spreadsheets. Treating them as such creates false confidence.
4. AI Without Accountability
This is where I draw the hardest line.
Any system that can influence real-world outcomes must have accountability—clear ownership of decisions, failures, and corrections.
“ The AI did it ” is not an acceptable answer in business, law, or ethics.
The future belongs to systems that make responsibility explicit:
- Who approved this action?
- What data informed this decision?
- How can it be reversed?
- Who is accountable when it fails?
Without accountability, trust collapses. And without trust, adoption stalls.
Final Thought
Agentic AI is not about replacing humans.
It’s about raising the baseline of what organizations can do—faster decisions, fewer bottlenecks, more consistent execution.
But that future will not be built by chasing autonomy for its own sake.
It will be built by teams that approach agentic AI with humility, structure, and long-term thinking. Teams that treat agents as systems to be designed, governed, and improved—not magic to be unleashed.
Some will build lasting advantage.
Others will build impressive demos.
I know which side I’d rather be on.
Top comments (0)