Your team is divided on system architecture approaches. How do you navigate conflicting opinions effectively?

Il est essentiel de rester sur les fondamentaux: -quels sont les besoins clients , quels sont les documents qui orientnet sa doctrine d'emploi? -quels sont les variantes ? Quelles initiatives récentes d'evolutions des démarches architecturales? Un point clé: Il faut des documents de référence approuvés. En particulier dictionnaires , concepts , references de CONOPS, CONEMP

Para navegar com eficácia, inicie ouvindo atentamente todos os envolvidos para compreender suas perspectivas e preocupa??es. Promova um debate estruturado onde a equipe possa avaliar os prós e contras de cada abordagem sugerida. Sempre que possível, baseie-se em dados e benchmarks para respaldar a decis?o, minimizando a influência de vieses subjetivos. Incentive a colabora??o, guiando a equipe a trabalhar em conjunto para alcan?ar um consenso ou uma solu??o. Por fim, assegure-se de que a decis?o seja transparente, explicando claramente os critérios adotados e os fatores considerados.

Abre tu mente, no solo imagines, se empático con la necesidad de negocio y lo principal, del usuario final, de esta forma sabrás cuál es la necesidad real y vas a dar una excelente opción de arquitectura

Identifique as necessidades e prioridades específicas do projeto e da equipe. Reúna informa??es sobre as raz?es por trás das diferentes abordagens propostas, levando em considera??o fatores como desempenho, escalabilidade e manuten??o. Compreender as motiva??es de cada abordagem ajuda a contextualizar a discuss?o.

One thing that I would add is that sometimes the needs are not conflicting, but one needs to be prioritised. In this cases the conflict resolution should focus on what is priority for the business because at the end is the business that should drive the architecture, and not the other way around.

A healthy dialogue is a crucial requirement for any decision-making process, including architectural decisions. Some software professionals are extroverts, and their voices are often clearly heard. But most engineers are introverts. They will only sometimes speak their mind even though it might be crucial. As the lead architect, I strive to create a healthy environment where every person can say what's on their mind without judgment or prejudice. When engineers feel like they are being heard, they will contribute more. When they contribute more, more context is being made available to decision-makers. When more context is available, the decision quality inevitably increases, and everybody wins.

Identifique as necessidades e prioridades específicas do projeto e da equipe. Reúna informa??es sobre as raz?es por trás das diferentes abordagens propostas, levando em considera??o fatores como desempenho, escalabilidade e manuten??o. Compreender as motiva??es de cada abordagem ajuda a contextualizar a discuss?o.

Communication is indeed a key factor. Keeping the communication channel open, and pro-actively updating on the status (whether on track or not, and if not, what is the cause and how to mitigate it), will earn eventually the stakeholders trust that they are in good hands. Listening to the feedback is a critical pan of this communication channel. The trust we gain in by acknowledging the feedback we get and acting upon, lead the stakeholder towards a much more collaborative interaction for helping to achieve the goal. When you are considered as a Trusted Advisors of the customer, conflicts and communication flaws will rarely happen, as the customer knows your doing the work for his/her own interest and he/she trusts your doing.

Comunicación, pilar principal de cualquier equipo de trabajo, mantén siempre mente abierta, para que de esta manera la comunicación fluya y se analice el problema desde objetivos claros

Fostering open dialogue is crucial when a team has divided views on system architecture. Creating an environment where every team member feels comfortable sharing their thoughts and reasoning is essential. When everyone has the opportunity to express their concerns and preferences, it promotes a collaborative atmosphere. This can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the different approaches and the logic behind them, which is fundamental for making an informed decision.

Avalie as op??es de forma objetiva, considerando os prós e contras de cada abordagem em rela??o às necessidades do projeto. Use critérios claros e baseados em dados para tomar decis?es informadas. Se necessário, fa?a protótipos ou provas de conceito para testar as abordagens em pequena escala antes de decidir.

Once we have a clear understanding of the needs and have fostered open dialogue, the next step is to objectively evaluate all proposed system architecture options. It's important to consider factors such as scalability, performance, reliability, and ease of future modifications. Additionally, assessing the potential risks and benefits associated with each approach is crucial. By evaluating the options based on a set of agreed-upon criteria, we can move towards a decision that best serves the project's objectives.

Depending upon the infrastructure that sits behind this system, you could venture an educated guess that the best system architecture has already been decided for you. Here's what I mean - For example, I have a solution which I host in my cloud tenant, and that needs to provide multi-region services. I already have a Well Architected Framework provided to me by my Cloud provider which has sections that deep dive about deployments which are multi-region optimized.

It is essential to achieve consensus; however, this should not hinder decisive action. Architectural discussions can often become overly theoretical without clear direction. It is crucial to have designated individuals responsible for reviewing all options and making final decisions.

Pour construire un consencus, partir d'une approche de référence , utiliser un cadre de reference architecturale ( TOGAF, DODAF, NAF, en liaison avec COBIT, ITIL). >Ce sont les amigu?tés qui conduisent les projets dans le mur. Basés sur mon expérience de quelques projets SE: Dictionnaire, Methodes Métamodèle Outillage Avec une bonne dose de dialogue, communication et concertation c'est un effort solide fondé sur des bases cohérentes qui est engagé.

While collective decision-making and team buy-in are important goals, they should not compromise the quality of architectural choices. Strong technical leadership is essential to ensure sound decisions are made. Effective tech leaders can present compelling arguments to guide the team toward the right path. Prioritizing open discussion, technical leadership, and critical thinking is preferable to relying solely on a democratic process.

I’d add that while a democratic decision-making process is essential, it’s also important to balance it with technical leadership. Ensure that experienced team members guide the discussions, as their expertise can help steer decisions in the right direction. Combining democratic principles with strong technical oversight can lead to a well-informed and balanced system architecture that benefits from diverse perspectives while maintaining technical integrity.

I must add that these conflicts are actually positive. Not rarely people work on projects they don’t believe or avoid giving their opinions because lack experience or because they think it’s not their responsibility. Companies where teams discuss openly about system design and its trade offs and the company is transparent about their business objectives are a good place to be.