A fintech has a central architecture group producing designs that delivery teams then implement, and the designs keep arriving late and slightly wrong. What is the structural problem?
Show the full answer Hide the answer
The structural problem
Decision-making authority has been separated from the feedback that would correct it. The group that designs does not deploy, does not carry the pager, and does not discover in week three that the assumed vendor latency was wrong. The people who learn that have no authority to change the design.
This produces a predictable pathology: designs are optimistic, teams route around them quietly, and the architecture that exists diverges from the architecture that is documented — while the group producing the documents continues to believe it is governing.
What works instead
- Architects embedded in delivery, accountable for outcomes, not artefacts. The consequence of a bad decision has to reach the person who made it.
- A design authority for the small class of decisions that genuinely need cross-cutting consistency — identity, data classification, the shape of the audit record, which regulator-facing store is authoritative — and explicit delegation of everything else.
- Paved roads instead of review gates. A team that can get a compliant, observable, audited service in one command does not need to be reviewed into compliance; the standard is in the template rather than in a meeting.
- Advisory review with a hard time budget. A review that cannot be scheduled inside a week is a review that will be skipped, and a skipped review provides less assurance than no review because it creates false confidence.
The tension to hold honestly
In a regulated brokerage, some centralisation is not optional — an auditor will ask who approved the design of the order-audit trail, and "each team decides" is not an answer. The skill is drawing the line narrowly: centralise the decisions where inconsistency is a regulatory or security problem, and devolve the rest, because a design authority that reviews everything reviews nothing well.