“As an architect, you architect for the present, with an awareness of the past, for a future that is essentially unknown”

— Norman Foster

In 2008, Netflix made a pivotal architectural decision following a major database corruption that caused a three-day service outage. This incident exposed the limitations of its single data centre architecture and pushed the company to rethink its infrastructure strategy. Instead of attempting incremental improvements, Netflix transitioned to a cloud-native architecture to ensure resilience, scalability, and agility¹.

Netflix formalised its commitment to Amazon Web Services (AWS), developing a plan to migrate its entire backend to the cloud. This was not a simple lift-and-shift operation. The company rebuilt its architecture from the ground up, shifting from a monolithic system to a microservices-based model and adopting NoSQL databases to enhance performance and scalability. The full migration took seven years to complete, culminating in January 2016 when Netflix decommissioned its last data center².

This architectural shift was a high-stakes decision. Cloud computing was still evolving, and relying entirely on a third-party provider for critical infrastructure was bold. However, Netflix's forward-thinking approach enabled it to scale dynamically, expand into 190 new countries, and support a growing user base of 86 million members as of 2016. The decision to fully embrace cloud computing transformed Netflix into a model for enterprise cloud adoption, demonstrating the long-term impact of strategic architecture decisions³.

Architects regularly make decisions that shape the future of their organisations. The wrong choice can result in inefficiencies, technical debt, or lost opportunities, while the right one can enable growth, innovation, and resilience. Successful architecture decisions require a balance between flexibility and commitment, ensuring they are timely, well-documented, and aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and long-term adaptability.

The Challenge of Architectural Decisions

Architectural decisions drive business success by enabling enhanced communication and understanding, strategic alignment and vision, and knowledge management and continuity. However, challenges in decision-making persist despite the availability of frameworks. Research highlights some key obstacles:

Groupthink and decision biases: Teams may conform too quickly, avoiding critical evaluation of choices due to pressure for consensus, a phenomenon well-documented in social sciences⁴.
Defining Architectural Boundaries: The line between architectural and non-architectural decisions is often unclear. An InfoQ article notes that "the boundary between architectural and other significant decisions is often ill-defined." This lack of clarity can lead to bloated Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), making it harder to distinguish truly architectural concerns⁵.
Slow Feedback Loops: Traditional architecture processes involve lengthy documentation cycles, which delay feedback and prevent architects from quickly assessing the impact of their decisions. Since architecture is about reducing uncertainty through decision-making, these extended cycles slow progress and adaptation⁶.

Making Effective Architectural Decisions

Making effective architecture decisions requires a structured approach that accounts for complexity, long-term impact, and organisational alignment. Standard methods can guide architects in making sound decisions:

Understand the Type of Decision: Not all decisions carry the same weight. Amazon's one-way vs. two-way doors framework⁷ helps distinguish between irreversible decisions and those that can be reversed with minimal cost.
One-way door decisions are difficult to reverse and require high-level governance (e.g., selecting a public cloud provider for hosting software). While migration between cloud providers is possible, it introduces substantial complexity, cost, and risk.
Two-way door decisions are easily changeable and should be made at the lowest level (e.g., A/B tests, blue/green deployments, and iterative experiments).
Understanding this distinction prevents over-analysis and ensures agility where needed.
Manage Decision Scope: Evaluate a decision's scope, velocity, and type to determine appropriate decision-making tools. The BTABok provides comprehensive guidance on managing decision scope⁸.
Use a Structured Decision Management Process: Leverage best practices in the decision management process to identify alternatives, assess impact, and engage stakeholders early. The SEBoK (Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge) discuss a decision management process that aims "to provide a structured, analytical framework for objectively identifying, characterising and evaluating a set of alternatives for a decision at any point in the life cycle and select the most beneficial course of action." (ISO/IEC/IEEE 15288)⁹

Communicating Architecture Decisions

Effective architecture decisions enhance clarity, ensuring strategic alignment and resilience. Structured decision-making enables architects to navigate complexity, reduce uncertainty, and drive sustainable outcomes that align with long-term business success.

Tools to Get You Started

Decision tools like Architecture Decision Records can help you document your decisions. Here are some to get you started:

* IASA BTABoK ADR Card

* IASA BTABoK Decision Bias Calibrator

* IASA BTABoK Decision Cascade Card

* GitHub repository of Architecture Decision Record Templates

Architecture Decisions: Making the Right Call at the Right Time

The Challenge of Architectural Decisions

Making Effective Architectural Decisions

Communicating Architecture Decisions

Tools to Get You Started

Further Reading

Get my free Newsletter

Architecture Decisions: Making the Right Call at the Right Time

The Challenge of Architectural Decisions

Making Effective Architectural Decisions

Communicating Architecture Decisions

Tools to Get You Started

Further Reading

Managing Stakeholders and Their Concerns

Get my free Newsletter