Software in the Age of AI: What really changes, and what does not

Yann Chevalier, CEO of Intersec, was invited by Revaia to debate the future of software in a world dominated by AI. Here are the main points of his position.

There's a lot of talk about the threat AI poses to software vendors. Is that really the right question?

YC: Not really. The central question lies elsewhere: how do you build durable competitive advantages in this sector? On that point, the answer hasn't fundamentally changed. As long as a company can clearly identify its strengths and keep reinforcing them, it stays differentiated. What is shifting is the nature of those differentiators; the ones that matter are those AI can't easily attack.

For Intersec, the key transition is the one that takes us from software vendor to critical infrastructure. It rests on four pillars:

• the sovereignty and trust our clients place in us, where AI changes very little
• our proven track record on use cases deployed across many countries, including in highly regulated sectors such as telecommunications and public authorities
• our technical differentiation, with a technology that represents roughly 1,000 man-years of development, because even with an army of AI agents, engineering excellence remains decisive
• and finally, our ability to maintain a lead in product innovation by consistently being the first to introduce the uses that truly matter to our customers, from AI assistants to the most advanced business features.
  .

Doesn't the collapse of entry barriers on the development side shift value toward go-to-market, distribution, and reputation?

YC: That's part of the answer, but it doesn't capture the whole reality. AI does lower development costs, and that's good news. It's a deflationary force that frees up investment capacity and lets teams hit their targets more efficiently.

But lowering development costs doesn't redistribute competitive positions. Every player benefits from the same dynamic. There's no break in the competitive balance. At Intersec, we don't feel particularly exposed. On the contrary, we see it as a chance to accelerate what we already do well.

On the revenue model, does AI call into question the way you price your offering?

YC: It's first and foremost a question of geography and sector. In mature markets, AI doesn't fundamentally change the equation until its impact is precisely quantified (in business case terms), because decision-makers are still guided by return on investment. In emerging markets, however (which have fewer human resources to operate a solution), or in those especially receptive to innovation (the Middle East, for example), AI features become commonplace quickly, and integrating them turns into a direct lever for pricing the offering. It isn't a universal model, it's deeply contextual.

Being a European technology company today: is that a handicap, an advantage, or neutral?

YC: It's clearly not neutral. For the past six to nine months, our American competitors have been far less present in our markets, except, paradoxically, in Europe, where they keep a strong presence. It's a dynamic we're watching closely. Fundamentally, we still have very significant organic growth potential. Within three to five years, our solutions are meant to equip many countries that still lag behind, both in emergency caller location and in Public Warning Systems. We're also looking at acquisition opportunities, but they remain complementary to our path. Our main engine is still organic growth, driven by sector expertise that AI can't reproduce in the short term.

Photo credits: © Hermance Triay