# David Blonski

David Blonski writes about enterprise AI and argues that companies can use AI to replace legacy business software and automate operational workflows.

- Profile: https://b2binfluencer.marketing/creators/david-blonski/
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidblonski
- LinkedIn followers: 2,950
- Topics: artificial-intelligence, ai-agents, enterprise-ai, digital-transformation
- Based on 16 dated posts, latest 2026-09-22

## Summary

David Blonski is most useful for arguing that enterprises should replace legacy software workflows with governed AI.

- Best for: Enterprise AI platforms, migration services, or systems integrators targeting CIOs and architecture leaders.
- Not for: Legacy SaaS incumbents promoting AI add-ons as secure, reliable, and easy to adopt.
- Check first: Confirm role at Elementum AI, partner route, and audience demographics before committing.

### Takeaways

- Incumbent suite vendors raise subscription prices and meter AI on top.
- One AI architecture instead of one agent per business function.
- Redesign the process before putting AI into it, as with Danaher.

## Main ideas

- **Incumbents raise software prices and meter AI on top**: Blonski's starting point is arithmetic: AI should make business software cheaper through fewer seats, less software and more automation, so a vendor charging more for the software and then adding an AI charge is taxing customers for a saving it should have passed on. The clearest mechanism Blonski describes is ServiceNow's consumption pricing, where the AI unit is a proprietary "assist" whose count the vendor sets rather than actual computing cost. SAP is described as blocking outside AI agents from reaching customer data, and Workday's chief executive Aneel Bhusri is quoted saying AI agent pricing has "a lot of upside." Blonski's conclusion is not that the AI in these products is useless, but that the pricing and data posture make them poor long-term bets — AI will be the reason customers leave, not the reason they stay.
- **One AI architecture instead of one agent per business function**: Blonski challenges the analyst position, attributed to Gartner, that domain-specialist agents from Salesforce, SAP and ServiceNow are the only secure path to autonomous operations. They question Gartner's sourcing, which cites vendor press releases, blog posts and product documentation. Blonski accepts the governance argument — probabilistic AI needs deterministic orchestration, auditability and security controls — but disputes the conclusion that only legacy vendors can provide them. AI can now reason across systems, workflows and unstructured context, they say, removing the need for a separate copilot, agent framework, workflow engine, interface, security layer and subscription for every function. They frame the alternative as one system where rules govern everything deterministic and people stay in the loop for the rest.
- **Redesign the process before putting AI into it**: The most concrete implementation lesson in Blonski's posts comes from a guest: Sriram P. of Danaher, speaking on a Snowflake Summit panel, said the company did not drop AI into an existing process but rethought the process around AI. The reasoning Blonski repeats is that telling people to "use AI" frustrates them when the tool is clumsy and adds work, while redesigning the workflow around what AI does well reduces work and brings people along. Blonski offers this as a blueprint for CIOs struggling to move AI past pilot stage.
- **Cut the software bill, not the payroll**: Blonski lists more than 100,000 announced layoffs — Oracle and Amazon at 30,000 each, Intel at 24,000, Citigroup at 20,000, IBM at 8,000 — attributed to AI, and calls the attribution either misattribution or mismanagement. They propose cutting the legacy software stack instead: save the money, keep the jobs and reinvest to move faster. Blonski invokes Jevons paradox to argue that efficiency raises rather than lowers demand for the underlying input, so AI should be a growth driver and people are the input. The substitutions they name are Salesforce administration so sellers can sell, ServiceNow ticket chasing so engineers can build, Coupa intake work so procurement can negotiate, and Workday workflow bureaucracy so managers can manage.
- **Stage the migration: keep payroll and the general ledger, move the rest**: Blonski's advice for buyers facing renewals is deliberately partial, not rip-and-replace. Where AI makes the largest difference — human capital management, talent management, recruiting, onboarding and compensation — they argue companies should start moving workflows out, while leaving payroll and the general ledger in place because they are stable and sensitive. The stated payoff is a short-term headache that catalyses modernisation across the rest of the organisation. Elsewhere, the same cost claim appears as a 50–70% reduction in total cost of ownership and new workflows delivered in days instead of quarters.
- **The budget test: what are you replacing?**: Blonski relays a buyer-side signal from a Global 1000 chief operating officer reconsidering a large Glean investment because being better than Microsoft Copilot no longer justifies the spend. They frame the questions for CIOs as: what are you replacing, who are you replacing, and what are you winning — new contracts, displaced systems, or outsourced and offshored work? Blonski's read is that "better," "faster" and "smarter" sold in 2024 but not in 2026, and that large AI budgets survive only where the outcome plainly justifies the cost.

## Work to read

- [Gartner is wrong: legacy SaaS isn't the only path to enterprise AI](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_enterpriseai-aiagents-digitaltransformation-activity-7462184886636843009-wSva)
- [Cut SaaS, not people: the case against AI-driven layoffs](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_artificialintelligence-cio-enterprisesoftware-activity-7459974016410464256-E5Xn)
- [Danaher's agentic AI lesson: redesign processes before deploying AI](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_snowflakesummit-aitransformation-enterpriseai-activity-7469771289138978818-oQGu)
- [The CIO decision tree: Mercedes, Tesla, or Waymo](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_aitransformation-enterpriseai-cio-activity-7492618251810627585-K7Wr)
- [After Silver Lake's Workday deal: a migration playbook for CIOs](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_enterpriseai-cio-digitaltransformation-activity-7494069727141523457-J1px)
- [ServiceNow's AI pricing adds a tax to legacy software](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_servicenows-ai-control-tower-offers-hazy-activity-7496619874236923905-thKZ)
- [The new CIO question: What are you replacing?](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_heard-from-a-global-1000-coo-that-theyre-activity-7495132418194948096-rLbk)
- [Sanofi's AI transformation, framed as a practical guide](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/davidblonski_inside-sanofis-ai-success-story-deloitte-activity-7483533220932702208-J7ZV)

## Brand relationships

- **Elementum AI** (mention)
- **Sanofi** (client)
- **Danaher** (client)
- **Deloitte** (disclosed_partnership)
- **ServiceNow** (mention)
- **Workday** (mention)

## Partnerships

David Blonski's posts do not present an open sponsorship offer. They include no sponsor policy, media kit, rate card, disclosure of paid placements, or public partnership inquiry route, so a brand cannot price or book a creator-style placement from what is published. Instead, the posts show how Blonski's commercially framed content is packaged: they write from inside Elementum AI, using "we" for the company's product claims, and direct readers to company-run customer events rather than personal sponsorship slots. The clearest example is a July 28 webinar promoted by Blonski, hosted by Elementum AI and Deloitte, with customer speakers from Sanofi and Snowflake and registration through a link in the post. The posts also carry customer proof points for the platform, including Sanofi's claim of over €10M saved in six months on procurement waste and Danaher freeing 42 employees from tariff work after a process redesign. For a buyer planning against legacy SaaS incumbents, the practical route is a co-marketing or vendor-partner conversation with Elementum AI, not a paid creator engagement with Blonski as an independent publisher. A competing vendor should expect a strongly partisan read: the posts argue that legacy SaaS is dying, that incumbent AI pricing is a new tax, and that ServiceNow, SAP, Workday, Salesforce, and Coupa should be displaced. Ask Blonski directly about sponsorship availability, terms, and paid-placement disclosure before planning a campaign.

## Alternatives

- Romain Libeau: Choose Libeau when the campaign should open with the buyer’s problem rather than the vendor’s replacement pitch. Their posts argue that a company can become legacy ahead of schedule: hypergrowth stacks on more products, services, packaging, specialists, and AI branding than the original product was designed to carry, and the foundation quietly gives out. The second post uses a procurement technology survey figure — 17% of procurement, finance, and IT leaders reporting clear ROI from their procurement technology and AI investments — to argue that AI cannot manufacture clean supplier data, adoption, or reconciled workflows, so the foundation decides how far AI gets. For an AI platform selling into procurement, finance, or IT spend buyers, that diagnosis-of-failure framing is a stronger opening than Blonski’s vendor-side attack: it lets the audience recognize their own stalled programme before the sponsor names a fix.
- Chris Goumas: Choose Goumas when the campaign targets people who have to implement inside a suite they already own, especially HR operations and HRIS teams at mid-market employers. Goumas’s posts give a concrete pilot method rather than a strategy argument: pick one narrow use case, a small tester group, approved sources, verifiable answers, and no automated changes, then trace wrong answers back to outdated policy, missing country exceptions, wrong employee location, or information the system never held. The second post explains Workday Build — Extend, Orchestrate, an agent builder, Data Cloud, developer tooling — and contrasts enterprise teams with dedicated platform staff against a mid-market employer with one integrations person, closing with five first steps, including watching consumption-based credit pricing change the budget math. That practitioner detail suits a sponsor promising a working pilot plan for a resource-constrained team, not a market argument.
- Vernon Keenan: Choose Keenan when the campaign must persuade Salesforce or ServiceNow ecosystem buyers and can support analyst-style written analysis rather than short posts. Keenan publishes longer pieces with a stated argument, linked sources, and named takeaways — one post reads ServiceNow’s reported $400 million acquisition of Sweep as a bid to govern AI agents inside Salesforce estates without moving customer data, introducing the idea of a dependency-resolved model of the system an agent is about to change. The second tracks a 168-day arc from Parker Harris’s public question about logging into Salesforce again to the AIforce announcement, and reads the interface change as a control story, including an unstated price and a governance layer not arriving until at least February 2027. A sponsor whose message is about who governs agents, what they are allowed to touch, and how platform changes get delivered can use that frame and the longer-format precedent; a cost-replacement message cannot.

---
AI-assisted summary of public posts. Audience demographics are not available. Engagement appears only where we checked recent posts. Method: https://b2binfluencer.marketing/methodology/