How do you keep your solution architecture organized?

I find it helpful to take the open palm approach, versus the closed fist. Workflows are more important than tools. All too often in enterprise architecture tools are chosen over frameworks in a closed fist approach causing complexity.

This has been my experience, wherein one of the areas that has been significantly impacted or neglected is due to the advent of Agile and the absence of enterprise governance practices. To address this, identifying popular frameworks and templates becomes crucial in establishing and standardizing these documents. The C4 model serves as one mechanism to consistently create information across teams. Furthermore, the introduction of team spaces, such as Lucid or Miro, has greatly facilitated information consolidation in one central location.

As per my experience it is not necessary to use any specific framework. Your solution architecture should be simple and easy to understand by all involved parties or stakeholders. If you will use any complex framework and audience loose interest then it is waste of time and effort.

In order to keep solution architecture organized but also maintain agile/speed/flexibility, I do not limit tools to use from different teams, but certainly clear guideline (and language) for teams to follow and communicate.

You should consider defining a RACI aligned with organization structure especially in a matrix environment. It is important to capture all the roles and have clarity in accountability.

It is very important to involve all stakeholders properly while building solution architecture. Many people think application architecture is solution architecture which is wrong. During solution architecture you must first talk to business identify the business requirement then talk to various other important stakeholders like business architect , data architect , security architect , infrastructure architect and finally application architects involved from components point of view.

Create an organization abbreviation list (Terms and definition) is crucial and aligning it with process is needed, be it UML or BPMN or even C4.

I dont think any specific language or notation is required as long as you are able to communicate your thought process to stakeholders. I believe you can do mix and match from notation point of view to communicate your architecture. Sometimes UML and BPMN are difficult to understand by audience hence if you simply use draw.io and create component interface model/system context using some boxes and arrows that is more than sufficient. Even if you use PPT that is also fine but all components and interfaces should be well documented.

to avoid fruitless discussions and confusions, all teams need to speak same language/terms, but we should support flexibility of technical tools, etc. for team to use.

Consistency is a precursor to benchmarking, hence on-boarding new teams that follow the same notations saves incumbents from redefining business process at every stage. It's critical to let your investors and teams know of the process flow while providing leeway for creative reinterpretation of flows whether we use C4, UML, 4+1, ArchiMate, diagrams.net or draw.io or SysML. Architectures are symbiotic as well as synthetic in nature.

In addition to symbols and notations, Solution Architecture should always evolve to capture what part of the solution is Net New vs. Changing / Modified vs. Deprecated.

RAID (Risk , assumption, issues and dependencies) is part of the project lifecycle and should get created much before the solution architecture comes in play. Having said that, architecture should contribute in updating the list with new/existing items

For overall solution design architectural decisions plays key role. You must identify the multiple solution options for a business problem then identify Pros and Cons and then use the rationale to select the appropriate solution option for the decision. You should also document design decisions which are integral part of solution architecture. Documentation of various assumptions , risks , issues and dependencies is very important.

If the architecture is sufficiently complex, it may be beneficial to have interim designs that cover a specific scope. In those cases, identifying key components or capabilities aligned to project milestones can be beneficial. It is likely that the design will change over time based on key learnings and in that case you may not reach the future state design as it was originally conceived.

Architecture diagrams and data flow diagrams help here as well. Especially during the integration and migration scenarios. They provide quite a clarity on how the designed system would accommodate the existing landscape. This would also be a live document that would change with evolution in scope. Documentation is always important along with version control of all the artifacts produced at every entry and exit of the lifecycle stages be it in agile, waterfall or hybrid.

It is important to review and get approval from authority board for your solution architecture. Take all review comments positively to improve the quality of your design.

Risk management is an under utilized tool. Taking stock of possible issues before they happen and addressing mitigations(what to do to lessen the likelihood or severity of the risk) and contingencies (what to do when the risk comes to fruition), can help make a solution architecturally sound and pre-test issue scenarios.

Review and Monitor effectiveness of Architecture Establishment of robust processes to monitor and evaluate architecture effectiveness is paramount to the success of any organization. This empowers the architecture team to be a strategic partner in driving business outcomes. By periodically assessing various aspects, we ensure alignment with business strategy and objectives. Key processes to uphold the efficacy of solution architecture include: 1. Alignment with Business Strategy 2. Business Impact Evaluation ( Productivity, Revenue Generation, customer satisfaction etc) 3. Technical Debt management 4. Cost Optimization ( cost to realize an architecture)

In my experience as a Technical Product Manager, I have come across Solution architecture listing options on the solution approach. It is ideal to narrow down to a single solution but sometime for multiple reasons options can be listed with a clear pro and cons list.