$285 billion was wiped off enterprise software valuations in a week. Not because AI failed. Because the market finally looked behind the press releases and found bolt-on features where architectural thinking should have been.
Fifty new AI agents announced without governance. "AI-powered" stamped across unchanged platforms. Earnings calls built on efficiency metrics whilst stock prices collapsed beneath them. The market isn't punishing AI. It's punishing the absence of product leadership.
60% of Fortune 1000 companies now have a Chief Product Officer — up from 15% three years ago. Korn Ferry predicts 30% of CEOs will be former CPOs by 2030. The role has quadrupled. The question is whether anyone hired the right person for it.
Most hired a title. What they needed was a capability — someone who sees the thinking, the strategy, the architecture, the commercial model, the execution, and the exit as one continuous thread. Not separate functions staffed by separate people. One mind that holds the full arc.
That's not a product manager who got promoted enough times. It's a business person who chose product as their instrument.
I wrote recently about the general expert — the leader whose value compounds across domains rather than deepening in one. AI is expanding that surface area fast. A CPO who understands architecture, capital allocation, go-to-market, and exit mechanics isn't a unicorn any more. They're a requirement. The $285 billion correction proved it. The vendors that survived aren't the ones with the most features. They're the ones whose product leadership understood that AI changes what software fundamentally is — not what it does, but how it learns, compounds, and evolves.
I led exactly this transformation. An enterprise underwriting platform — unrated, invisible to the analyst community. Within twelve months, recognised as a Leader by Everest Group. What changed wasn't the roadmap. It was the product thinking. We stopped building a configured workbench and started building an intelligence platform. Design-in, not bolt-on.
Most CPO failures aren't capability failures. They're expectation mismatches. Companies default to credentials — big tech logos, familiar narratives — when they should be hiring for stage. A glossy CV is magnificent atop a mature organisation. It's useless inside one that needs building.
$285 billion says a lot of them need building. Enterprise software vendors don't need another AI press release. They need product leaders who can architect for the next paradigm shift — not bolt onto the current one. Hire for stage and compound. Hire for credential and build on sand.
I've done the building. Across P&C, specialty, telco, and ICT. Not theory. Outcomes. From thinking through to exit — every stage of the arc.
The slides walk through the framework. If you're hiring for this role — or rethinking what it should be — I'd welcome the conversation.
#ProductLeadership #CPO #EnterpriseTransformation #AI #InsurTech #Leadership
First Comment
Three threads are converging and they all point in the same direction.
The general expert thesis: AI is expanding the surface area of what one leader can directly influence. Conception, strategy, architecture, build, go-to-market — domains that used to require entire teams are now compressible into one operating mind. I've built two enterprise-grade platforms this way. Both in production.
The $285 billion correction: capital has stopped rewarding "AI-powered" press releases and started demanding evidence of architectural thinking. Bolt-on versus design-in isn't a technical debate. It's the difference between a CPO who understands product features and one who understands how software fundamentally learns and compounds value.
The hiring mismatch: ZRG Partners' research confirms what most boards sense but can't articulate — the majority of CPO failures are expectation failures, not capability failures. Companies hire credentials when they should be hiring for stage. The visionary who can also operate. The strategist who has also shipped.
Seventy percent of CPOs now carry P&L responsibility. This isn't a product role any more. It's the proving ground for the next generation of chief executives.
The question for boards isn't whether to appoint a CPO. It's whether they're hiring someone who can hold the full arc — from thinking through to exit.
johnbowers.pro has the detail. Or just connect — I'm easy to find.