Decentralizing Architectural Decisions with the Architecture Advice Process

2026-03-05 · Source: InfoQ · Field: Technology & Digital — Software Development & Engineering, Emerging Technologies & Innovation · Depth: Intermediate, short

Summary

Andrew Harmel-Law advocates for decentralizing architectural decisions through an "architecture advice process," arguing that traditional centralized architecture practices create bottlenecks and fail to incorporate sufficient feedback. He presented this concept at Goto Copenhagen, highlighting that architectural decisions occur constantly and widely, making it impossible for a few named architects to be optimally informed and accountable for all of them. The advice process allows anyone to make architectural decisions, provided they seek advice (not permission) from affected parties and experts. This shifts responsibility and accountability to the decision-makers, fostering conversations where and when needed. The role of traditional architects evolves into advice-givers, context-providers, and decision-coaches, spreading architectural practice across the organization.

Key takeaway

For Directors of AI/ML or VPs of Engineering struggling with architectural bottlenecks, adopting an architecture advice process can significantly improve decision velocity and team autonomy. Your teams can make critical architectural choices, provided they consult relevant stakeholders and experts, shifting your role from gatekeeper to enabler. This approach fosters a more agile and accountable development environment, but requires overcoming ingrained hierarchical mental models.

Key insights

Decentralizing architectural decisions via an advice process empowers teams and distributes accountability.

Principles

• Anyone can make any decision with advice, not permission.
• Accountability transfers to the decision-maker.
• Architecture practice should be a collective knowledge flow.

Method

To make an architectural decision, seek advice from those affected and those with expertise. Record the decision and advice, but the decision-maker is not bound by the advice and remains accountable.

In practice

• Implement an Architecture Decision Record (ADR) system.
• Train senior architects as advice-givers and coaches.
• Foster a culture of trust and shared knowledge.

Topics

• Decentralized Architecture
• Architectural Decision-Making
• Software Architecture
• Advice Process
• Organizational Change

Best for: VP of Engineering/Data, Director of AI/ML, AI Architect, Software Engineer, CTO

Related on AIssential

• Empowering Teams to Make Architectural Decisions • Andrew Harmel-Law • YOW! 2025 — Decentralized architectural decision-making, using advice and documentation, empowers teams and fosters trust.
• Mini book: Architecting Autonomy: Decentralising Architecture Inside an Organization — Decentralized architecture with automated guardrails enables organizational scale and velocity in the AI era.
• My team made seven architecture decisions in three years. Five of them were wrong. — Architecture decisions should prioritize current, explicit constraints over imagined future needs to avoid costly operational overhead.
• Let AI Models Fight Over Your Architecture — Multi-agent AI systems can automate and enhance software architecture governance through structured debate and review.
• Agents are ready but your architecture probably isn't — AI value stems from outcome-driven design, robust data infrastructure, and proactive governance, not just model selection.
• Podcast: [Video Podcast] The Craft of Software Architecture in the Age of AI Tools — AI tools accelerate software development by raising abstraction, but human judgment and accountability remain critical for architectural integrity.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by InfoQ.