Innovations in the AI sector not only bring new technologies, but also new pricing models. One of the most notable trends in 2024 is the shift to a results-oriented pricing model, where customers only pay when the AI actually completes the intended tasks - according to an analysis by The Information. This new model, pioneered by companies such as Zendesk, Intercom and Forethought, has important lessons for Dutch companies, especially when it comes to efficiency and cost savings in an increasingly automated world.
Until recently, software was mainly sold based on the number of users (the well-known software as a service (SaaS) models) or based on the use of the software. For example, customers paid per user or per amount of computing power used. For a long time, this was the foundation of the software industry, with fixed monthly costs, regardless of whether the software actually added value or was used efficiently.
However, in a world where AI is able to automate more and more tasks, that model is starting to pinch. As Zendesk's Nikhil Sane puts it, “Just because you're using our service doesn't mean you're getting value out of it.” Here comes the new outcome-based pricing model just around the corner. Companies like Zendesk only calculate now when their AI solution — for example a chatbot — performs tasks autonomously, without human employees having to intervene.
For companies, this means that they do not pay for the use of the software, but for the actual value that the software provides. This can lead to lower revenues for AI suppliers in the short term, but offers long-term opportunities for sustainable customer relationships and greater customer satisfaction.
Dutch companies that are considering implementing AI solutions can learn a lot from this trend. Traditionally, software is still sold on a subscription basis in many sectors, with customers paying a fixed monthly fee to access features regardless of whether those features are actually being used. This approach may prove inefficient at a time when AI is automating more and more routine tasks.
For Dutch companies, the outcome-based model can mean that they have more control over their IT budgets. They only pay for AI systems when they actually add value by performing tasks automatically, such as resolving customer queries without human intervention. This can be particularly valuable in sectors such as customer service, where AI chatbots can take over tasks such as answering simple questions.
Practical example: At RB2B, a company that uses AI chatbots to handle customer queries, it was found that Intercom's AI bot Fin solved 60% of the 948 support tickets in August. This saved their two-person support team 142 hours of work, which resulted in significant cost savings. Instead of $10 per question solved by a human, the company only paid 99 cents per task handled by the AI bot.
Of course, there are also risks associated with this model, both for software vendors and for companies that want to adopt it. It can be difficult for AI vendors to maintain a stable revenue stream, especially when the AI doesn't always function perfectly. This could lead to unpredictable revenues and could put pressure on development teams to continuously optimize the performance of the AI systems.
On the customer side, there may be a risk that companies will become too dependent on these result-oriented pricing models. If the AI doesn't perform as expected, this can lead to unexpected cost increases when tasks still need to be performed by human employees. Companies should therefore take a critical look at the reliability of the AI solutions they choose and ensure that they have sufficient backup systems.
The question is whether this pricing model also works in the Netherlands, where the adoption of AI is increasing in various sectors, but where companies often still think traditionally about IT spending. Outcome-based pricing can be particularly interesting for companies in sectors such as customer service, e-commerce, and IT management, where AI solutions are already routinely used to automate common tasks.
In addition, Dutch companies that are involved in product development or software services may consider this model for their own customers. It can be an attractive way to make their products more accessible to smaller companies, who may be reluctant to invest large amounts of money in AI before they see actual value.
If more international software companies switch to outcome-based pricing, this could cause a domino effect, with Dutch software suppliers also having to switch quickly. Metronome CEO Scott Woody expects that when major players embrace this model, their competitors will soon follow suit. Companies that stick to traditional pricing models can miss the boat, especially as customers become increasingly accustomed to paying for actual results rather than just for use.
For Dutch companies, outcome-based pricing not only offers an opportunity to better control their IT costs, but also to gain more confidence in the AI solutions they use. By only paying for technology that actually works, companies can operate more efficiently and use their resources in a more focused way.
To take full advantage of this trend, Dutch companies must:
Do you want to know more about outcome-based pricing or the implementation of AI solutions in your company? Then contact AI.nl and The Automation Group for customized advice and help in choosing the right AI strategy for your organization.
.svg)
