Neoway builds ML platform with team-first approach and product thinking
Neoway's functional team structure created silos that prevented data scientists from accessing historical data in the proper format and from deploying model predictions integrated with the company's architecture; internal ML tooling suffered from poor developer experience and low user adoption.
The original features framework had terrible user experience and was abandoned; the functional organizational structure created dependency bottlenecks that slowed business value delivery.
Neoway redesigned into cross-functional cells in early 2020 and built an ML platform covering data pipelines, a Feature Store, distributed development environments, model productization tooling, Airflow-based pipeline orchestration, and model serving APIs.
Frequently asked questions
What did this team achieve with this AI workflow?
Neoway redesigned into cross-functional cells in early 2020 and built an ML platform covering data pipelines, a Feature Store, distributed development environments, model productization tooling, Airflow-based pipeline…
What tools did this team use?
Airflow, Gitlab, Docker.
What results were reported?
user adoption of internal ML tools: bad experience and low user adoption; Software delivery speed: accelerating software delivery (source-reported, not independently verified).
What failed first in this deployment?
The original features framework had terrible user experience and was abandoned; the functional organizational structure created dependency bottlenecks that slowed business value delivery.
How is this back office ops AI workflow structured?
Raw data pipeline preparation → Feature Store feature engineering → Distributed model training → Model productization and CI/CD → Airflow batch pipeline orchestration → Model API prediction serving.