Enterprise tech budgets have tightened their standards. AI investment is rising, but tolerance for inefficiency has collapsed. Leaders want clearer returns, finance teams are watching timelines closely, and delivery organizations are being judged on progress earlier than ever.
That scrutiny is exposing a belief that has held for years without being tested – that bigger teams produce better results.
Heading into 2026, large delivery teams are no longer a safe default. In many cases, they slow work down. AI, modular architectures, and intelligent automation reward speed and judgment. They surface problems quickly and penalize hesitation. Scale does little to protect you once friction becomes visible.
The difference is already clear. Small teams with clear ownership move faster and deliver with less resistance. Large teams lose time to coordination, diluted responsibility, and delayed decisions. That gap is structural, and it’s widening.
As a result, client expectations are changing accordingly. Fewer leaders care how many people are assigned to a problem. What they care about is how quickly something usable appears, how reliably it performs, and whether the work holds up without constant revision.
Large teams built around keeping everyone busy struggle under that pressure. Activity becomes the measure of success, and progress stalls. Smaller, high-caliber teams work from the opposite premise. They decide faster, focus on outcomes, and move forward without excess process.
That reality is reshaping how work and engagements are secured. Open-ended engagements and headcount-heavy contracts are giving way to tightly defined outcomes and clearer accountability. Clients are willing to pay for certainty when timelines are credible, and delivery risk is visible. Presence no longer signals value. Reliability does.
If your delivery model still treats size and scale as execution insurance, you’re preparing for conditions that no longer apply.
AI increases the pace of work, but it also increases the cost of delay. When decisions lag, the consequences show up immediately rather than months later.
Large teams struggle under that pressure. Every additional layer slows decisions. Handoffs dilute context. Ownership blurs. What looks like caution on an org chart turns into hesitation in practice.
Smaller teams face the same demands, but they can absorb them. Decisions stay close to the work. Context is shared directly rather than explained repeatedly. When something needs to change, it does. AI magnifies that advantage by reducing manual effort and exposing issues earlier.
This is where reuse drives real efficiency. High-performing teams build on validated decisions and architectures, accelerating delivery through leverage—not labor.
As AI removes more mechanical effort from delivery, expertise becomes harder to replace. The people who create the most value are the ones who know where to apply judgment and where not to.
AI doesn’t eliminate the need for specialists. It exposes the cost of working without them. People with deep domain knowledge know when to trust an output and when to stop it before it causes problems.
This is why smaller teams outperform larger ones. Specialists move faster because they don’t need consensus to validate every decision. They understand the constraints, make calls early, and course-correct without delay. Generalists spend time confirming whether they’re on the right path. Specialists already know.
In 2026, the delivery advantage will come from who is trusted to use them well.
This reality creates discomfort. Large teams have long been associated with control, performance and headcount still feels like risk mitigation to many.
As pressure builds, teams that struggle to act become a constraint on the business, even when they’re busy. Organizations that adapt will design delivery around judgment and momentum rather than volume. Those who don’t will keep adding people and expecting different results.
Large teams won’t disappear overnight. But it will become impossible to ignore the cost of carrying them once progress slows and alternatives are clearly outperforming them.
To participate in our interviews, please write to our HRTech Media Room at info@intentamplify.com
Ingrid Curtis is the Chief Executive Officer of Sparq, where she leads the company’s evolution into an AI-accelerated product engineering and data consultancy. With over 17 years at Sparq, Ingrid has played a pivotal role in scaling the organization from a U.S.-based digital engineering firm into a global, AI-first partner for enterprise and mid-market growth companies. Previously serving as President and COO, she has driven strategic growth initiatives, global expansion, acquisitions, and the launch of AI-native frameworks—while keeping Sparq deeply people-focused and outcomes-driven. Ingrid partners closely with the board, leadership team, and private equity sponsors to deliver long-term value creation and exceptional client experiences.