The architecture under the cockpit — how data flows from many disconnected segment, plant and project systems into one governed truth, how that truth becomes a decision, and how two 360s still deliver over real data gaps.
No big-bang migration. The platform federates each segment, plant and project system, resolves it to one ontology, and serves a single trusted number — then turns that number into a decision, and the decision into an owner's action.
Each segment, plant and project system stays where it is. The platform layers ingestion, master-data resolution, a shared ontology and a semantic layer on top, then serves one governed truth to the apps and AI. Data flows top → bottom.
A single transaction's journey through the stack. A confidence flag and a reconciliation tie-out ride along with it the whole way.
Adapters pull each segment, plant & project system's events on schedule / CDC.
Raw records stored verbatim, with lineage + timestamp.
Codes matched to one canonical entity.
Mapped onto the ontology — classes & relationships.
Native fields → governed metrics; estimates flagged.
One metrics API; reconciliation gates the numbers.
360 views, exec briefs & AI read one truth.
The governed truth doesn't sit in a warehouse — it routes itself to the right view, the right action, and the right owner.
The four value-creation pillars don't just have dashboards — each has a standing agent that reads its governed data products and recommends the next move. Same ground truth, automated.
order book (₹4,055 Cr), bid-pipeline conversion & order inflow vs plan
service_line · opportunity · signal · kpiEBITDA margin, the 765 kV substation mix & steel / zinc cost vs plan
business_unit · ebitda_bridge · supplier · kpidebtor days (214), free cash flow, net debt/EBITDA & covenant headroom
kpi · ar_aging · debt_tranche · covenant_qtr765 kV AIS/GIS & data-centre capability build and the MENA order book
brand_cohort · integration_workstream · project · kpiSome segments and capabilities aren't fully on the common SAP grain yet, so the capability→segment mapping and site-grain detail are incomplete. These views still answer — by resolving, allocating-and-flagging, then reconciling. The estimate is labelled, never hidden.
Some capabilities report at their own grain — so the capability → site / project → segment → legal-entity rollup is partly missing or inferred.
of revenue already at true site grain; the rest labelled & closing as segments move onto the common grain
For capabilities not yet on the common grain, site-asset and executed-revenue detail isn't available at site grain — so the site twin would otherwise be blank.
avg site-grain coverage today — transparent where it's modelled
Reconciliation runs live on the data. The 0 known breaks below are the site-grain gap surfaced on purpose — exactly what a CFO or auditor wants flagged, not buried.
Open Data Health →