Who's side are you on?

Let’s start with a story that the every solution architect can easily relate to.

The story below has a very positive ending. However, while reading, it should be kept in mind that this will not always be the case.

“Kristie, a solution architect, was tasked with leading the overhaul of her company’s CRM system, which involved balancing the competing priorities of the sales, customer support, and marketing departments. She initially built strong relationships and fostered collaboration by holding one-on-one and cross-departmental meetings. However, a major conflict erupted between Tom, the sales director, and Lisa, the head of customer support, threatening to derail the project. With the CTO under pressure for quick results, Kristie faced higher stakes and more intense political dynamics. She maintained neutrality, focused on project goals, and used data-driven presentations to gain support and mediate disputes. Her political acumen and effective leadership led to the successful launch of the new CRM system, benefiting the entire company.”

In my opinion, there are 3 key takeaways from the story above:

Maintaining Neutrality

This trait is the highlight of this story. When there are highly powerful and influential stakeholders involved, staying neutral is of utmost importance.

Our job as architects is not to resolve people issues or to take sides with stakeholders.

Our job is to facilitate guided change in the organization and ensure that the changes are tied back to the benefits that the organization is aspiring to achieve.

Maintaining neutrality has a lot to do with people. We all have our own agendas. It is unrealistic to say that we don’t have any agenda when it comes to our involvement with organizational change.

But maintaining neutrality alone is not enough.

As solution architects, we must take it a step further and ensure that our only allegiance is to guiding organizational change towards success.

That’s the side we are on!

Communication and Collaboration

The story depicts a conflict between two highly powerful stakeholders, with our solution architect Kristie trying to resolve the conflicts and facing pressure to deliver on time from another influential, in fact highly powerful stakeholder, the CTO.

Kristie built relationships, but conflicts are also part of the process.

She excelled in communication by creating views for the stakeholders and helping them to look at the situation objectively.

By collaborating with every influential and powerful stakeholder, she was able to help resolve the conflict.

In my view, be it a CTO or any other stakeholder, they are normal humans driven by their goals and agendas. They may or may not have concerns conducive to effective change. But if everyone understands the power of objectivity and trade-offs, the solution is always a win-win.

However, as the story has a positive end, it may not always be the case.

One must remember:

We don’t own the architecture; our organization owns it and so do the stakeholders who are critical for strategy definition.

Leveraging Support

When facing significant conflicts and higher stakes, Kristie effectively leveraged the support of senior management and used her political acumen to mediate disputes. By keeping the CTO informed and seeking his guidance, she navigated the complex political landscape and ensured the project’s success.

Asking for support is always an option. Senior management is usually willing to help. I was once told by my Programme Director, “Never suffer in silence. If you don’t speak out, we cannot read your mind.”

I have followed her advice ever since.

One must have faith that everyone participating in the project aims to help it succeed. No personal agenda can be bigger than that.

So speak up and leverage support. You may be surprised.

Thanks a lot for reading my post and hopefully you are able to resonate with what I was trying to explain.