You're proposing changes to system architecture. How do you ease client worries about cost implications?

n a system architecture overhaul, it's essential to communicate the long-term value of the proposed changes to the client. Highlight how performance optimization, scalability, and cost-saving benefits—like reduced maintenance, enhanced security, and improved energy efficiency—justify the initial investment. By conducting a thorough value analysis, you can demonstrate how these changes will drive operational efficiencies, reduce downtime, and provide significant returns over time. Position the new design as a strategic investment that supports the client's future growth and competitiveness.

When proposing architectural changes, focus on the long-term value these updates will provide. Illustrate how they solve current system inefficiencies, reduce operational bottlenecks, or improve scalability. Use data and case studies to highlight the performance gains, reliability improvements, and customer satisfaction these changes can drive. By demonstrating how the improvements will enhance business operations or lead to revenue growth, clients can understand the investment’s tangible value. Emphasizing the ROI and competitive advantages often helps ease concerns about immediate costs, showing the value far outweighs the investment.

1- one big challenge today is that the building should respond to the climate (heat, wind and sound) 2- that can be done with having nice piece of architecture which suits customers vision 3- designers should calculate the running cost like maintenance to give a good answer for their designs

A like-for-like system overhaul will always be costlier. Business and engineering need to consider optimisations to lower costs. The original system may have capabilities and features giving diminishing returns. These can easily be retired without impacting customers, thus saving implementation and operational costs. Of the remaining, undifferentiated capabilities may be sourced more economically off the shelf. Prioritising the remaining capabilities on business value will ensure that low value capabilities do not incur disproportionately higher cost and effort. Lastly, system overhaul is also an opportunity simplify business processes, which will also help simplify the technology leading to much lower development and operations costs.

Absolutely! I always frame it as an investment, not just a cost. I once proposed a cloud migration to a client who was wary of upfront expenses. To ease their worries, I presented a value analysis showing reduced on-premises infrastructure costs, lower energy consumption, and fewer IT support hours needed. I backed it up with real-world data, forecasting a break-even point within 18 months and net savings after two years. When clients see the numbers in context and understand the long-term benefits—like increased uptime or faster performance—they’re more likely to see the bigger picture and embrace the change as a strategic move.

Clients often worry about the risks tied to system changes. Explain how your proposal actively addresses and mitigates risks, such as technical debt, outdated infrastructure, security vulnerabilities, or performance bottlenecks. Outline how neglecting such risks can lead to costly downtime, data breaches, or higher maintenance costs. Providing a clear risk management strategy ensures clients that the changes reduce exposure to future issues, thus safeguarding their business operations. Positioning the upgrades as proactive solutions helps alleviate concerns by showcasing how the system’s integrity and reliability will be strengthened.

- Show long-term cost savings and performance improvements for clear ROI. - Suggest gradual implementation to minimize upfront costs. - Integrate current systems to reduce expenses.

Spot on! Highlighting a solid risk management plan can be a game-changer in these conversations. I usually break it down into clear steps: how we identify potential risks (performance dips, security vulnerabilities, etc.), assess their impact, and outline mitigation strategies—such as automated backups, load testing, or security audits. In one project, we incorporated a risk buffer in the budget, which covered potential contingencies without surprise costs. I also emphasize that this proactive approach helps avoid expensive emergency fixes or unplanned downtime later. When clients see risk handled with precision, they gain confidence that their investment is safeguarded.

Risk in a system overhaul or modernisation programme is directly proportional to its scope. Reducing the risk requires reducing the scope and appropriately prioritising it on business value. The scope can be reduced by retiring capabilities and features with diminishing value and using commodity off the shelf products for capabilities that are undifferentiated for the business. Prioritising the remaining on business value ensures that higher value capabilities have proportionately higher value and are delivered earlier. Further, if the business can be convinced to simplify their processes, this leads to simpler technology delivered with low risk.

Propose a phased implementation approach, which spreads costs and minimizes disruption. By breaking the changes into manageable stages, you allow the client to evaluate benefits as each phase is completed, offering time to adjust and assess ROI before proceeding further. This strategy also mitigates the impact on their budget, preventing large upfront investments. A phased rollout keeps the current system functional while gradually integrating improvements, ensuring smoother transitions. This incremental approach reassures clients that changes can be controlled and measured, reducing their anxiety over financial and operational risks.

I’m a big advocate for phased implementations—it’s like taking small, measured steps instead of a giant leap. During one project, we split a costly cloud migration into phases: we started with non-critical services, validated the performance gains, and got client buy-in before proceeding to core systems. This spread out costs and reduced the risk of disrupting business operations. Each phase served as a checkpoint, allowing us to assess ROI and make adjustments on the fly. Clients appreciate this approach because it offers flexibility, minimizes financial strain, and ensures they’re in control throughout the transformation journey. It’s about making change feel manageable, not overwhelming.

And these phases need to be prioritised on business value and dependencies so that underlying dependencies and higher value get proportionately higher investment and delivered earlier to achieve business success.

Clients often fear hidden costs. To build trust, provide transparent cost breakdowns covering all phases of the project, including initial setup, long-term maintenance, and potential upgrades. Clearly differentiate between one-time expenses and ongoing operational costs. By making the financial impact predictable, clients can make informed decisions without fearing unexpected budget overruns. Also, include cost-benefit analysis showing potential savings from optimized performance or reduced downtime. Clear documentation of every expenditure helps clients feel in control of the budget, reducing resistance to architectural changes.

Absolutely—cost transparency is the foundation of trust. I provide clients with detailed cost breakdowns that include everything from labor hours to licensing fees. In one project, we shared a real-time dashboard that tracked project spending against the budget, allowing the client to see exactly where their investment was going. This level of openness led to productive conversations about potential cost-saving adjustments, like substituting a third-party tool for an open-source option. When clients have visibility into costs, it demystifies the process and fosters collaboration. They’re not just seeing numbers; they’re seeing the rationale behind each expense, which makes every dollar feel well-spent.

Emphasize the long-term savings that come from implementing architectural changes. Illustrate how upgrading now can lower ongoing maintenance costs, improve efficiency, reduce downtime, and decrease technical debt. For example, modern infrastructure may lead to less frequent system overhauls or fewer outages, directly lowering operational costs. Clients may also benefit from improved performance and scalability, enabling them to serve more customers with the same resources. Presenting a clear picture of how current investment leads to future savings helps shift their perspective from upfront costs to long-term financial benefits.

Exactly! Shifting the focus from upfront costs to total cost of ownership is crucial. I’ve often used cost projections and ROI calculations to demonstrate long-term savings. For instance, during a proposal for a cloud migration, I showed how reducing on-prem hardware would cut maintenance and energy costs, and how automated scaling would prevent overprovisioning. We forecasted a 30% reduction in operational expenses within two years. Clients appreciate seeing how their investment today pays off tomorrow. When they understand the long-term financial benefits—less downtime, fewer tech debt issues, and reduced upgrade costs—they’re more inclined to view the change as a strategic, cost-effective move.

Offer continuous support packages post-implementation to reassure clients that their investment will remain secure over time. Highlight the importance of ongoing monitoring, optimization, and issue resolution, ensuring that the new system architecture evolves smoothly with their business needs. Continuous support minimizes the risks of downtime, bugs, or inefficiencies after deployment. Providing this long-term commitment can ease client concerns about the project’s sustainability and performance, offering them peace of mind knowing expert support is readily available. This builds confidence in both the system’s stability and your long-term partnership.

It is important to track the support and maintenance overheads closely. With relaxed quality and increasing technical debt, increasing development capacity is directed towards operations, support and maintenance. This leaves lower capacity to deliver value to customers, especially when delivering the overhaul programme incrementally. A false sense of security sets in initially as the IT spend is not exceeding the budget but under the hood the development capacity is being compromised. This may either slow the programme down or force developers to cut corners to meet deadlines. The latter turns into a vicious cycle of increasing support overheads. Thus any support plan should also have tech debt reduction as an integral part of the plan.

Exactly—continuous support is like the safety net that clients need after major changes. I often bundle in maintenance and support plans that cover everything from routine check-ups to emergency fixes. In one implementation, we provided a 12-month support package with tiered response times, ensuring the client had access to help without needing to bring in external consultants for every little issue. This not only saved them costs on unexpected repairs but also reinforced that we were committed to their success beyond the initial rollout. It’s all about being a partner, not just a provider—offering ongoing support ensures the architecture remains robust and cost-efficient long after the project ends.