Konstantin “Stan”
PonomarevTRANSFORMATION & PROGRAM LEADERSHIP
Menu

Foundation design

CASE 05 / DATA & AI ENABLEMENT 2 MIN READ

Govern the foundation
before scaling the ambition.

KLAD was conceived as a common data layer for operational analysts, data scientists and external technology partners. I tracked its investment and program dependencies within the wider digital portfolio.

Jump to the results ↓
5capabilities in the platform design
CONTEXT
Gazprom Neft · KLAD data platform
MY ROLE
Portfolio Management Direction Lead
PERIOD
Formation and governance milestone · 2018
10programs in the intended roadmap
3distinct user profiles
5platform capabilities

AT A GLANCE

Foundation design

The mandate

Create reusable data capabilities across programs.

My contribution

Shape the formation plan, governance and user needs.

The result

Architecture aligned and procurement documentation submitted.

01 / THE CHALLENGE

The problem to solve.

Programs needed access to the same operational data, but faced fragmented source systems, repeated model development and difficult external collaboration. A shared platform had to address data access and governance together.

THE DELIVERY LOGIC ILLUSTRATIVE MODEL

Operational
analysts
Data
scientists
External
partners
KLADShared data foundation
Ownership · Quality · Access

02 / KEY DECISIONS

Where I focused.

The central trade-off

Separate platforms could meet local needs sooner but reinforce duplication. A shared foundation required agreement on capabilities, ownership and user needs before the investment could advance.

  1. 01

    Treat the platform as a portfolio dependency.

    Tracked KLAD in portfolio funding and steering-committee materials, connecting its progress to the digital programs that would rely on it.

  2. 02

    Account for three different user needs.

    The platform design covered operational analytics, model development and a controlled environment for external collaborators. These users required different access patterns and safeguards.

  3. 03

    Develop governance alongside infrastructure.

    The Data Management Model workstream ran alongside platform preparation. Ownership and quality expectations were part of the operating design, rather than a post-launch addition.

03 / THE OUTCOME

What changed.

  • By the documented 2018 milestone, the architecture was agreed and the steering committee and working groups were formed.
  • An equipment procurement decision was submitted to the investment committee.
  • A parallel data-management initiative established a path for governance to develop with the platform.

04 / MY ACCOUNTABILITY

A clear line of ownership.

This case covers a formation-stage milestone. The source does not establish final commissioning or measured retrieval-speed improvement. A 30× improvement appeared as a design target and is deliberately not claimed as a realized result.

WORKING PRINCIPLE

Shared infrastructure is only useful when programs can depend on both the technology and its operating rules.

Facing a similar mandate?

Let’s discuss the decisions, lessons and experience behind this work.

Discuss this experience

LET’S CONNECT

The next mandate.
Let’s discuss it.

An opportunity, a shared challenge or an exchange of ideas — start a conversation.

Let’s connect

AREAS OF PRACTICE

Transformation management.
Portfolio & program leadership.
AI-enabled business change.

Tampa, Florida
U.S. work authorization
No sponsorship required

Executive profile PDF · 1 pageView LinkedIn (opens in a new tab)