Decision Brief · Leadership

Which AI model should we standardize on?

A recommendation for a 60-person company deciding what to adopt as its single, shared AI platform across engineering, ops, and business teams.

Framing

The question, and how we'll decide it

We will not pick a model by reading a benchmark leaderboard. We will pick the one that best fits a 60-person company with mixed technical fluency.

The Landscape · June 2026

Four credible candidates

Anthropic
Claude
Sonnet 4.6 / Opus 4.6+. Strong coding, low hallucination, clear safety posture.
OpenAI
GPT‑5
Broad multimodal, Microsoft/Azure-native, largest ecosystem — but priciest.
Google
Gemini
3.1 Pro / Flash. 2M-token context, Workspace integration, cheapest at scale.
Meta · self-host
Llama
Open weights, full data control. Needs infra + an ML team to run well.

Pricing and capability figures on the following slides are current as of June 2026 from public provider pages and third‑party comparisons; treat as ±20% indicative, not contracted.

Criterion 1 · Capability

All four are "good enough" — differences are at the edges

Coding (SWE‑bench) Reasoning Multimodal Long context Claude ~80% GPT‑5 ~72% Gemini ~68% . GPT‑5 best Gemini 2M

Bar lengths are normalized to the leader on each axis. For our workloads (writing, analysis, code review, ops docs), every candidate clears the bar; the differentiator is what each is best at, not whether it's good enough.

Criterion 2 · Cost

Cost spans ~5× at list price

ModelInput $/1MOutput $/1MContextBatch discount
Claude Sonnet 4.6$3.00$15.00200KYes
Claude Haiku 4.5$1.00$5.00200KYes
GPT‑5$1.25$10.00200–400K50%
Gemini 3.1 Pro$2.00$12.002M50%
Gemini 3 Flash$0.50$3.002M50%
Llama (self‑host)infrainfra
Real cost warning
Headline price understates spend 3–9× — reasoning "thinking" tokens and cache behavior dominate the bill at scale, not the published rate.
Negotiated reality
Committed-volume enterprise deals typically shave 20–40% off list. Two vendors with a credible fallback gives us leverage on both.
Criteria 3 & 4 · Privacy · Ease

Privacy posture and "can a non-engineer use it?"

ModelData residency / VPCTraining on your dataEase for non‑technical team
ClaudeZero-retention API + AWS Bedrock VPCNo (API tier)High clean chat UI, no setup
GPT‑5Azure OpenAI (region-pinned)No (enterprise)High most familiar brand
GeminiGoogle Cloud, Workspace-nativeNo (enterprise)Med best if already on Google
LlamaFull self-host, your hardwareNeverLow needs an ML team
Recommendation

Standardize on Claude, with Gemini as the long-context fallback

Primary platform
Anthropic Claude (Sonnet 4.6 default, Haiku 4.5 for bulk)
Best balance of strong capability, low hallucination (safety matters for client-facing work), a genuinely easy chat UI for our non-technical majority, and a no-training API tier. Haiku gives us a cheap lane for high-volume, low-stakes tasks so we're not paying Sonnet rates for everything.
Rollout · 90 days

Phased adoption so we can reverse cheaply

Days 0–30 · Pilot
Volunteers only
Engineering + ops power users on Claude Pro seats. 50–100 real tasks logged with quality + cost.
Days 30–60 · Compare
Head-to-head
Run the same task set on GPT‑5 and Gemini. Buy the answer with data, not vibes.
Days 60–75 · Procure
Enterprise tier
Negotiate committed-volume Claude deal; add Gemini API for long-context workloads.
Days 75–90 · Roll out
All staff
SSO, a 1-page usage policy, a shared prompt library, and a single billing owner.
Pilot Compare Procure Roll out Day 90
Cost envelope

Expected monthly spend at 60 people

Consumer seats only: ~$1,200/mo + API usage (Sonnet/Haiku mix): ~$2,700/mo + Gemini long-context: ~$600/mo Total envelope: ~$4,500/mo Assumes 60 seats @ ~$20, plus API on real workloads with Haiku routing for bulk tasks.
Per-head
~$75/mo
All-in for a tool used daily across the company — under most per-seat SaaS line items.
Cost control
3 levers
Route low-stakes traffic to Haiku, set per-team API budgets, and use prompt caching for repeated context.
Risks & mitigations

What could go wrong, and what we do about it

RiskLikelihoodMitigation
Vendor lock-in / pricing hikeMediumKeep Gemini API live as a credible fallback; abstract prompts in a shared library so swap is cheap.
Quiet overspend on APIMediumPer-team budgets, Haiku routing for bulk, monthly billing review by a single owner.
Data exposureLowEnterprise no-training tier, zero-retention API, 1-page policy forbidding PII in prompts.
Model falls behindMediumRe-run the head-to-head task set quarterly; the standardization is a default, not a forever-contract.
Low adoptionMediumSSO + prompt library + champion in each team; measure active usage, not just seats sold.
Bottom line
Adopt Claude now; re-verify in 90 days with real usage data.
A reversible, cheap default beats a six-month evaluation. We pick the strongest balanced option today and commit to changing it if the data says so.