Navigating Architectural Indecision: What to do when teams stay silent

In this episode Andrew Harmel-Law, Kenny (Baas) Schwegler, and Andrea Magnorsky discussed the difficulties of facilitating software architecture decisions, particularly when teams are hesitant to take responsibility. Kenny shared his experience at a growing company that needed to choose a new front-end framework (Vue or React) to scale from 8 to 115 developers. His goal was to empower the team to make a democratic decision, but they were mostly junior to mid-level developers who were uncomfortable with the accountability of a major choice.

Key Strategies for Facilitation

The discussion highlighted several methods for navigating this kind of indecision:

• Ask for consent: When the team felt too uncomfortable to decide, Kenny asked for their consent to make the decision himself. This approach still involved them in the process, and he ultimately chose React.
• Support the decision: After making the decision, Kenny asked the team what they needed to get on board with it. The developers requested training, which was then arranged. This practice, also known as "disagree and commit," ensures that even if people don't agree with a decision, they are given the necessary resources to follow through with it.
• Create a safe environment: People are often afraid to make decisions because of the potential for future negative consequences. Andrew pointed out that an architect can act as a "proxy" for the team, taking on the accountability to protect them.
• Understand Governance and Accountability: Andrea emphasized the importance of clarifying who is responsible for a decision. A good governance framework provides checks and balances to prevent bad decisions