When I talk about architecture, I’m not referring to diagrams, job titles, or heavyweight processes. I’m talking about the core design of a system, the decisions that shape how it evolves, how it communicates its intent, and how it holds up under change.
Over the years, I’ve become increasingly convinced that architecture is less about structure and more about understanding. It’s not just what you build, it’s what you choose to make important, and how you enable that importance to endure over time.
Architecture, for me, is not separated from programming, it emerges from it. The best architecture grows through exploration, adapts as understanding deepens, and holds space for language, purpose, and flexibility.
What Is Software Architecture, Really?
There’s no perfect definition of software architecture, and that’s probably a good thing. For me, it’s not just about high-level diagrams or early decisions. It’s about:
- The essential design choices that define how a system works.
- The shared understanding between developers about how the system is meant to behave.
- The strategic decisions that are hard to reverse and must be preserved or revisited carefully.
- And most of all, the parts of a system that are worth caring about over time.
Architecture is about recognizing what matters, whether that’s consistency, clarity, flow, autonomy, or resilience, and then shaping the system to protect and support that.
If you can’t name what’s important in your system, it doesn’t really have an architecture. It has structure without strategy.
Why Does Architecture Matter?
You can get quite far with good code and clever tooling. But without thoughtful architecture, you hit walls fast, walls that cost time, money, and sanity.
Good architecture doesn’t slow you down. It accelerates change by making intent visible and reducing unnecessary friction. Bad architecture, on the other hand, quietly accumulates “cruft”: layers of complexity that make every new feature harder than it should be.
People often see internal quality as a luxury. I see it as a prerequisite for any system that plans to survive. Teams that ignore architecture don’t just slow down, they lose clarity, they lose trust in their tools, and they lose the joy of building.
My Focus Areas
The architecture work I do isn’t tied to any single technology stack or methodology. But it does center around a few key principles:
Language-Driven Design
Architecture should reflect the language of the domain. If the code and the business talk past each other, the system won’t evolve cleanly. I advocate for modeling systems that grow from shared language, not just structure.
Exploratory Domain Discovery
Understanding comes before design. I practice and teach exploratory techniques, collaborative conversations, domain modeling, and lightweight experiments, that help teams uncover what really matters before locking in structure.
Orbit Software Development
A methodology I’m evolving that treats software not as a linear build, but as a series of orbits around intent, constantly aligning systems with changing needs, anchored by feedback, autonomy, and clarity of purpose.
Architecture as Conversation
Architecture isn’t a one-time decision, it’s an ongoing dialogue between people, systems, and constraints. I emphasize lightweight models, visual artifacts, and shared understanding, not ivory-tower documentation.
Architecture Articles and Patterns
On this site, you’ll find essays, models, and pattern writeups that reflect how I think about architecture in real systems. Some are practical, others exploratory. Many are tied to ongoing book projects or consulting engagements. Topics include:
- Strategic design and modeling
- Architecture decision patterns
- Refactoring and modularization
- Architectural boundaries and seams
- Lightweight modeling with language
- Pattern languages for distributed systems
- Sociotechnical alignment between teams and systems
You can browse the Architecture Essays, Patterns, or Writing sections to dive deeper.
Who Is This For?
If you’re a developer who wants to design more intentionally, an architect navigating complexity, or a leader trying to align teams through shared design, I hope this material helps. It’s written for people who care about the why behind systems, not just the how.