LeadershipNot yet confirmed elsewhere1 publisher2 min readPublished
The AI Stack Isn't Finished, So Stop Building as Though It Is
Adoption has outrun the personal computer and the internet, yet the technological and institutional foundation stays unsettled. The move is to buy optionality, not lock in architecture.
The Board Room · Leadership desk
What happened
- AI's technological, industrial, and institutional architecture is still unsettled: by this account it has not yet been platformed.
- By some estimates about 2.4 billion people worldwide use a generative AI product every month.
- Salesforce's Agentforce has reached $1.2 billion in annual recurring revenue, part of a fast commercialization wave.
- Measured against the standard of a general-purpose technology like electricity, the transformation still looks shallow and early.
- The recommended posture is to learn faster than you commit, invest in complements, and build assets that outlast architectural change.
Why it matters
- decision With the foundation unsettled, choosing one stack becomes a bet rather than a default, and preserving optionality is the cheaper position until the architecture holds still.
- cost Firms that hard-wire today's configuration pay twice when the shared layer moves: once to build on it, again to rebuild once it shifts.
- capability The one asset a shifting stack cannot erode is organizational capability a shared model does not supply, which is where durable advantage will sit.
- constraint A jagged, task-by-task reliability frontier limits how much work can be safely committed to automation right now.
Platforming, in the sense this argument uses it, has little to do with which vendor wins. It is the arrival of a shared technological, industrial, and institutional architecture stable enough that independent firms can build on top without fearing the ground moves under them [7]. The revenue that makes the current moment look like a maturing ecosystem measures a different thing. A reported $2 billion run rate at Cursor and $1.2 billion in recurring revenue at Salesforce's Agentforce show how fast buyers will try the tools [10][12], not how settled the foundation beneath them is [7].
That distinction is the whole of the investment problem. Adoption has run faster than it did for the personal computer or the internet at the same stage [4], and roughly 2.4 billion people now touch a generative AI product each month [9]. But the essay's own standard is not adoption. It is whether AI becomes a general-purpose technology on the order of electricity or the internal combustion engine [2], and by that measure the complementary innovation and organizational rework such a shift requires is still in its infancy [1]. The binding constraint is not immature models or the usual adoption friction; those are real but not what holds things back [15].
Two findings from the underlying research make the posture concrete. Where AI is reliable remains jagged and task-by-task rather than uniform [5], and the deep productivity gains of a general-purpose technology historically arrive only after a lag, following the intangible investment that a J-curve describes [6]. Both argue against committing capital to a single architecture on the assumption it is finished.
So the counsel is to spend on things that survive a change in the stack. Learn faster than you commit, put money into complements rather than raw model capability, and build organizational capability that no shared model can hand your competitor as easily as it hands it to you [8]. Electricity, the steam engine, and the internet each transformed economies only after successive waves of complementary innovation built around them [3]; the firms that captured value were rarely the ones that bet earliest on a particular configuration.
The uncomfortable part is that many buyers are already staffed and provisioned as though the platform exists. Harvey is embedded across large law firms and Shopify treats AI use as a baseline expectation [13][14]. Treating a well-marketed layer as permanent architecture is exactly the commitment the evidence says to defer.
What to watch
- Whether a dominant technical standard or interoperability layer emerges that firms can build on without lock-in risk.
- Whether measured productivity gains start appearing in aggregate data, signalling the J-curve turning up.
- Whether the enterprise revenue leaders such as Agentforce and Harvey consolidate into a de facto platform others must adopt.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence42
- Adoption58
- Hype gap+8
- Incentives40
- Confidence45
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Judged against the general-purpose-technology standard, progress remains shallow; the complementary innovation, organizational integration, and economywide transformation expected of such a technology are still in their infancy.
- [2]
AI's larger promise is to become a true general-purpose technology, like electricity or the internal combustion engine, that reshapes organizations, industries, and the broader economy.
- [3]
General-purpose technologies transform economies because they are applied across many industries while stimulating successive waves of complementary innovation, as with electricity, the steam engine, and the internet.
- [4]
Generative AI adoption has been faster than adoption of the personal computer or the internet at a comparable stage.
ReportedSupportedSource: Bick, Blandin, and Deming, Management Science, published online Jan. 20, 2026View cited source - [5]
The pattern of where AI is reliable is jagged and task-by-task rather than uniform.
ReportedSupportedSource: Dell'Acqua, McFowland, Mollick, et al., Harvard Business School working paper 24-013, September 2023View cited source - [6]
The deep productivity gains of a general-purpose technology arrive only with a lag, following intangible investment described by a productivity J-curve.
ReportedSupportedSource: Brynjolfsson, Rock, and Syverson on the productivity J-curveView cited source - [7]
AI's surrounding technological, industrial, and institutional architecture remains unsettled, meaning the technology has not yet been fully platformed.
- [8]
The essay recommends that organizations learn faster than they commit, build assets that survive architectural change, invest in complements rather than raw AI capability, and develop organizational capabilities that no shared model can replace.
- [9]
By some estimates, about 2.4 billion people worldwide use generative AI platforms each month.
- [10]
AI coding platform Cursor reportedly passed a $2 billion revenue run rate by early 2026.
- [11]
As of April 2026, Perplexity was reported to have more than 100 million monthly users across its products.
- [12]
Salesforce's Agentforce has reached $1.2 billion in annual recurring revenue.
- [13]
Harvey has spread across large law firms.
- [14]
Shopify has made AI use a baseline expectation across its operations.
- [15]
The essay identifies immature models and ordinary adoption friction as real but not the binding constraint on AI becoming economically transformative.
- [16]
Until AI is platformed, most companies risk building on unstable ground.
Sources
1 independent publisher whose own reporting we read for this story.
- sloanreview.mit.eduBuilding on AI’s Unfinished Foundation
1 article · August 26, 2026
Topics and entities
Follow any of these and your For You feed starts watching them — no settings page required.
Topics
- AI Productivity MeasurementFollow
- Enterprise AI AdoptionFollow
- General-Purpose Technology EconomicsFollow
- Architectural Lock-In RiskFollow
- AI Platform StrategyFollow
Entities
- MIT Sloan Management ReviewFollow
- CursorFollow
- PerplexityFollow
- SalesforceFollow
- AgentforceFollow
- HarveyFollow
- ShopifyFollow
- Erik BrynjolfssonFollow
- Daron AcemogluFollow
- Ethan MollickFollow
- U.S. Census Bureau Business Trends and Outlook SurveyFollow
- Productivity J-CurveFollow