Honestly, if you’ve been keeping an eye on the markets lately, things have started to feel a little... well, heavy. Usually, when the tech sector wobbles, it’s just noise or a reaction to interest rates, but what we’ve seen over the last few weeks feels more like a structural tectonic shift than a temporary dip.

Think about the sheer scale of it. India’s IT heavyweights the massive engines like TCS, Infosys, and Wipro took a staggering hit. The Nifty IT index dropped over 6%, which effectively wiped out more than ₹2 lakh crore in market value in a heartbeat. Meanwhile, over in the US, the NASDAQ saw a parallel correction that erased nearly $300 billion. Now, you could argue this is just another case of investors being twitchy, but I really don't think that's the whole story. It feels like the first real shockwave of AI moving from the "hype cycle" into "legitimate workforce replacement."

The shift from talking to doing

For the last two years, most of our conversations around AI were stuck in the chatbot phase. We were all playing around with tools that could summarize a long email, draft a cover letter, or answer basic questions. They were helpful assistants, sure, but they were still just peripheral.

That era is ending. With the arrival of tools like Anthropic’s Claude Code and Claude Cowork, we’ve crossed a very significant threshold. These aren't just tools that help you work; they’re systems designed to do the work. I’m talking about AI that can write, test, and debug production-grade code, or even refactor entire application components without a human holding its hand every step of the way. They’re handling complex legal reviews and crunching datasets to produce structured reports that used to take teams of analysts a week to finish. It’s a bit unsettling when you realize this isn't speculative anymore. These tools are live, they're being deployed, and they are ruthlessly efficient.

Why this hits the service model where it hurts

This hits the Indian IT sector particularly hard because that entire $280 billion industry was built on a very specific, very successful promise: delivering high-volume technical work reliably and at a lower cost than Western domestic labor.

For decades, that was a winning formula. But the thing about AI is that it doesn't just lower the cost of labor; it basically collapses the entire cost curve for anything that is repetitive or rules-based. Think about entry-level coding, QA testing, documentation, or compliance checks. These used to be the bread and butter of the outsourcing world. Now? It’s software-on-software. Unlike previous waves of automation that took years to roll out because they required hardware or new physical infrastructure, this is just code updating code.

We’re already seeing the fallout in the numbers. We saw over 100,000 tech layoffs globally by mid-last year, and it wasn't just developers. It hit HR, compliance, and operations too. When you see Indian IT firms issuing such cautious outlooks, it’s not because the global demand for tech has vanished. It’s because clients have realized they simply need fewer people to achieve the same outcomes.

It’s not about losing jobs, it’s about shifting "Task Clusters"

I think the biggest mistake we can make right now is framing this as a simple "AI is taking our jobs" narrative. That’s a bit too reductive. It’s more accurate to say that AI is eating up "task clusters."

If your role is built primarily on repetition, pattern execution, or following a set process, then yes, your professional footprint is shrinking. However, roles that involve high-level system design, framing the actual problem, or making decisions when the data is messy and uncertain? Those are actually expanding. The line in the sand isn't "technical vs. non-technical" anymore. It’s "replaceable execution vs. differentiated capability."

What "Being Skilled" actually looks like now

It’s actually kind of wild to realize that the skills we used to consider "core" knowing how to write a specific language or follow a corporate process are being devalued in real-time. To stay relevant in this new version of the industry, you have to be the person who:

• Acts as a Multiplier: Using AI tools to do the work of five people, rather than trying to compete with the machine's speed.
• Becomes the Auditor: You need to be able to validate and stress-test what the AI spits out, because while it’s fast, it can still be confidently wrong.
• Translates the Vague: Being the bridge that turns a messy business goal into a precise instruction that a system can execute.
• Owns the Outcome: Moving away from "I finished my task" to "I am responsible for the result."

Some final thoughts

At the end of the day, we’re witnessing a massive re-pricing of human capability. AI is forcing the entire tech industry to answer a very uncomfortable question: What unique value does a human actually bring when execution becomes cheap and abundant?

For professionals and companies alike, the answer to that question is going to determine who stays relevant over the next decade. The shift has already started, and honestly, ignoring it isn't going to slow it down. It’s a lot to process, but I think the people who lean into the "problem-solving" side of things will come out on top.

Do you feel like your current role is more about the "process" or the "problem-solving" side of things? I'd be happy to help you brainstorm how to tilt your focus more toward the latter.

‍