This is what AI is for. Why don't you ask ChatGPT?

I know you are asking for something different, but since there are already a few good answers, allow me to instead to reject the premise and give you a different.

It's not impossible to implement an AI solution within the context your provided. The problem is that it's going to be expensive. However, you can offer to deliver something smaller, focus on the smallest but valuable contribution you can make. While cleaning up the data is still going to be a hell of task, if the scope is small enough it can be achievable. Then, you can communicate the difficulty to scale due to data issues which can help management undestand the importance of prioritizing data quality.

If you have a bunch of sales data, maybe you can focus on deriving purchase patterns and build a simple recommendations engine. If you want to focus on marketing, you could try lead classification. Ideas depend on the domain of the company you work for.

They're not wanting to work better, they just want to be able to say they "use AI".

Get them an estimate of how much it would be to give everyone Copilot for Business licenses and they will start talking about the business having other priorities.

Having been in a situation in which management could not quite grasp the concept of "what you're asking is literally impossible" the only answer I have to give is to leave and find someplace smarter to work.

"Each department in this company has developed their own way of doing things. Unfortunately, not every department is giving us information in a way that we can use it to our advantage. We need to get everyone across the company on the same standards so we don't have any mixups. We can't help you do your jobs better if we can't process the information you give us."

Implementation of AI requires strong unified data governance and data hygiene to produce company wide strategic solutions. The current company posture instead is focused on tactical level data collection and analysis which does not lend itself to consumption in relevant possible cross-department opportunities.

Our team does its best to maintain consistency within our own processes, but collaborating with other groups like marketing and sales can be challenging due to siloed operations. Each team follows different approaches to data management, often using free-form fields and inconsistent tagging methods, making it difficult to combine datasets effectively.

You pretty much already had it.

It is actually easier to just get a different job with better leadership. You can say exactly what you wrote in your exit interview.

"sure thing boss"

Starts looking for new job

We're unable to leverage some of the latest advances in AI due to our Leadership's abundance of caution and strategically allowable risk profile.

Why would you even bother?

We need shared definitions to tell meaningful stories with our data. And then use a company specific example like how a customer's journey can not be understood with differing definition between marketing and sales. The marketing team can't measure the quality of the leads they're producing unless they can directly link a customer's whole journey from acquisition to churn. Otherwise it's just vanity metrics. But don't be too harsh, vanity metrics are really common in business. A company needs strong data leadership to create a culture of using data to justify decisions to a culture of using data to inform decisions.

Resign, then offer them consulting on it for $300/hour.

Our legacy systems have served us well. Unfortunately, the facts of being market leaders and first movers mean we're not operationally equipped to leverage turnkey AI solutions. We will need significant buy-in from management in several stakeholder organizations, as well as significant time and resources for procurement (or development), implementation, and change management.

(optional depending on your GAF level) : With the right level-set and commitment, integrating our systems for AI could be transformative in the best ways.

Removing the unecessary adjective "old" would be an obvious start.

But what is your audience and what do you hope to accomplish? Unless you really have an audience who is likely to accept that the people in leadership are lacking an important competence and the power to go around them to get something done, then I would assume that leadership is your audience. In which case the part that blames them is entirely unhelpful and you should stick to explaining the problem and needed changes.

Good luck. The company I work at has the exact same problem. Since each system tends to be owned by a different org, and the systems all meet the owning org's needs, you're going to be in for struggle.