How to Think Like an Architect: Building Better Software Through Construction PrinciplesUsing Real-World Architectural Thinking to Improve Software System Design, Structure, and Sustainability

As software engineers and system designers, we're often tempted to think in abstractions — flowcharts, diagrams, layered architectures. But what if we started thinking like an architect, not of code, but of buildings? What if we saw code not as lines in a file, but as bricks in a cathedral — each with purpose, material, and connection?

This isn't about aesthetics. It's about the construction mindset — how meaningful systems are assembled, joined, and made to last. Let's explore how the architectural thinking of Peter Zumthor applies to software architecture, especially in how we build.

Construction is Composition: Code is Material

In building architecture, construction is not just technical execution. It's where design meets materiality. Every beam, joint, and material choice affects the total presence of the structure.

In software, the same principle applies: code is not abstract — it's concrete. Frameworks, libraries, modules, interfaces — these are your building materials. A well-architected system isn't just about having the right features — it's about how the parts come together, and what happens at the joints.

Analogy: A join in construction = An API boundary in a software system. A good join is seamless and supportive. A bad one is brittle and cracks under pressure.

Joints Define Quality

Zumthor emphasizes that “every join should reinforce the total presence.” In software, we tend to obsess over components in isolation — microservices, modules, plugins — but often overlook the contracts and integrations between them.

These "joins" are where bugs happen, latency creeps in, and systems collapse. Think about how two services talk — REST, gRPC, event buses, shared databases. It's not just whether they work — it's how they come together.

In software, integration is design. Interfaces, boundaries, and contracts are architectural elements — not afterthoughts.

Material Knowledge = Technical Literacy

Zumthor's work is rooted in deep material understanding — how wood bends, how stone absorbs light, how concrete weathers. Similarly, good software architects must understand their materials: not just what a framework does, but how it behaves under load, how it scales, how it fails.

You can't design a resilient system if you don't understand how Redis behaves under memory pressure or how Docker containers handle file I/O.

Knowing what to use is junior. Knowing how and why it behaves as it does is senior. Understanding the materiality of software components is architectural.

The Details Set the Tone

Zumthor says, “We are faced with the challenge of filling out the whole with innumerable details.” That's exactly how software architecture works. Architecture isn't just the high-level diagram — it's the cascade of decisions about deployment, observability, state consistency, logging, failure handling.

You know you're thinking like an architect when details like retry policies, error propagation, idempotency, and timeouts become design decisions, not just implementation tasks.

Build First, Then Abstract

Zumthor flips the order of traditional design: he starts with the concrete object, not the abstract plan. This mindset is crucial in software too. Don't fall into the trap of overdesigning. Build, observe, reflect, refactor.

A symphony on paper is not music. Architecture diagrams are not systems. They only come to life through construction — through code, deployments, and usage.

In software, start small, get real, and abstract later. Model reality, not hypotheticals. As Dijkstra put it, “the question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.” Reality is what matters.

Why Lead with Construction?

Too often, teams fall into "analysis paralysis," endlessly debating the perfect design while postponing actual progress. By building first, you:

• Expose unknowns early: Prototypes reveal real integration issues, performance bottlenecks, and usability flaws that abstractions miss.
• Get rapid feedback: Stakeholders and users can engage with tangible results, not just diagrams or specs.
• Prevent waste: Premature abstractions can lead to overengineered systems that are hard to change and maintain.

Strategies for Concrete-First Architecture

1. Spike Solutions: Build a simple, end-to-end implementation of the most uncertain or risky part of your system first.
2. Thin Vertical Slices: Deliver minimal, usable features that cut through all layers (UI, backend, data), not just isolated components.
3. Refactor Relentlessly: Use working code as the foundation for better abstractions. Let the real system teach you what needs generalizing.
4. Prototype User Experience: Even a rough UI or CLI gives critical insight. Don't wait for the backend to be "perfect."
5. Architectural Fitness Functions: Define automated checks (tests, metrics, static analysis) that help guide the emergent structure toward your architectural goals.

When to Abstract

Abstraction is powerful—but only when it’s informed by reality. Use these signals:

• Repeated patterns: If you implement similar logic in multiple places, it's time to extract an abstraction.
• Painful changes: If modifying a feature requires changes in many places, you need a better structure.
• Growing complexity: When adding new features becomes confusing or risky, refactor for clarity.

Case Study: From Prototype to Platform

Consider the evolution of a notification system:

1. Initial Build: Hard-coded email notifications for a single event.
2. User Feedback: Requests for SMS and push notifications.
3. Refactor: Introduction of a "Notification Channel" interface.
4. Abstract: Plug-in system supports any future notification types.

By building first, you learn what abstractions you actually need—grounded in practical requirements, not speculation.

In summary: Let reality drive your abstractions—not the other way around. Build, observe, and only then, abstract for clarity, flexibility, and longevity.

Emotional Response in Systems?

It might sound odd, but Zumthor urges us to feel architecture — not just think it. We remember buildings not for their blueprints but for the spaces they created, the way light filtered through a room, the sound of footsteps on stone.

Shouldn't our systems feel the same? Not emotional, but visceral: fast, responsive, clean, reliable. What if we asked:

• What does it feel like to use our system?
• Is it inviting or intimidating?
• Does it feel safe to change, or like a house of cards?

Your architecture isn't just for the compiler. It's for humans — developers, operators, users. Feel matters.

The User's Journey: From Friction to Flow

Great software, like great buildings, guides users effortlessly from one space (or feature) to another. Think about the difference between stumbling through a cluttered, confusing hallway versus gliding through an open, sunlit atrium.

• Onboarding: Is the first experience welcoming and clear, or confusing and cold?
• Feedback: Are errors explained gently and clearly, or does the system just break?
• Flow: Can users accomplish their goals smoothly, or are they interrupted by arbitrary obstacles?

The Developer’s Experience: Joy or Dread?

Architectural decisions shape not only the user’s experience but also the developer’s. Does the codebase invite exploration, or does it punish curiosity? Is it easy to make safe changes and improvements, or does every refactor feel risky?

• Cognitive Load: Are patterns and conventions consistent and discoverable?
• Safety Nets: Is there good test coverage, clear error messages, and robust CI/CD, making changes less stressful?
• Collaboration: Are boundaries clear, with helpful docs and interfaces, or does tribal knowledge rule?

Building Trust and Delight

Just as we trust a well-built bridge or a sturdy home, users and developers trust systems that consistently deliver and gracefully recover from problems. Delight comes from little touches: fast load times, delightful microinteractions, even meaningful error messages.

• Reliability builds trust—both in the system and between the people who use and maintain it.
• Delight encourages engagement—users come back, developers contribute and innovate.

Bringing Feeling Into the Design Process

• User Testing: Observe real people using the system—note where they hesitate, smile, or frown.
• Dogfooding: Use your own tools. Experience the pain or pleasure firsthand.
• Feedback Loops: Make it easy for users and developers to share impressions and frustrations.

In summary: Architecture is not just a technical blueprint but a human experience. By considering the emotional and visceral responses of everyone who interacts with our systems, we create software that is not only functional but memorable, meaningful, and even joyful.

Patterns from Physical to Digital

Let's make the transfer from building architecture to software even more explicit by mapping classic construction principles to software patterns:

Beyond the Basics: Deeper Architectural Patterns

While the table above covers foundational parallels, the analogy can be made even richer:

1. Zoning & Modularity

Just as cities use zoning laws to organize spaces for residential, commercial, or industrial use, software systems benefit from modularity and domain-driven design.

• Physical: Different building types and functions are separated for safety and efficiency.
• Software: Bounded contexts, isolated modules, and microservices keep complexity manageable and enable teams to work independently.

2. Plumbing & Data Flow

Buildings have hidden yet essential plumbing and wiring—channels for water, waste, and electricity. In software, data pipelines, message queues, and event streams serve a similar function, connecting components behind the scenes.

• Ensure clear, well-documented data flows.
• Use circuit breakers and monitoring, just as you'd check for leaks or shorts.

3. Insulation & Encapsulation

Insulation keeps heat in and noise out. Encapsulation in software keeps complexity contained, exposing only what's necessary through clear interfaces and hiding internal details.

• Improves maintainability and reduces the risk of cascading failures.

4. Fire Exits & Fail-safes

Every safe building has fire exits, alarms, and extinguishers—designed for emergencies. Software needs graceful failure modes, circuit breakers, and rollback plans.

• Plan for disaster recovery as you would plan for fire drills.

5. Renovation & Evolution

Buildings are renovated over decades, adapting to new needs. Software must be designed for evolution: refactoring, adding features, migrating to new platforms.

• Favor loose coupling and clear contracts to make upgrades possible without total rebuilds.

Practical Takeaways

• When designing a system, ask: What is my foundation? Where are my fire exits? How will this system evolve?
• Use construction analogies to communicate software design to non-technical stakeholders—bridging the gap between digital and physical thinking.
• Remember that the most resilient systems—like the best buildings—are those that anticipate change, failure, and growth from the very beginning.

Failure and Maintenance — The Forgotten Phase

Buildings require maintenance, and so do software systems. The design is only as good as how gracefully it degrades and how easily it recovers.

• Design for repair: Can you swap out components (like replacing windows or bricks) without tearing down the entire structure?
• Monitor for stress: Are you tracking error rates, slowdowns, and odd loads (like a building's stress sensors)?
• Plan for the long term: Is your software easy to update, patch, and improve as needs change?

Conclusion: The Craft of Assembly

To start thinking like an architect — of buildings or systems — you must move beyond abstraction into construction. That means:

• Studying your materials (frameworks, protocols, patterns)
• Designing your joins (interfaces, APIs, contracts)
• Honoring the details (resilience, observability, testing)
• Building before abstracting
• Caring about the feel, not just the function

Architecture isn't just about how systems look on paper. It's how they come together, how they hold together, and how they make others feel — now and long after you're gone.