AI Data Companion · Enterprise Data Integration

Designing an AI workflow that works while the analyst works.

An exploration of how AI can support enterprise data analysts — from discovering fragmented context to generating recommendations, while keeping humans in control of the final decision.

My Role Product definition with PMs · Lead interaction & prototyping
Domain Enterprise data integration & semantic mapping
Artifacts Bounded context specs · Figma + Codex prototypes
The Journey at a Glance Executive Overview
Stage 01
Discover

AI synthesizes documentation & fragmented legacy schemas upfront.

Stage 02
Assist

AI generates candidate field mappings backed by concrete evidence.

Stage 03
Review

Analyst inspects data samples, spec citations, and confidence ratings.

Stage 04
Approve

Analyst overrides edge cases and formally approves mappings into pipeline.

Stage 05
Continue

Background execution runs without blocking analyst context switches.

01 — The Opportunity

Before designing the AI, I had to understand what the analyst was actually doing.

The brief was open-ended: “What could AI do for enterprise data integration?”

It would have been easy to immediately start designing a conversational chatbot or an automated mapping wizard. But jumping straight to features would have solved the wrong problem.

Enterprise source-to-target mapping is not simply drawing lines between columns. It is an arduous process of reconstructing fragmented context across legacy schemas, missing business definitions, scattered documentation, and high regulatory audit risk.

“Don't start with ‘What AI feature should we build?’ Start with: ‘Where is the analyst actually spending cognitive effort?’”
Discovery Context What I expected vs. what research revealed
▾
What I Expected

AI could parse incoming tables and automatically draw mapping lines between source and target columns.

What I Discovered

Analysts spent 80% of their effort acting as data detectives—hunting down cryptic abbreviations (TX_CAT_V2), wikis, and PDFs before linking a single field.

That Changed the Question

Instead of “Where should AI appear in the UI?”, I asked: “How can AI help the analyst understand the data before mapping begins?”

The Four Operational Realities of Enterprise Data

  • Cryptic Column Naming: Legacy schemas use abbreviated identifiers (e.g. TX_CAT_V2) with zero self-describing documentation.
  • Scattered Specifications: Business rules and glossary definitions live across Confluence pages, email threads, and PDFs.
  • Audit Liability: Analysts cannot commit unverified AI guesses; every mapping must be auditable during regulatory reviews.
  • Parallel Projects: Analysts manage multiple product schemas simultaneously and cannot tolerate blocking workflows.
02 — Four Core Decisions

Four decisions shaped the direction.

01 · Product Definition

Understand the work before defining AI

Enterprise schemas contain tens of thousands of columns. Querying everything at once produces untrusted results. Working with PMs across Ingestion and Catalog squads, I bounded the AI's scope into hierarchical domain containers and established clear boundaries between deterministic rules and AI inference.

02 · Workflow Transformation

Reframe the workflow: Understanding precedes mapping

Legacy tools treated integration as a simple line-drawing interface. But analysts spent 80% of their effort hunting through PDFs and deciphering cryptic columns before linking a single field. I redesigned the sequence so that AI-driven document discovery and glossary synthesis occur upfront, transforming the analyst into a high-leveraged reviewer.

Previous Reality
80% Hunting → 20% Line-Drawing

Manual investigation of cryptic fields and scattered PDFs.

Transformed Workflow
Upfront Synthesis → 80% Review

AI extracts domain glossary; analyst verifies recommendations.

03 · Human–AI Interaction

Keep the analyst in control: AI proposes, human approves

AI recommendations cannot simply appear as an opaque “magic” result. In enterprise compliance, an unverified link creates major regulatory risk. I designed an inspectable interaction model where every AI recommendation provides supporting evidence, data samples, and spec citations—giving analysts total confidence to refine and approve.

Core Interaction: AI Proposes → Human Reviews → Human Refines → Human Approves
Total lineage traceability with 1-click inspection.
04 · Asynchronous Design

Design around the wait: Asynchronous AI

AI processing on large enterprise schemas takes minutes or hours to run. Forcing an analyst to sit through a blocking loading spinner destroys productivity. I architected an asynchronous, non-blocking model and prototyped multi-product context switching in Figma and Codex—allowing analysts to dispatch tasks, continue other work, and return precisely where they left off.

Dispatch AI Task → Switch Products → Background Notification → Instant Resume
Zero blocked states across parallel integration projects.
03 — The Complete Direction

An AI-supported workflow, not an AI chatbot

The outcome of this exploration was not a standalone chatbot or a decorative widget bolted onto existing screens. It was a comprehensive product model connecting the four decisions into a cohesive, non-disruptive workflow:

Where AI Belongs:

Synthesizing unstructured specs, parsing thousands of candidate columns, decoding naming patterns, and running heavy jobs asynchronously in the background.

Where the Human Remains in Control:

Inspecting sample data evidence, validating semantic meaning, overriding ambiguous edge cases, and taking formal audit ownership of the final integration.

“I didn't start by asking: ‘What can AI do?’ I started by asking: ‘What does the analyst need help with?’ That led to: ‘Where should AI participate — and where must the human remain in control?’ And finally: ‘How can AI continue working without making the analyst stop working?’”
04 — Summary of Outputs

What this work produced

Product Architecture

Defined the bounded domain containment model and established the work allocation framework separating rules from inference.

Reviewable Interaction Spec

Created the 4-stage inspection model and evidence drawer, establishing compliance-ready AI interaction patterns.

Interactive Codex Prototypes

Proved asynchronous multi-product switching and return-to-context behaviors with working interactive prototypes.