AI Strategy

Future of Work

5–7 minutes

AI Doesn’t Fit the Old Playbook So Why Are Companies Still Using It?

Why AI breaks linear transformation models, and what replaces them

Rafi Menachem

CEO & Founder

Abstract digital circuit board representing outdated technology frameworks in AI adoption

Share

AI doesn’t fit the old playbook, so why are so many companies still using it?

In "Why Traditional Transformation Models Are Not Working for AI," Dr. Brian Massey outlines a critical mismatch between legacy change frameworks and the nature of artificial intelligence. Traditional models were designed for predictable, linear change, but AI is dynamic, non-linear, and continuously evolving.

Key Points from the Article:
- Traditional models are too rigid: Legacy transformation frameworks are static and sequential, making them poorly suited for the fluid, experimental nature of AI.
- AI demands adaptability: Real impact comes from iterative, data-driven strategies that can flex and evolve alongside AI capabilities.
- Governance and ethics are central: AI introduces new challenges around transparency, bias, and data privacy, requiring stronger oversight and often centralized functions.
- It’s a team sport: Success depends on cross-functional collaboration; aligning tech, operations, leadership, and governance under one shared vision.

Syntari’s Perspective:
At Syntari, we believe that bridging this gap requires more than just retooling strategy, it demands a modern product operating model. This model shifts organizations away from one-off transformations toward continuous capability-building. In this approach, AI is not a project, it’s a product: iterated, owned, scaled, and constantly improved. We build, and help others build, cross-functional teams around outcomes, enable rapid learning cycles, and ensure governance is embedded from day one. That’s how our clients turn AI into a lasting advantage, scaling smarter, adapting faster, and leaving outdated models behind. Rafi Menachem

For a more in-depth understanding, you can access the full article here: https://lnkd.in/eESJAYhY

Looking for more? Dive into our other articles, updates, and strategies

{ "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "FAQPage", "mainEntity": [ { "@type": "Question", "name": "What is a build vs. buy AI platform decision?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "A build vs. buy AI platform decision is the choice a firm makes between assembling its own AI infrastructure, including data pipelines, orchestration, governance, and model routing, versus adopting an existing platform built for that purpose." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "Should a private equity firm build its own AI orchestration platform?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "For a single workflow, building it yourself is often the right call, and a fast one. For a full orchestration layer spanning governance, vector search, and multi-model routing, most firms find buying is faster and less expensive than building, largely because the infrastructure and the governance are the hard parts, not the workflow itself." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "Is it better to build one AI workflow or a full AI orchestration platform in-house?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "If the goal is one workflow, one automated process, build it. That's often the right way. If the goal is a firm-wide capability spanning multiple workflows and shared governance, most firms are better off building on a platform that already has the infrastructure underneath it than assembling their own from scratch." } } ] }