They Said the Systems Were Compatible. They Didn’t Say the Teams Weren’t
Article summary
They Said the Systems Were Compatible. They Didn’t Say the Teams Weren’t We’d been through the architecture. It checked out. The APIs matched. The stacks were modern. The scaling story was believable. Everything looked aligned. Then we merged the teams. And nothing worked. Not technically. Socially. Logically. Culturally. We weren’t dealing with incompatibilities in technology. We were dealing with incompatibilities in rhythm, trust, assumptions, and decision velocity. The system interfaces aligned. The people interfaces did not. But here’s the good news: it’s fixable. This isn’t a horror story. It’s a story about discovering what really matters in a technical acquisition-and building a practice around solving it. Because once you understand that architecture doesn’t just live in code, but in teams, you can start designing for both.
Read Full Article on MediumPractical takeaway
The main idea behind They Said the Systems Were Compatible. They Didn’t Say the Teams Weren’t is to help teams move from broad theory to clear, repeatable decision making. When teams apply this thinking, they reduce ambiguity and focus on improvements that deliver measurable momentum.
Example scenario
Imagine a team facing competing priorities. By applying the ideas in They Said the Systems Were Compatible. They Didn’t Say the Teams Weren’t, they can map dependencies, identify risks and choose the next move that produces progress without destabilizing their system.
Common mistakes to avoid
- Trying to redesign everything instead of taking small steps.
- Ignoring real constraints like incentives, ownership or legacy systems.
- Creating documents that do not lead to any change in code or decisions.
How to apply this in real work
Start by identifying where They Said the Systems Were Compatible. They Didn’t Say the Teams Weren’t already shows up in your architecture or delivery flow. Then pick one area where clarity would reduce friction. Apply the idea, measure its effect and share the learning.
Signs you are doing it correctly
- Teams make decisions faster and with fewer disagreements.
- Architectural conversations become clearer and less abstract.
- Changes land safely with fewer surprises or rework cycles.