Enterprise Architecture
Most systems do not fail on launch day. They fail eighteen months in, when a change in one place breaks something nobody connected to it. We draw the boundaries first, and write down why they are where they are.
How the engagement runs
Agreed before we start, not discovered later. You own everything we produce, whether or not you continue with us.
- 01
Review
Current-state map + risks
- 02
Target
Target architecture + ADRs
- 03
Path
Sequenced migration plan
- 04
Execution
First services + working pattern
- Starts with
- Architecture review
- You get
- Target design + migration path
- Shape
- Advisory or hands-on build
You are probably here because
If none of these sound familiar, this may not be the practice you need — tell us what is actually happening.
- 01
A release that needs four teams in the same room
- 02
A database every service reaches into directly
- 03
Reports that slow down the product when they run
- 04
Nobody left who knows why a core decision was made
The decisions that are expensive to reverse
Not all four land in every engagement — we scope to what the problem actually needs.
Boundaries that hold
Services own their data and talk through contracts. No reaching into another team's tables, which is the coupling that makes a system impossible to change.
Migration without a big bang
The legacy system is replaced a route at a time behind a router, so every step is reversible and the business keeps running.
Read and write paths separated
One source of truth, purpose-built read models for search and reporting, so an analytics query cannot slow down checkout.
Decisions written down
Architecture decision records in the repo — what we chose, what we rejected, and what would make us revisit it. The next team inherits reasoning, not just code.
What we can point at
Including where we cannot. An unproven claim is worth less to you than a stated limit.
We have not yet delivered a large-scale enterprise migration
Said plainly because it is the first thing an enterprise buyer should ask. Our architecture work to date is at platform rather than programme scale.
Review first, commitment second
For work at a scale we have not done before, we start with a paid architecture review. You get the design and can take it elsewhere.
Questions this answers
If you cannot answer these about your current system, that is usually where we start.
Can we change this without a coordinated release across four teams?
How do we get off the monolith without stopping feature work?
Where will this break first when volume doubles?
Why was it built this way, and does that reason still hold?
How the engagement runs
Indicative, not a template. The shape holds; the depth of each phase moves with the problem.
Review
We map what exists — services, data ownership, the paths that carry real load — and identify where coupling is actually costing you delivery speed.
Current-state map + risks
Target
The design we are aiming at, with boundaries drawn around the things that change together, and the trade-offs stated plainly.
Target architecture + ADRs
Path
An ordered migration where each step ships independently and can be reversed. No stop-the-world rewrite.
Sequenced migration plan
Execution
We build the first slices with your team so the pattern is understood by the people who will extend it.
First services + working pattern
What we reach for first
Not the only things we work with — the ones we default to unless there is a reason not to.
Runtime
- Node
- Python
- Containers
Data
- Postgres
- Event streams
- Read models
Contracts
- OpenAPI
- Typed clients
- Versioning
Practice
- ADRs
- Load testing
- Migration plans
Tell us what you’re trying to build
An idea, a stalled project, or a system that has outgrown its architecture — send it over and we’ll tell you where we would start and whether we’re the right team for it.
- Response time
- Within one business day
- First call
- 30 minutes, no deck
Prefer to write first? Send the brief and we’ll come back with questions before we come back with a proposal.