Privacy starts with the actual data path.

Record account, service and purpose together

The Google Privacy Hub applies to the Workspace arrangements it identifies. It describes training restrictions and differing history and retention rules. For approval, record the business account, exact interface and processing purpose. Also note whether data is only analysed, stored as a file or passed to another service.

Source settings are not a blanket data block

Workspace Intelligence settings can limit active searching of individual sources. Explicitly referenced or currently open content may still be used as context. Check separately what search can discover and what a user can deliberately provide. A restricted data area needs effective content and permission rules, together with a test under the relevant user role.

Treat history and saved output separately

Current Workspace documentation describes conversation histories and administrator retention settings. Do not rely on older blanket statements that prompts are never stored. Record the history settings effective for your interface, and assess inserted content separately as part of an email, document or file. Deleting a conversation does not establish where a previously exported result remains.

Example: approved documents for proposal drafts

A team wants proposal drafts based on internal service descriptions. The pilot uses a curated repository without personal-data edge cases. A data-flow record identifies the source, user roles, generated draft, approver and storage destination. Test cases include an unauthorised document, an old price list and a request to place internal notes in customer-facing text. Each situation needs an expected, observable response.

Working template: the data-flow record

For each workflow awaiting approval, record its purpose, data categories, sources, user roles, processing services, generated outputs, retention and possible recipients. Attach the reviewed provider source and date. Assign an owner to unresolved points. This turns the broad question “May we use Gemini?” into concrete decisions that business, IT and privacy stakeholders can assess together.

• Account changes and added integrations trigger a new review.
• An approved purpose is not blanket approval for every data category.

A traceable basis for your approval

The outcome is a list of permitted workflows with prerequisites and open issues. Responsible privacy and business stakeholders can use it to assess the specific deployment. Werkverstand prepares the technical and operational review without treating a provider contract as blanket legal approval. The System Check helps select a workflow with useful benefits and a manageable data requirement.