What are the best practices for evaluating software architecture in financial systems?

1 Choose an appropriate evaluation method

When evaluating software architecture, it's important to choose an appropriate method that suits your needs, resources, and constraints. The Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) is a structured and scenario-based method that identifies and analyzes tradeoffs among quality attributes. Alternatively, the Architecture Review for the Integration and Test of Systems (ARITS) focuses on integration and testability of system components and interfaces. Active Design Reviews (ADR) involve active participation from reviewers who evaluate the architecture from different perspectives. The Software Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM) compares and evaluates alternative architectures based on predefined scenarios and criteria. Whichever method you choose, it should provide clear and actionable feedback.

3 Involve relevant stakeholders and experts

Software architecture evaluation is not a solo activity, but a collaborative one that requires the involvement and input of various stakeholders and experts, such as system developers, users, managers, and regulators. It is important to engage these stakeholders and experts throughout the evaluation process, and solicit their feedback and suggestions. Additionally, you should communicate the evaluation goals, methods, and results clearly and effectively to ensure that everyone is on the same page. System developers have the most knowledge and experience with the technical aspects of the architecture. System users have the most knowledge and experience with the functional aspects of the architecture. System managers have the most knowledge and experience with the managerial and organizational aspects of the architecture. System regulators have the most knowledge and experience with the legal and ethical aspects of the architecture.

4 Conduct the evaluation iteratively and incrementally

Software architecture evaluation is not a one-time event, but rather a continuous process that should be conducted iteratively and incrementally throughout the system development lifecycle. This means that you should evaluate the system at different stages, such as planning, design, implementation, testing, and deployment. Additionally, review and update the evaluation method, criteria, and metrics as the system changes. Incorporate the evaluation results and feedback into the system improvement and enhancement process. Finally, repeat the evaluation as needed to guarantee that the system meets its quality and suitability goals. By conducting an evaluation in this manner, you can identify and address issues and risks of the software architecture early on and ensure that it delivers value to its users and stakeholders.

6 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?