Adaptive Product Governance for AI-Mediated Customer Journeys: A Dynamic Framework for Requirements Fluidity and Governance Complexity in Enterprise AI Systems
Abstract
The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI), adaptive recommendation systems, and large language model (LLM)-powered conversational interfaces into enterprise digital products has fundamentally transformed how customers interact with products and services. Historically, customer journeys were modeled as stable, linear sequences of touchpoints that product teams could define, validate, and govern using conventional Product Development Lifecycle (PDLC) frameworks. However, AI-mediated customer journeys are inherently dynamic rather than static, continuously evolving through model retraining, adaptive personalization, user feedback, and shifting data distributions. This behavioral dynamism introduces persistent customer journey volatility that challenges conventional governance approaches and reduces the effectiveness of traditional product management practices. This paper formalizes the AI-Induced Instability Model, a four-stage conceptual framework describing how AI behavioral adaptation propagates into customer journey volatility, requirement instability, governance complexity, and execution friction throughout enterprise product development. Building upon this diagnostic model, the study proposes the Adaptive Governance Framework (AGF), a six-dimensional governance architecture that redefines product governance through velocity-matched requirement revalidation, hypothesis-driven product specifications, progressive capability streaming, continuous risk assessment, AI lifecycle governance, and dynamic portfolio management. The framework is designed to support organizations in maintaining alignment between rapidly evolving AI capabilities and business objectives while preserving governance, compliance, and delivery quality. The AGF was empirically evaluated through a 14-week enterprise e-commerce product governance program involving 14 concurrent AI-enabled product initiatives. The evaluation demonstrated a 43% reduction in requirement revalidation cycle time, a 37% decrease in backlog volatility, a 29% improvement in delivery alignment, and governance documentation completeness reaching 91%, compared with 54.2% under a traditional PDLC baseline. These findings demonstrate that adaptive governance significantly improves organizational responsiveness, decision quality, and execution consistency in AI-driven product environments. The proposed framework provides enterprise product managers, technology leaders, and governance practitioners with a practical, scalable, and quantitatively validated architecture for managing AI-mediated digital products operating in continuously evolving customer ecosystems while ensuring sustainable innovation, regulatory compliance, and long-term business value.
Keywords
References
T. Brown et al., "Language models are few-shot learners," Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 33, pp. 1877–1901, 2020.
J. Gouveia and S. Santos, "Rethinking the Customer Journey: Impact of AI for Consumers and Businesses—A Systematic Literature Review and Research Agenda," Int. J. Consum. Stud., vol. 49, no. 6, p. e70136, 2025.
A. Paleyes, R.-G. Urma, and N. D. Lawrence, "Challenges in deploying machine learning: a survey of case studies," ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1–29, 2022.
M. Cagan, Inspired: How to create tech products customers love. John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
T. Chow and D.-B. Cao, "A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects," J. Syst. Softw., vol. 81, no. 6, pp. 961–971, 2008.
N. Forsgren, J. Humble, and G. Kim, Accelerate: The science of lean software and devops: Building and scaling high-performing technology organizations. IT Revolution, 2018.
B. Fitzgerald and K.-J. Stol, "Continuous software engineering: A roadmap and agenda," J. Syst. Softw., vol. 123, pp. 176–189, 2017.
D. Sculley et al., "Hidden technical debt in machine learning systems," Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 28, 2015.
S. Amershi et al., "Software engineering for machine learning: A case study," in 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP), 2019, pp. 291–300.
K. Ahmad, M. Abdelrazek, C. Arora, M. Bano, and J. Grundy, "Requirements engineering for artificial intelligence systems: A systematic mapping study," Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 158, p. 107176, 2023.
E. Ries, "How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses," Lean Startup, 2011.
M. Perri, Escaping the build trap: How effective product management creates real value. O'Reilly Media, 2018.
E. Bjarnason et al., "Challenges and practices in aligning requirements with verification and validation: a case study of six companies," Empir. Softw. Eng., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1809–1855, 2014.
Y. Chen and C. Prentice, "Integrating artificial intelligence and customer experience," Australas. Mark. J., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 141–153, 2025.
N. I. of Standards and T. (US), Artificial intelligence risk management framework: generative artificial intelligence profile. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2024.
L. G. Uberti-Bona Marin, B. Rijsbosch, K. Meding, G. Spanakis, G. van Dijck, and K. Kollnig, "Is your AI Model Accurate Enough? " Difficult Choices Behind Rigorous AI Development and the EU AI Act. EU AI Act (March 11, 2026), 2026.
M. Mitchell et al., "Model cards for model reporting," in Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, 2019, pp. 220–229.
T. Gebru et al., "Datasheets for datasets," Commun. ACM, vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 86–92, 2021.
P. Liang et al., "Holistic evaluation of language models," arXiv Prepr. arXiv2211.09110, 2022.
K. E. Weick and K. M. Sutcliffe, Managing the unexpected: Sustained performance in a complex world. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
E. Tabassi, "Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0)," 2023.
L. Wang et al., "A survey on large language model-based autonomous agents," Front. Comput. Sci., vol. 18, no. 6, p. 186345, 2024.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52088/ijesty.v6i3.1848
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 Vijayalakshmi Narasimhan




























