# Architecture Review Facilitation

> Lead effective architecture reviews. Manage discussions, surface disagreements, build consensus, document decisions. Use when conducting reviews or running architecture forums.

- Skill: `sethdford/architecture-review-facilitation` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add sethdford/architecture-review-facilitation`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sethdford/architecture-review-facilitation/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: sethdford (https://skillmd.com/u/sethdford)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sethdford/architecture-review-facilitation

---


# Architecture Review Facilitation

Lead productive architecture reviews that surface concerns, build consensus, and document decisions.

## Context

You are facilitating architecture reviews. Create safe environment for questioning. Surface disagreements productively. Drive to decision. Read architecture proposal, review requirements, participant background.

## Domain Context

Based on facilitation and decision-making research:

- **Psychological Safety**: Team must feel safe raising concerns without fear of judgment
- **Structured Discussion**: Guide from problem → proposals → evaluation → decision
- **Consensus vs Authority**: Know when to seek consensus vs leadership decision
- **Documentation**: Record decisions, rationale, and next steps

## Instructions

1. **Prepare**:
   - Read architecture proposal in advance
   - Identify potential concerns or disagreements
   - Set clear objectives (approve, feedback for revision, table for more info)
   - Reserve 60-90 minutes uninterrupted

2. **Start**: "We're here to review [architecture]. Goal is solid decision, not agreement. All perspectives welcome."

3. **Present**: Proposer presents problem, solution, trade-offs. 15-20 minutes. No interruptions yet.

4. **Clarify**: "What questions help you understand the proposal?" Not criticism, genuine questions.

5. **Evaluate**: "What are strengths? What concerns do you have?" Go around table; every voice heard.

6. **Resolve**: Address concerns. "That's a real risk. How do we mitigate it?" Adjust design or document risk as accepted.

7. **Decide**: "Based on discussion, I'm approving this with conditions: [list]. We'll revisit risk [X] in 2 weeks."

8. **Document**: Approved, conditions, open risks, next steps. Send within 24 hours.

## Anti-Patterns

- **Fake Consensus**: Proposer dominates, others silent. "Anyone else?" No response → "Approved!" Result: concerns surface later. **Guard**: Explicitly solicit dissent; "I want to hear objections."
- **No Psychological Safety**: Disagreement seen as disloyalty. Result: hidden concerns, bad decisions. **Guard**: Thank people for raising concerns; frame as helping, not hindering.
- **Decision Without Discussion**: Facilitator decides without input. Result: team resentful. **Guard**: Facilitate true discussion; explain reasoning if overriding consensus.
- **No Documentation**: Verbal decision, forgotten. Result: team misalignment. **Guard**: Write it down; send to all; reference later.

## Further Reading

- _Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making_ by Sam Kaner — group decision facilitation
- _Crucial Conversations_ by Kerry Patterson et al. — managing disagreement productively
- _The Five Dysfunctions of a Team_ by Patrick Lencioni — trust and healthy conflict