
How AI Agents Are Redefining Tech Startups
Net Kohen, CEO of Linkme (valued at $100M+), shares insights on using technology to drive business success.
Not that long ago, the idea of a billion-dollar company being run by just a few people would've been laughed out of the room. Unicorn startups have always been associated with big teams, long hours and even longer funding rounds. But that picture is changing—and fast.
AI agents and automation aren't just making things more efficient; they're quietly redrawing the boundaries of what's possible in tech startups. We're heading toward a world where billion-dollar companies might be built and operated by teams of three or fewer people. It sounds crazy, but the shift is already underway.
If you're a tech leader, this is a wake-up call you can't afford to hit snooze on.
The Rise Of Autonomous AI Agents
AI agents have been around in some form for years—think chatbots or task automation tools. But what's different now is how smart and autonomous they've become. These agents can now make decisions, manage processes and even coordinate with other agents, all with minimal (sometimes no) human oversight.
What started as simple support bots has morphed into agents that can manage complex functions like marketing execution, sales outreach and even product iteration. Some agents are capable of creative problem-solving, financial modeling and generating new product strategies.
It's no longer a question of whether these agents can replace traditional functions; it's already happening. More founders are skipping the process of building out departments and instead deploying agents to handle the heavy lifting.
From 100-Person Teams To Three-Person Unicorns
Historically, scaling meant hiring more people. More engineers, more marketers, more customer support reps—the list goes on. The more you grew, the more people you needed to keep things running. AI agents flip that model on its head.
Now, a handful of founders can:
• Automate core functions, using agents trained on very specific datasets.
• Run go-to-market campaigns, where agents not only generate content but also optimize, A/B test and adjust strategies on the fly.
• Handle customer service at scale, with agents that can solve complex customer issues in multiple languages.
• Manage finance and compliance, reducing or even eliminating the need for a full back-office team.
In this way, three people with the right agent stack could build, launch and scale to unicorn status without following the old rules of scale.
What This Means For Tech Leaders
This moment isn't just about automation—it signals a deeper transformation in the very economic model underlying how companies are built. For tech leaders, investors and operators, the implications are far-reaching and demand careful attention. Traditional valuation metrics, such as headcount or conventional organizational hierarchies, will likely lose relevance. Instead, new indicators—like capital efficiency, the sophistication of agent orchestration and speed to market—will become central to how companies are assessed.
At the same time, we're likely to see the rise of a new kind of founder. Success won't necessarily hinge on deep technical expertise or operational management skills. The most effective leaders may be those who excel at orchestrating networks of AI agents—individuals who understand how to align autonomous tools toward a coherent vision.
This shift will also reshape organizational design itself. Rather than focusing on execution, human teams will be reoriented toward higher-order tasks like strategy, creativity and long-term direction. The actual "doing" will increasingly be handled by agents.
As this shift is already happening, it's important to understand what the next steps look like for such an approach.
How To Prepare For This Agent-First World
If you want to stay ahead of this wave, here are a few moves to start considering right now:
Map out your entire operating rhythm on a whiteboard—everything from marketing cadences and onboarding touchpoints to invoice runs and more. Then circle the steps that take up a lot of time but don't require human judgment. Ask yourself: What could ChatGPT handle? Those tasks are perfect candidates for automation with an AI agent.
Roll out one agent at a time, measure the lift and keep a running "kill list" of tasks you'll automate next quarter. The biggest hurdle is usually messy data, so budget a sprint for cleaning it up first. You'll free your team to chase opportunities instead of chasing checklists.
It's not enough to deploy a few bots and hope they behave. Tomorrow's standout leaders will know how to map dependencies, set guardrails and connect their agents together so they hand off work without dropping the ball.
You can start small, have a content creation agent feed a testing agent that fires results back to marketing and then iterate. Learn prompt design, basic APIs and data governance rules—they're the new managerial toolkit. Expect a learning curve, though. Agents can be brittle at first, but the compounding payoff is massive once they click into place.
Ask yourself, "If my burn rate were cut in half, how would I redeploy capital?" When fixed costs shrink, strategy changes. You can attack smaller, overlooked niches or spin up experiments that used to be too expensive. Model best-, base- and worst-case scenarios with sub-10-person teams and see where the economics break.
One warning—lean doesn't mean lax. Regulators, customers and investors will still expect airtight security, compliance and transparency, so bake those controls into your agent stack from day one.
Conclusion
AI agents aren't just tools; they're changing the entire game of tech entrepreneurship. The unicorns of the next decade probably won't look like the ones we know today. They'll be smaller, leaner and built on top of fleets of autonomous agents. For tech leaders willing to embrace this shift, the opportunity is enormous.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
27 minutes ago
- Forbes
Business Leaders Called To Align Tech Decisions With Corporate Values
Signs point to an emerging, if informal, social contact on AI deployment. With the rapid rollout of AI, corporate leaders are increasingly being called to consider the proper alignment between technology strategies and organizational purposes and values. It's a call that speaks to an informal, yet important 'social license' between companies and their stakeholders on the use of technology, and its impact on labor, among other interests. And it's a call that's been reflected in recent comments from influential religious, legal and business leaders, including Pope Leo XIV, Amazon CEO Andrew Jassy, and Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz Founding Partner Martin Lipton. Attention to this informal social license arose from President Joseph Biden's 2023 Executive Order on the 'Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.' This (now revoked) Executive Order identified eight specific principles on which AI development should be guided, including a commitment to supporting American workers and preventing 'harmful labor-force disruptions'. The National Association of Corporate Directors ('NACD') indirectly acknowledged the AI social license in its 2024 Blue Ribbon Commission Report, 'Technology Leadership in the Boardroom: Driving Trust and Value.' The Report called upon boards to 'move fast and be bold' with respect to AI deployment, while simultaneously acting as a 'guardrail to uphold organizational values and protect stakeholders' interests'. In a May 12, 2025, address to the College of Cardinals, Pope Leo spoke broadly about the social concerns with AI, focusing particularly on what he described as the challenges to the defense of human dignity, justice and labor that arise from 'developments in the field of artificial intelligence.' A recent article in The Wall Street Journal chronicled the long-running dialogue between the Vatican and Silicon Valley on the ethical implications of AI. Indeed, on June 17, Pope Leo delivered a written message to a two-day international conference in Rome focusing on AI, ethics and corporate governance. In his message, the Pope urged AI developers to evaluate its implications in the context of the 'integral development of the human person and society…taking into account the well-being of the human person not only materially, but also intellectually and spiritually…'. This 'alignment' concern was underscored by a recent post by the highly regarded Mr. Lipton, encouraging corporate boards to maintain their organizational values while pursuing value through AI. 'Boards should consider in a balanced manner the effect of technological adoptions on important constituencies, including employees and communities, as opposed to myopically seeking immediate expense-line efficiencies at any cost.' There certainly is little question that for many companies, generative AI is likely to have a disruptive impact on labor; that the efficiency gains expected from AI implementation could result in a reduced or dramatically altered workforce. The related question is the extent to which 'corporate values' should encompass a response to tech-driven labor disruption. Note in this regard the long-standing position of NACD is that a positive workforce culture is a significant corporate asset. A recent memo from Amazon CEO Andrew Jassy offers a positive example of how to address the strategy/values alignment challenge ‒ by being transparent with employees, well in advance, about the coming transformation and its impact on the workforce, and by offering practical suggestions on how employees can best prepare for it: Those who embrace this change, become conversant in AI, help us build and improve our AI capabilities internally and deliver for customers, will be well-positioned to have high impact and help us reinvent the company. As boards work with management to deploy AI, they should be in regular conversation on which valued-centered decisions the board must be informed, and on which such decisions they may be asked to decide, or merely advise. Such a dialogue is likely to enhance the reflection on corporate purposes and values within decisions regarding strategy and technology. Of course, that incorporation can come in many different ways and from many different directions; the Amazon example being one of them. There are no established guidelines on how leadership might approach the strategy/values alignment discussion. But there is a growing recognition that corporate values must be accommodated in some manner into the AI decision-making. Most likely, effective alignment will balance the inevitability of AI—driven workforce impact with initiatives that advance employee well-being and 'positively augment human work,' including initiatives that minimize job-displacement risks and maximize career opportunities related to AI. For as the NACD suggests, the ultimate AI deployment message to the board is that '[I]t's about what you can do, but also what you should do.'


Forbes
27 minutes ago
- Forbes
Systemic Vulnerabilities In US Healthcare: Emerging Solutions
Vlad Panin, CEO at iFrame, is a corporate lawyer, healthcare administration expert and scientist. The U.S. healthcare system—nearly a fifth of the nation's GDP—faces mounting financial and operational stress, with dramatic episodes like the 2024 Change Healthcare cyberattack exposing deep-rooted risks from centralization, fragmented cyber defenses and dependency on opaque, outsourced administrative processes. At the same time, I see a generational shift in artificial intelligence (AI) as creating an unprecedented opportunity: The accelerated verticalization of AI—"agent-first" applications trained for domain-specific workflows—which can allow the U.S. to reshore and reinvent medical revenue cycle management (RCM), helping restore trust, efficiency and resilience. From Centralization Crisis To AI Opportunity Change Healthcare, processing $2 trillion in annual claims and touching one-third of U.S. medical records, became a single point of catastrophic failure when a ransomware attack in early 2024 paralyzed claims and cash flow for hospitals nationwide—impacting 94% of hospitals financially, with 60% losing over $1 million per day. The root cause was a basic mistake: The failure to implement multi-factor authentication—compounded by the complexities of integrating legacy acquisitions. Small and medium-sized providers (SMBs) were hit hardest, with 80% suffering revenue loss and over half using personal funds to stay afloat. Meanwhile, a parallel crisis snowballed: Major insurers' use of proprietary AI algorithms, like UHG's nH Predict and Cigna's PxDx, drove record claims denials and lawsuits. Some algorithms were revealed to have high error rates—over 90% of nH Predict-based denials reversed upon appeal with complaints centered on a lack of transparency, lack of clinical review and a persistent sense that AI was being wielded as a blunt instrument to cut costs and compress provider margins. CMS and several states have now banned sole reliance on AI for claim determinations, ushering in a new regulatory era. AI Not Just Inevitable But Imminent And Vertical What's fueling the renewed optimism is not just AI's raw technical horsepower, but the abrupt market readiness for "verticalized" solutions—deeply embedded, domain-specific agents. AI is here, and its impact is accelerating. The necessary conditions are in place: computational power, broad access to distribution channels, a growing pool of skilled talent and rising global demand. What's particularly transformative is the speed at which new innovations are now reaching scale. While the cloud transition took years, AI achieved global awareness and trial almost overnight, and ChatGPT had hundreds of millions of users in months. Most importantly for healthcare, analysis from Sequoia "suggests the greatest value will accrue at the application layer." This means vertically integrated, workflow-specific AI agents—fine-tuned for specialty domains—will capture the largest profit pools and create the deepest competitive moats. Unlike generic tools, these agents can be co-pilots or autopilots for domain-specific work, such as revenue cycle management or prior authorization in healthcare. Sequoia has cited stunning user engagement growth in AI-native apps, especially in high-trust, regulated industries like healthcare. Startups like Open Evidence in diagnostics are already outperforming generalist models, while vertical agents in security and DevOps began outperforming top humans in 2024. US-Based, AI-Augmented Medical Coding The immediate implication for U.S. healthcare administration is profound. The historical justification for offshoring medical coding and RCM—lower labor costs—is being upended by vertical AI's ability to process claims far faster, more accurately and securely within U.S. borders. The human-in-the-loop paradigm—AI as supercharged analyst, certified coder as reviewer/arbiter—offers providers both scale and compliance. Innovation is moving in tandem with this shift. For example, AI Medical Coder Training Center now offers certified programs that guarantee job allocations for AI-upskilled coders, ensuring that the promise of AI does not displace skilled U.S. labor. Overall, it's important we focus on catalyzing jobs with larger compensation, increased regulatory compliance and higher trust. With government agencies and regulators implementing new cybersecurity and data localization standards—including mandatory multi-factor authentication, regular audits, and scrutiny of offshore PHI processing—the business case for reshoring healthcare administration is now both statutory and economic fact. From Missed Opportunity To Strategic Advantage Why act now? The physics of technology distribution has fundamentally changed: "Nature hates a vacuum," as Sequoia's leadership notes, and AI adoption is filling industry gaps at dizzying speed. The market is experiencing a "tremendous sucking sound" for domain-specific AI, as existing macro headwinds (tariffs, offshore volatility, rising cyber-attacks) pale in comparison to the relentless pull of scalable, value-creating automation. But not all AI-driven revenue is built to last. Savvy operators are beginning to distinguish between short-term curiosity spend and deeper, more sustainable value. The real movement lies in technology that drives lasting changes in behavior—tools that integrate into core workflows, reshape how people work and earn the trust of their users. In healthcare, especially, trust is emerging as the true differentiator. It's no longer enough for an AI tool to perform well; customers need to believe their data is secure and that the technology won't compromise their care or privacy. Building For The Next Wave Looking ahead, healthcare's reinvention will require navigating new challenges like persistent agent memory (so agents remember institutional rules and patient context), seamless communication protocols for interoperability and zero-trust security frameworks given the impossibility of face-to-face verification. As "agent swarms" and the "agent economy" emerge—software agents negotiating, transacting and collaborating with and for human teams—vertical healthcare agents will become a critical locus of value, with the most credible actors being those who combine vertical expertise, technical excellence and ironclad governance. The winners will be those organizations that vertically integrate AI with real human oversight, U.S.-based certification, and cross-system trust, turning the weaknesses of centralization and opacity into strengths of agility, transparency and resilience. A Call To Action For US Healthcare Stakeholders Now is the critical window for U.S. healthcare payers and providers to leap ahead: Reshore RCM with vertical, AI-augmented applications; invest in certified, U.S.-based talent; demand transparent, audit-ready technology; and build networks of trust that give SMBs and enterprises alike a fighting chance. As new federal and state regulations favor local data and AI with human oversight, there has never been a better—or more urgent—moment to make the U.S. the global standard for secure, resilient, and equitable healthcare administration in the era of agentic AI. Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?


WIRED
38 minutes ago
- WIRED
No One Is in Charge at the US Copyright Office
Jun 27, 2025 10:20 AM During a wild time for copyright law, the US Copyright Office has no one at the helm—and no one knows when that will change. A sign is displayed at the entrance to the U.S. Copyright Office on June 13, 2025, in Washington, DC. Photograph:It's a tumultuous time for copyright in the United States, with dozens of potentially economy-shaking AI copyright lawsuits winding through the courts. It's also the most turbulent moment in the US Copyright Office's history. Described as 'sleepy' in the past, the Copyright Office has taken on new prominence during the AI boom, issuing key rulings about AI and copyright. It also hasn't had a leader in more than a month. In May, Copyright Register Shira Perlmutter was abruptly fired by email by the White House's deputy director of personnel. Perlmutter is now suing the Trump Administration, alleging that her firing was invalid; the government maintains that the executive branch has the authority to dismiss her. As the legality of the ouster is debated, the reality within the office is this: There's effectively nobody in charge. And without a leader actually showing up at work, the Copyright Office is not totally business-as-usual; in fact, there's debate over whether the copyright certificates it's issuing could be challenged. The firing followed a pattern. The USCO is part of the Library of Congress; Perlmutter had been appointed to her role by Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. A few days before Perlmutter's dismissal, Hayden, who had been in her role since 2016, was also fired by the White House via email. The White House appointed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who had previously served as President Trump's defense attorney, as the new acting Librarian of Congress. Two days after Pelmutter's firing, Justice Department official Paul Perkins showed up at the Copyright Office, along with his colleague Brian Nieves. According to an affidavit from Perlmutter, they were carrying "printed versions of emails" from Blanche indicating that they had been appointed to new roles within the Copyright Office. Perkins, the email said, was designated as Acting Register of Copyrights. In other words, he was Perlmutter's replacement. But was Blanche actually the acting Librarian, and thus able to appoint Perkins as such? Within the Library of Congress, someone else had already assumed the role—Robert Newlen, Hayden's former second-in-command, who has worked at the LOC since the 1970s. Following Hayden's ouster, Newlen emailed LOC staff asserting that he was the acting Librarian—never mentioning Blanche—and noting that 'Congress is engaged with the White House' on how to proceed. In her lawsuit, Perlmutter argues that only the Librarian of Congress can fire and appoint a new Register. In a filing on Tuesday, defendants argued that the president does indeed have the authority to fire and appoint the Librarian of Congress, and that his appointees then have the ability to choose a new Copyright Register. Neither the Department of Justice nor the White House responded to requests for comment on this issue; the Library of Congress declined to comment. Perkins and Nieves did not enter the USCO office or assume the roles they purported to fill the day they showed up. And since they left, sources within the Library of Congress tell WIRED, they have never returned, nor have they assumed any of the duties associated with the roles. These sources say that Congress is in talks with the White House to reach an agreement over these personnel disputes. A congressional aide familiar with the situation told WIRED that Blanche, Perkins, Nieves had not shown up for work 'because they don't have jobs to show up to.' The aide continued: 'As we've always maintained, the President has no authority to appoint them. Robert Newlen has always been the Acting Librarian of Congress.' If talks are happening, they remain out of public view. But Perlmutter does have some members of Congress openly on her side. 'The President has no authority to remove the Register of Copyrights. That power lies solely with the Librarian of Congress. I'm relieved that the situation at the Library and Copyright Office has stabilized following the administration's unconstitutional attempt to seize control for the executive branch. I look forward to quickly resolving this matter in a bipartisan way,' Senator Alex Padilla tells WIRED in a statement. In the meantime, the Copyright Office is in the odd position of attempting to carry on as though it wasn't missing its head. Immediately after Perlmutter's dismissal, the Copyright Office paused issuing registration certificates 'out of an abundance of caution,' according to USCO spokesperson Lisa Berardi Marflak, who says the pause impacted around 20,000 registrations. It resumed activities on May 29th, but it is now sending out registration certificates with a blank spot where Perlmutter's signature would ordinarily be. This unusual change has prompted discussion amongst copyright experts as to whether the registrations are now more vulnerable to legal challenges. The Copyright Office maintains that they are valid: 'There is no requirement that the Register's signature must appear on registration certificates,' says Berardi Marflak. In a motion related to Perlmutter's lawsuit, though, she alleges that sending out the registrations without a signature opens them up to 'challenges in litigation,' something outside copyright experts have also pointed out. 'It's true the law doesn't explicitly require a signature,' IP lawyer Rachael Dickson says. 'However, the law really explicitly says that it's the Register of Copyright determining whether the material submitted for the application is copyrightable subject matter.' Without anyone acting as Register, Dickson thinks it would be reasonable to argue that the statutory requirements are not being met. 'If you take them completely out of the equation, you have a really big problem,' she says. 'Litigators who are trying to challenge a copyright registration's validity will jump on this.' Perlmutter's lawyers have argued that leaving the Copyright Office without an active boss will cause dysfunction beyond the registration certificate issue, as the Register performs a variety of tasks, from advising Congress on copyright to recertifying organizations like the Mechanical Licensing Collective, the nonprofit in charge of administering royalties for streaming and download music in the United States. Since the MLC's certification is up right now, Perlmutter would ordinarily be moving forward with recertifying the organization; as her lawsuit notes, right now, the recertification process is not moving forward. The MLC may not be as impacted by Perlmutter's absence as the complaint suggests. A source close to the MLC told WIRED that the organization does indeed need to be recertified, but that the law doesn't require the recertification process to be completed within a specific time frame, so it will be able to continue operating as usual. Still, there are other ways that the lack of a boss is a clear liability. The Copyright Claims Board, a three-person tribunal that resolves some copyright disputes, needs to replace one of its members this year, as a current board member, who did not reply to a request for comment, is leaving. The job posting is already live and says applications are being reviewed, but as the position is supposed to be appointed by the Librarian of Congress with the guidance of the Copyright Register, it's unclear how exactly it will be filled. A source familiar at the Library of Congress tells WIRED that Newlen could make the appointment if necessary, but 'we expect there to be some kind of greater resolution by then.' As they wait for the resolution, it remains an especially inopportune time for a headless Copyright Office. Perlmutter was fired just days after the office released a hotly-contested report on generative AI training and fair use. That report has already been heavily cited in a new class action lawsuit against AI tools Suno and Udio, even though it was technically a 'pre-publication' version and not finalized. But everyone looking to see what a final report will say—or what guidance the office will issue next—can only keep waiting.