AIORG-W001 Working papers AI × management and organizations

AI-Native Firms

Hyunjin Kim · Rembrand Koning

Also recorded as: HBS Working Paper 26-090 · SSRN 6905079 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6905079 · ssrn:6905079

working paper abstract · 2026-07-01

Recorded claims
3
coded from the inspected source
Evidence classes
2
scholarly-metadata, ssrn-abstract-page
Recorded limitations
5
stated, never hidden

From the hash-bound evidence releases

Recorded claims

Each claim states what the inspected source says, at the recorded location—bounded by its scope and graded by its confidence. Nothing here is a synthesis across works.

In the inspected working-paper abstract, firms classified as AI-native were about 25% smaller while allocating about 13% more of their workforce to engineering; they had roughly 15% fewer entry-level employees and managers and were about half a seniority level flatter, despite comparable reported valuations.

confidence: medium scholarly-metadata apw-r0-seed

Scope: YC W20-F24 and comparable US venture-backed firms founded 2020-2024; structural associations, not a universal organization template.

The reported structural differences were stronger when AI was part of what a firm sold than when AI appeared only in worker tool-use signals, suggesting that product architecture and organizational architecture covary more strongly than generic tool adoption in this sample.

confidence: medium scholarly-metadata apw-r0-seed

Scope: Early venture-backed firms and the paper's text-based AI-native classifications.

Across Y Combinator cohorts W20-F24 and U.S. venture-backed startups first financed in 2020-2024, the abstract reports that AI-native firms were 25% smaller than non-AI startups in the same industry and cohort, had a 13% higher engineering share, roughly 15% lower entry-level and manager shares, and hierarchies flatter by half a seniority level, with comparable valuations.

confidence: moderate ssrn-abstract-page apw-e1-ssrn-backfill

Scope: Universe: YC W20-F24 firms and U.S. venture-backed startups first financed in 2020-2024; unit: startup firm and workforce; period: cohorts/first financings 2020-2024; denominator: matched non-AI startups in the same industry-cohort, with sample counts not displayed.

Structured relationships

In-corpus citations

Only source-supplied cites relationships whose two endpoints are admitted are shown. Invocation evidence remains a separate relationship.

Cites (0)

No in-corpus outgoing citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.

Cited by (0)

No in-corpus incoming citation is available in the current enrichment coverage.

Boundaries

Limitations & independence

Recorded at coding time, carried with the work forever. A claim without its limits is not evidence.

Recorded limitations

  • AI-native classification and entry selection can confound structure comparisons
  • Abstract-level evidence only; full text was not inspected.
  • The comparisons are observational; sample sizes, baseline means, uncertainty, and whether percentages are relative or percentage-point differences are not displayed.
  • Working paper may be revised
  • Young US venture-backed startup sample

Source independence

Academic working paper using YC, venture, and workforce-profile data; no focal-firm outcome audit.