Contact us
Our team would love to hear from you.
Back to cases
Architecture assessment for a data quality solutions company
We conducted a comprehensive architecture assessment and delivered actionable recommendations to help a data quality solutions provider remove friction points and accelerate their platform’s growth.
Bottlenecks and barriers to growth
For data-driven teams, quality, accuracy, and security are nonnegotiable. A US-based data quality solutions company addresses this need by delivering data hygiene and enhancement solutions that help customers close data gaps and market more efficiently. The company is undergoing a major strategic transformation to merge its key offerings—cleaning existing data and adding missing information to records—into a unified platform. The client identified legacy systems, a fragmented architecture, and manual operations as critical blockers, and initially considered adding development capacity to resolve them.
Upon deeper examination, it became clear that the issues stemmed from underlying architectural and process-level constraints, as well as gaps in certain competencies. EffectiveSoft proposed a holistic architecture and workflow assessment to identify the real stoppers and define a clear path forward.
Client
Data quality solutions company
Country
USA
Domain
Service
Technology
GoLang, React, PostgreSQL, AWS
Uncovering opportunities for optimization
The assessment focused on the new unified platform. It was broken down into three phases covering business, operational, and technical aspects, including business and technology overview, product and project management, solution architecture, and infrastructure components.
Step 1: Planning
The first week of collaboration with the client was dedicated to planning. Our team examined information about the company—including goals, products, processes, and available documentation—and identified the stakeholders to participate in the following phase. This was critical to align schedules and ensure efficient, well-orchestrated execution going forward.
As a result of this phase, our team prepared the following artifacts for further use:
- A list of topics for workshop discussion, as well as the number of required workshops and a list of questions for each.
- A list of participants for the workshops, from client success managers and developers to a product manager and C-level executives.
- A two-week workshop calendar coordinated with participants’ schedules.
Even successful systems can outgrow their original architecture, creating hidden inefficiencies and bottlenecks. Ignoring this fact limits your ability to scale and innovate. An architecture review (AR) can expose these blind spots and help build a sustainable foundation for long-term growth.
Step 2: Workshops
Over two weeks, EffectiveSoft’s reviewers conducted over 20 on-site workshops with teams across the organization, including executive leadership. During these sessions, they covered a broad set of topics:
- Business overview
- Technology strategy and key architectural decisions
- Security strategy
- Product and project management
- Architecture overview (core system components, infrastructure, and cloud architecture)
- Engineering delivery and quality assurance
- DevOps practices
- Data strategy
- UX/UI process
- Support processes
- AI tool usage
The reviewers mapped current processes, discussed the solution architecture, and validated assumptions with stakeholders to uncover operational pain points, technical constraints, architectural issues, or misalignments. Our team also reconstructed high-level solution diagrams for further review.
Step 3: Review
The review phase took another two weeks, during which our team analyzed recordings and transcripts from the workshops, existing documentation, and tools, and prepared an architectural review document (ARD).
The assessment captured the company’s strengths and key differentiators, while also uncovering some gaps, including in delivery processes, testing, documentation, and automation. The issues described in the ARD were categorized into critical, high, medium, and low impact depending on how they affect usability, scalability, performance, security, and other quality attributes, as well as business goals and growth plans.
Key findings included:
- A nonoptimal software development lifecycle (SDLC) due to multiple factors, from requirement gathering to testing and deployment
- Improvement potential in key delivery roles (Scrum Master, DevOps, QA), leading to inconsistent planning and sprint execution
- Opportunities to strengthen alignment and ownership
Architecture assessment services
Explore our expertiseAssessment outcomes
Based on the findings, EffectiveSoft delivered an ARD featuring:
- A comprehensive description of the current state (“as-is”)
- A structured overview of the identified issues and gaps
- Recommended approaches to address each issue
- Consolidated, prioritized recommendations forming the foundation of the client’s transformation road map
Following the assessment, we continue our engagement by supporting the client in implementing the recommendations defined in the ARD.