Architecture Review Board — Running ARBs
Structured Architecture Governance
Introduction
An Architecture Review Board (ARB) provides structured review of architectural decisions, ensuring solutions meet standards, are scalable, and align with organizational goals. For Azure integration systems, ARBs help maintain quality, reduce risk, and share knowledge across teams. This guide covers establishing and running an effective ARB.
This comprehensive guide covers:
- ARB charter — Establishing purpose and scope
- Review criteria — What to evaluate
- Process flow — How reviews work
- Templates — Standardized artifacts
- Team composition — Who participates
ARB Charter
Purpose and Scope
{
"arbCharter": {
"purpose": "Ensure integration architecture decisions meet quality, security, and operational standards",
"scope": {
"includes": [
"New integration system architecture",
"Major changes to existing systems",
"Technology selections and changes",
"Security and compliance decisions",
"Cost-impacting decisions"
],
"excludes": [
"Bug fixes and minor changes",
"Non-production experiments",
"Standard operational tasks"
]
},
"authority": {
"canApprove": "Standard designs meeting criteria",
"canEscalate": "Complex designs to architecture leadership",
"canMandate": "Use of approved patterns and services"
},
"sla": {
"initialReview": "5 business days",
"reReview": "2 business days",
"expedited": "2 business days with justification"
}
}
}
Review Criteria
Evaluation Framework
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ARB REVIEW CRITERIA │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ ARCHITECTURE QUALITY │
│ ✓ Solution matches requirements │
│ ✓ Follows well-architected principles │
│ ✓ Integrates with existing systems │
│ ✓ Appropriate for scale and performance needs │
│ │
│ SECURITY │
│ ✓ Meets security standards │
│ ✓ Uses approved identity mechanisms │
│ ✓ Data protection requirements met │
│ ✓ Compliance requirements addressed │
│ │
│ OPERATIONS │
│ ✓ Monitoring and alerting configured │
│ ✓ Operational runbooks documented │
│ ✓ Recovery procedures defined │
│ │
│ COST │
│ ✓ Cost estimates realistic │
│ ✓ Cost optimization opportunities identified │
│ ✓ Budget available │
│ │
│ RISK │
│ ✓ Risks identified and mitigated │
│ ✓ Dependencies understood │
│ ✓ Fallback options defined │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Decision Matrix
{
"decisions": {
"approve": {
"criteria": "Meets all mandatory requirements",
"nextSteps": "Proceed with implementation"
},
"conditional": {
"criteria": "Meets requirements with conditions",
"nextSteps": "Address conditions and re-review"
},
"defer": {
"criteria": "Needs more information or design work",
"nextSteps": "Revise and resubmit"
},
"reject": {
"criteria": "Does not meet requirements",
"nextSteps": "Pivot approach and resubmit"
}
}
}
Review Process
Process Flow
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ARB PROCESS FLOW │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ SUBMITTER ARB │
│ │ │
│ │ 1. Prepare ADR/Architecture Doc │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 2. Submit via portal │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 3. Initial triage │
│ │ ─ Determine if review needed │
│ │ ─ Assign reviewers │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 4. Review (5 days) │
│ │ ─ Each reviewer provides feedback │
│ │ ─ Consolidate into single response │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 5. Decision meeting (optional) │
│ │ ─ For complex or contentious reviews │
│ │ ─ Live discussion │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 6. Decision communicated │
│ │ ─ Approval/Conditional/Defer/Reject │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 7. (If conditional) Address feedback │
│ │ ─ Update documentation │
│ │ ─ Resubmit │
│ ▼ │
│ │ 8. Approved - proceed │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Submission Template
# Architecture Review Request
## Requestor
- Name:
- Team:
- Date:
## Proposal
- Title:
- Type: [New System | Enhancement | Migration | Technology Change]
## Summary
[High-level description of what is being proposed]
## Architecture
[Link to architecture diagram and ADR]
## Requirements
- Functional requirements
- Non-functional requirements
## Impact
- Affected systems
- Integration points
- Cost impact
## Timeline
- Desired approval date:
- Planned implementation:
## Reviewers
[Optional suggestions for reviewers]
## Additional Context
[Any other relevant information]
ARB Team
Roles and Composition
{
"arbTeam": {
"chair": {
"role": "Facilitate reviews, make decisions",
"time": "20% of role",
"required": true
},
"reviewers": {
"role": "Evaluate proposals in their domain",
"areas": [
"Integration Architecture",
"Security",
"Operations",
"Cost/FinOps"
],
"required": "3-5 rotating"
},
"scribe": {
"role": "Document decisions and actions",
"required": false
},
"stakeholder": {
"role": "Represent business needs",
"required": "As needed"
}
},
"rotation": {
"frequency": "Quarterly",
"process": "Volunteer or assigned",
"backup": "Always have backup reviewers"
}
}
Metrics and Continuous Improvement
Tracking Effectiveness
{
"metrics": {
"throughput": {
"reviewsPerMonth": "Target: 8-12",
"avgCycleTime": "Target: < 10 days"
},
"quality": {
"firstPassApprovalRate": "Target: > 70%",
"reSubmissionRate": "Target: < 20%"
},
"impact": {
"postImplementationIssues": "Track failures",
"architectureDebt": "Track technical debt introduced"
}
}
}
Best Practices
Running Effective ARBs
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ARB BEST PRACTICES │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ SETTING UP: │
│ ✓ Define clear scope and criteria │
│ ✓ Recruit experienced reviewers │
│ ✓ Establish regular cadence (weekly/bi-weekly) │
│ ✓ Use standardized templates │
│ │
│ DURING REVIEWS: │
│ ✓ Focus on architecture, not code │
│ ✓ Be constructive and solution-oriented │
│ ✓ Consider team constraints │
│ ✓ Document decisions clearly │
│ │
│ AFTER REVIEWS: │
│ ✓ Share learnings with broader team │
│ ✓ Update patterns based on common issues │
│ ✓ Track metrics and improve │
│ ✓ Recognize good architecture work │
│ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Related Topics
- ADR Process — Architecture decision records
- C4 Model — Architecture diagrams
Azure Integration Hub - Architect Level Solution Design & Architecture Reviews