Method
How we analyze an architecture without rewriting it
App Architects engagements follow a shared sequence so you know what happens between the scoping call and the findings workshop. The method supports application architecture analysis for service dependencies and performance bottlenecks.
Evidence before opinion
We start from what your systems actually do under load and across call boundaries — logs, traces, interface contracts, and the people who own each hop. Diagrams help; they are not a substitute for evidence.
Recommendations stay tied to ranked risks. We do not propose a wholesale rebuild when a queue partition or an ownership change would address the bottleneck in front of you.
The shared sequence
- Scoping call. Agree systems in scope, access needed, and the business event driving the review — release, migration, peak season, or lingering incidents.
- Evidence pack. Collect design docs, metrics exports, and named contacts. On-site days in Seoul use your conference rooms; remote weeks use scheduled working sessions.
- Mapping and ranking. Build or refresh the dependency view, walk critical user journeys, and rank bottlenecks by impact and likelihood.
- Challenge workshop. Walk findings with engineering leads, surface disagreements early, and separate facts from open questions.
- Written delivery. Hand over diagrams, risk notes, and remediation options sized for your team — not a binder of unused recommendations.
What we need from you
- A technical sponsor who can answer ownership questions within a day
- Read access to metrics and staging evidence for paths in scope
- Honest notes on recent incidents, even when they are incomplete
What we never do in-method
- Change production systems during the analysis window
- Sell monitoring licenses or product seats as part of the review
- Present vanity metrics that are not tied to a path you care about