<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Change-Management on SaaS Tech Watch</title><link>https://saastechwatch.com/tags/change-management/</link><description>Recent content in Change-Management on SaaS Tech Watch</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 09:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://saastechwatch.com/tags/change-management/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Weekly-Ship Problem: Change Management for AI Products That Rewrite Themselves</title><link>https://saastechwatch.com/posts/2026-08-25-the-weekly-ship-problem-change-management-for-ai-products-that-rewrite/</link><pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://saastechwatch.com/posts/2026-08-25-the-weekly-ship-problem-change-management-for-ai-products-that-rewrite/</guid><description>&lt;p>A conventional SaaS release changes what the software does. An AI-native SaaS release can also change what the software &lt;em>thinks&lt;/em>, and those are different failure modes. Buyers who learned their release-management discipline in the era of feature flags and semantic versioning are discovering that the same discipline does not transfer cleanly to products whose behaviour is partly controlled by prompts, evals, and model weights they do not own.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>This piece is about what buyers can demand, what buyers can do on their own side, and what vendors owe their customers when every deploy has a chance of moving the agent&amp;rsquo;s personality.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>