Pragmatism vs Perfection

I’ve often wondered why the term “architecture” is used to describe tech stacks and digital infrastructure.

I mean, of course I get it from a descriptive point of view.

As architects, we design how the component parts of a technology solution are pieced together. We start with foundational back-office components like billing engines and databases, add some wiring and plumbing (middleware and APIs), decorate it with internal user interfaces like a CRM or marketing automation platform, and then create ways for people to access this technology goodness through websites and apps.

As a noun (or verb!), “architecture” explains what we do as well as any term. But it’s the connotation I struggle with.

What do I mean by that?

Well, when a building is described as “architectural” it implies that it’s grand in scale or elaborately designed.

Cathedrals are architectural. Modern, multi-tiered houses with tennis courts overlooking the water in Remuera, are architectural. An architectural home isn’t a standard home, it goes well beyond the functional and elicits images of indulgence and opulence.  

My townhouse in Silverdale – whilst very comfortable, safe, warm, practical and affordable – would never be described as architectural. But it’s the perfect home for my family right now.

The same issue applies to how architects themselves are perceived in the building industry.

The architecture community, rightly or wrongly, has a reputation for over-designing, not listening to clients, sacrificing buildability and liveability for aesthetics, and going way over budget.

The technology industry has borrowed a term that’s associated with perfection over pragmatism, form over function, and vanity over user-centricity.

And as a group of technology designers, it feels like we’ve developed a similar reputation.

Many of the digital transformation programmes we’re brought in to work on at Voco, are projects in crisis.

A typical scenario is that the internal team are drowning in complexity, burning through budget, not delivering fast enough, are unsure of their strategy and business outcomes, and have lost the confidence of the leadership team.

For the good of the industry, we’d love it if fewer digital projects got into this state. And of course, we’d love to get involved in more projects right at the start to set them up for success!

The next best thing is to provide some help and advice to the industry – a few fundamentals that will increase the chances of architects designing a technology solution that is right-sized and fit-for-purpose for your business.

Use these common sense guidelines and we’re confident that your architecture design and digital transformation projects will deliver the business performance and customer experience improvements you’re looking for.

So here goes…

Good solution design is actually about business outcomes.

At the heart of every successful technology project lies a clear understanding of business challenges, needs, and outcomes.

A Solution Architect must deeply understand these things and be able to clearly articulate them from the outset. If they don’t or can’t, they’ll never be able to shape a clear technology vision and lead the wider team towards it.

This requires a healthy dose of curiosity about how the business works, the context in which it operates (industry and customers), and a knack for good storytelling.

My advice is to ask lots of questions at the start.

Who are our internal users and what are their skills sets? Who are our external customers and what are their needs? What technical constraints do we need to design around? What operational processes need to be preserved and which ones can be challenged? What metrics and KPIs will determine whether the project is a success or not?

I always say to my clients if their Solution Lead can’t articulate a clear set of high-level business outcomes and a draft technology vision after the first week of the project, they’re probably not the right person to lead the project.

Simplify the complex

This is our purpose at Voco. And for good reason.

Admittedly, solution design is often very complex. But many architects revel in this, taking weeks to produce 140 page design documents that only a handful of people in the business will ever read, and even fewer people will understand.

In today's fast-paced business landscape, complexity is the enemy of progress. Whether it's bloated processes, convoluted systems, or indecipherable jargon, complexity makes it hard for teams to stay aligned, and it can stifle innovation and creativity.

As a general rule, it should be possible to summarise a good solution design in fewer than 10 pages, even for the most complex technology environments in the most challenging industries.

This level of simplification is about focusing on core principles, streamlining and consolidating ideas, challenging convention, and setting the team up so that they can easily adapt to the ever-changing environment around them.

By distilling complex ideas into clear, concise concepts, architects can communicate more effectively with stakeholders at all levels of the organisation. This not only improves understanding and buy-in but also fosters a sense of shared purpose.

The path to simplicity may not always be easy, but the benefits are well worth the effort.

Consider your surroundings

There are layers and layers of planning that go into the design and build of a new house.

Firstly, the design must be suitable for the owner’s needs, tastes and budget. But it also needs to be appropriate for the site it will be built on – topography, orientation to the sun, privacy from neighbours, and so on.

It needs to fit seamlessly into the surrounding environment and the vibe of the street, and be sympathetic to the history and heritage of the suburb and city it will be built in.

And finally, the design needs to endure – be usable and desirable for the generations of owners that will enjoy it long after the original owner has moved on.

Designing without considering the broader context can lead to structures that feel out of place or disconnected.

The same principle applies to technology architecture. And this is where keeping things simple can become really challenging!

By understanding the broader organisational landscape – things like regulatory requirements, privacy considerations, customers, and competitors - architects can begin to explore potential solutions in the right context, and make informed decisions and trade-offs with the big picture in mind.

This means thinking beyond individual components or isolated systems, and considering how they fit together to form a cohesive whole.

Come down from the ivory tower

The best architects understand that their role is to bridge the gap between technical complexity and business value.

It’s so easy to get bogged down in the minutiae of the technology, the purity of the design, and lose sight of the bigger picture. This can lead to solutions that are technically impressive but fail to deliver meaningful results, or sometimes fail to deliver anything at all!

Don’t fall into this trap -  actively engage with stakeholders from across the organisation, ask for feedback, get them to share what matters to them, and ensure that all technical decisions are driven by business objectives and priorities.

When you step down from the ivory tower and talk to the people who use the technology every day, you’ll find it’s not as scary as it sounds, and you never know what you might discover!

Fit-for-purpose vs best practice?

Most technology solutions, like most houses, don’t need gold plating when timber and steel will do the same job.

Every architect wants to do the best job they can. But sometimes the relentless pursuit of best practice is the opposite of what’s needed. Pragmatism is usually better than perfection.

Best practice is not necessarily wrong, and there are scenarios where it is absolutely required, but it is often too extravagant and expensive for the task at hand.

The challenge for every architect is discerning between good enough and best, without losing sight of business outcomes.

Embrace the grey

The reality is that architecture is messy. It's messy because the world is messy – full of competing priorities, conflicting requirements, and unpredictable variables.

And while it's tempting to seek certainty and clarity, the truth is that ambiguity is inevitable. Architects who can navigate this ambiguity with confidence and adaptability are invaluable.  

Embrace the beauty in the grey areas, celebrate the unknown, solve problems creatively and efficiently, be willing to experiment, take risks, and get comfortable learning from failure.

What about the real world?

At Voco, we do a lot of work with Government agencies where balancing pragmatism and perfection is incredibly important. Whether it's processing tax returns or issuing health certificates, there's a constant pressure to do more with less – to spend tax payer dollars in the most value-adding and efficient ways possible. But these are also the scenarios where accuracy and precision are paramount.

“Good enough” shouldn’t be seen as a compromise. A bigger issue is when the gold-standard alternative takes so long to deliver, and costs so much to implement, that it compromises an entire project.

Architecture, at its core, is a delicate balancing act. And it’s a beautiful thing when you get it right.

At Voco, we’re experts in finding this balance while staying grounded in business reality. If you’re exploring a new technology architecture, or want an independent assessment of a solution that already exists, get in touch with Jamie and the team.