Director, Regulatory AI Business Partner

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. Must not repeat job title. Must not include Job ID etc. Must preserve all substantive info, no invention. Remove boilerplate like EEO, scam warning, application instructions, etc. We need to parse the posting. Key sections: - About AISI AI Strategy & Innovation (AISI) sits at the centre... That's about the role? Could be "About the role". We'll put that content under

About the role

with

. - Role Overview: description of responsibilities? Could be part of responsibilities. - What You'll Do: list of duties. Should be under Responsibilities with

• . - Essential for the role: qualifications (Master's degree etc). Could be under Requirements or Qualifications. We'll decide: maybe "Requirements" for mandatory qualifications, "Qualifications" for desirable? But we need to follow instruction: use headings for section headings (About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). We need to decide which content maps. We have: - About AISI... (intro) -> About the role. - Role Overview: description of role (maybe also part of About the role). Could combine. - What You'll Do: bullet list of duties -> Responsibilities. - Essential for the role: mandatory qualifications (Master's degree, 5+ years experience, stakeholder management, ability to understand data, comfort interfacing IT, excellent communication, comfort with ambiguity, familiarity with AI governance). That's Requirements. - Desirable for the role: nice-to-have (hands-on experience in Regulatory Affairs, direct experience with regulatory standards, experience spanning industry and Health Authority, familiarity with regulatory and clinical data standards, experience with generative AI, experience supporting buy-vs-build, advanced degree PhD/MD, clinical training, awareness of AI-enabled tools as SaMD). That could be Qualifications or Skills. We have separate Skills heading; we could put skills there. But we also have Skills heading. Could put technical skills under Skills. However we have also "Skills" heading; we can list skills like stakeholder management, communication, etc. But we already have many in Requirements. Might be better to treat Requirements as mandatory, Qualifications as desirable, Skills as specific competencies (like data infrastructure, AI governance). But we need to avoid duplication. Let's map: - About the role: intro paragraph(s) about AISI and role overview. - Responsibilities: the bullet list under "What You'll Do" (business partnering, governance, demand shaping, data standards, strategy). We'll extract each bullet as
• . - Requirements: mandatory qualifications: Master's degree in AI/ML, data science, health informatics, or related field; 5+ years experience in digital health, AI/ML, or tech-driven environment within healthcare or drug development, with meaningful exposure to Regulatory, demonstrated track record of identifying, articulating, realizing value of AI/data products; demonstrated stakeholder management ability; ability to understand and reason about data, data and compute infrastructure, pipelines, translate fluently between technical and business; comfort interfacing with IT and enterprise data functions on data access, governance, infrastructure, compute; excellent interpersonal, verbal, written communication skills, ability to operate in international matrix environment and bring structure and clarity to ambiguous problems; comfort with ambiguity and bias for action; familiarity with AI governance, compliance, responsible-AI considerations in regulated (GxP) environment, judgment to know when specialist input required. - Qualifications: desirable: hands-on experience in Regulatory Affairs within life sciences or at a Health Authority; direct hands-on experience with Regulatory standards and workflows (regulatory submissions, regulatory affairs operations, clinical data management) in drug development; experience spanning both industry and Health Authority settings highly valued; familiarity with regulatory and clinical data standards and compliance; experience with generative AI or agentic systems applied to regulatory writing and submissions; experience supporting buy-vs-build decisions, vendor evaluation, or AI/data product management; advanced degree (PhD, MD) in relevant scientific, statistical, or technical field; clinical training or clinical background (MD, PharmD, RN) that supports credible engagement with clinical and regulatory stakeholders; awareness of how AI-enabled tools and connected or digital health technologies (e.g., SaMD, wearables) can themselves fall under regulatory oversight. - Skills: maybe we could list specific skills like "Stakeholder management", "Strategic thinking", "Technical translation", "AI governance", "Data infrastructure understanding". But we already covered many. Could combine Skills with Requirements? But instruction says prefer few substantive sections over many thin ones. We could omit Skills if not distinct. However we have a heading Skills available; we could include if there is specific skill content not covered elsewhere. The posting mentions "Excellent interpersonal, verbal, and written communication skills", "Ability to understand and reason about data, data and compute infrastructure, and pipelines", "Comfort interfacing with IT and enterprise data functions", "Comfort with ambiguity and a bias for action", "Familiarity with AI governance, compliance, and responsible-AI considerations". Those could be considered skills. But they are already in Requirements. Might be okay to have Skills section with those items, but then we duplicate. Better to not create Skills if no unique content. - Benefits: The posting mentions: "Our positions offer eligibility for various incentives—an opportunity to receive short-term incentive bonuses, equity-based awards for salaried roles and commissions for sales roles. Benefits offered include qualified retirement programs, paid time off (i.e., vacation, holiday, and leaves), as well as health, dental, and vision coverage in accordance with the terms of the applicable plans." Also earlier: "Join us in our unique and ambitious world. The annual base pay for this position ranges from $186,014.40 - $279,021.60 USD Annual [80% - 120% ]. Our positions offer eligibility for various incentives—an opportunity to receive short-term incentive bonuses, equity-based awards for salaried roles and commissions for sales roles. Benefits offered include qualified retirement programs, paid time off (i.e., vacation, holiday, and leaves), as well as health, dental, and vision coverage in accordance with the terms of the applicable plans." Thus we have Benefits content. - Pay: The posting includes annual base pay range: $186,014.40 - $279,021.60 USD Annual [80% - 120%]. Also mentions incentives etc. We'll put Pay section with that range. - Schedule: The posting mentions: "When we put unexpected teams in the same room, we unleash bold thinking with the power to inspire life-changing medicines. In-person working gives us the platform we need to connect, work at pace and challenge perceptions. That's why we work, on average, a minimum of three days per week from the office. But that doesn't mean we're not flexible. We balance the expectation of being in the office while respecting individual flexibility." So schedule: minimum three days per week in office, flexible. Thus we have Schedule. Now we need to output HTML fragment with headings

  and appropriate

  or

  • . No extra tags. We must not include boilerplate like EEO, mission statement about inclusive environment, etc. Also remove "Date Posted", "Closing Date", "Call To Action", "Why AstraZeneca" maybe? The "Why AstraZeneca" paragraph includes some motivational content but might be considered boilerplate? It's not EEO but it's promotional. The instruction: remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. "Why AstraZeneca" is not explicitly listed but could be considered promotional fluff; but it's part of the posting. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. So we should keep it if it's substantive. However it's more about culture; could be considered substantive. But we have limited sections; we could incorporate into About the role or maybe a separate section? There's no heading for culture. We could put it under About the role as additional paragraph. Also "Call To Action" and "Step into a role..." is promotional; could be considered boilerplate? It's a call to action, maybe considered application instruction? It's not exactly instruction to apply but encouraging. Might be considered boilerplate. Safer to remove it as it's not substantive about role. The instruction says remove application instructions. "Call To Action" is like encouragement to apply; could be considered application instruction. We'll remove. Also "Date Posted" and "Closing Date" are metadata; we should drop or fold into short p. The instruction: do NOT put Job ID / requisition numbers as headings — fold minor metadata into a short

    or drop it. So we could include a short p with Date Posted and Closing Date maybe. But they said fold minor metadata into a short

    or drop it. We could include a

    with that info. However we have no heading for metadata; we could just include a

    after the headings? But we need to output only HTML fragment; we can include a

    with that info somewhere, maybe after Benefits? But better to drop it as not essential. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; date posted maybe not substantive about role. So we can drop. Also "Our mission is to build an inclusive environment..." is EEO boilerplate; remove. Now we need to ensure we don't create sections with filler like "commensurate with experience". We have real content. Now craft HTML. We'll have:

    About the role

    ... (intro + role overview + maybe why AstraZeneca?)

    Responsibilities

    • Serve as the primary, trusted business partner between AI for Clinical Development team and the Regulatory function across the enterprise.
    • Partner closely with AI for Clinical Development function leads and their teams, and the broader EAI teams, to develop AI solutions, sitting on project teams and where needed engaging Regulatory domain expertise directly into solution development, keeping delivery aligned to function needs.
    • Develop a deep, current understanding of Regulatory priorities, workflows, and decision points.
    • Understand and coordinate with ongoing digital and AI efforts within the Regulatory function.
    • Build credibility and trusted relationships with senior leaders across the function, and act as a calm, structured partner when priorities compete.
    • Connect with the digital, data science, and AI teams embedded within the Regulatory function and the therapy areas, and with senior Regulatory leaders across biopharma and oncology, so efforts are coordinated rather than duplicated.
    • Act as a bridge on responsible and compliant AI for the AI for Clinical Development team: flag early when a solution under development may constitute a regulated product or otherwise trigger regulatory requirements, and help teams chart a path through them.
    • Partner with compliance, quality, privacy, and data-governance stakeholders to close gaps where enterprise guidance does not yet exist, so teams can move quickly without taking on undue risk.
    • Provide AI expertise and consultation to Regulatory—advising where AI will add the most value within the function's digital roadmap, and how AI can support Regulatory in achieving its digitally-enabled vision.
    • Translate function needs into a prioritized, sequenced set of AI opportunities—drawing on Regulatory's existing roadmaps rather than a new list—and help decide which are best implemented at the enterprise level versus within the function directly.
    • Define and demonstrate the value of AI solutions for Regulatory: build the business case, agree success metrics up front, and track adoption and benefits realization after delivery.
    • Contribute the business and domain perspective to buy-vs-build and vendor-evaluation decisions for Regulatory use cases.
    • Help establish appropriate performance, cost, and latency expectations for shared clinical AI capabilities in partnership with the team's evaluation and monitoring efforts.
    • Coordinate related AI