Making the case for architectural change

Description

Sometimes moving to a new technology or architecture is a clear necessity. The user needs have fundamentally changed. The stack is no longer supported. The system hit an unacceptable scalability limit. In these cases, the decision to invest in migrating the system should be obvious.

On the other hand, how do you make the case for architectural migration when the costs of not doing it are hidden? How do you measure the cost of significant gaps in maintainability or support? What if the technology choice lacks a pool of talent from which to hire? What if the system is built of bespoke components that carry with them a steep learning curve? What if there are no tests? Since an architect’s intuition is usually insufficient for making the case, he or she needs to come armed with data and a clear plan to move the system forward.

Michelle Brush focuses on how to make a business case for architectural migration, covering the attributes of the system that can be tracked and measured as surrogates for architectural quality and offering guidance on how to scope the work to minimize risk to the organization. Along the way, Michelle touches on the importance of providing reasonable estimates of the effort and addresses how to frame the conversation with leadership to reduce the likelihood of hearing, “No.”

Leaders are typically unmoved by arguments for design. If you really want to change the system, you have to gather compelling data and present it alongside a clear plan.