Tommy Wang Product Builder · Architecture Advisor

Architecture Advisory

Architecture decisions before they become delivery risk.

Architecture decision support for AI, integration, and cloud modernization programs where reliability, ownership, rollback, and delivery risk matter. Useful when teams need production-ready AI/RAG/agent boundaries, BizTalk or ESB modernization paths, integration contracts, observability, and executive decisions that can survive delivery reality.

Book architecture review See advisory focus areas

Architecture advisory session reviewing cloud integration boundaries and delivery risk.

Problems I help with

Concrete architecture pressure, not generic consulting categories.

Legacy integration

We are modernizing legacy integration.

For teams moving from BizTalk/ESB-style integration toward Azure Logic Apps, APIs, events, or cloud-native workflows.

  • System-of-record boundaries
  • Sync vs async decisions
  • Contract design
  • Retries and idempotency
  • Reconciliation
  • Cutover and rollback

AI production

We want AI/RAG/agents in production.

For teams moving past prototypes and needing production boundaries before AI workflows touch real customers or operations.

  • Retrieval freshness
  • Source-of-truth ownership
  • Evaluation and human review
  • Latency/cost controls
  • Fallback paths
  • Auditability

Modernization risk

Our modernization plan is too risky.

For cloud modernization programs where sequencing, dependencies, rollback, and the operating model are unclear.

  • Dependency mapping
  • Migration sequencing
  • Observability
  • Failure modes
  • Cost/performance tradeoffs
  • Operational ownership

Executive decision

Executives need a decision, not more diagrams.

For leaders who need a clear architecture decision memo before funding, platform selection, migration, or vendor commitment.

  • Decision memo
  • Options comparison
  • Risk register
  • Recommended path
  • Next actions and owners

Where this experience applies

Architecture review is strongest when it understands the domain pressure.

Architecture review is most useful when it understands the domain pressure, not just the diagram.

What to send before a review

Useful context beats polished decks.

  • Current architecture diagram or rough sketch
  • Integration inventory
  • Known failure modes or incidents
  • Roadmap or migration plan
  • Constraints: budget, timeline, vendor/platform commitments
  • Decision that needs to be made
  • People who need to agree

What the first conversation should clarify

Enough clarity to choose the right review shape.

  • The decision being made
  • Systems and teams affected
  • Main risks
  • Missing information
  • Whether a short review is enough
  • Likely artifact: decision memo, risk register, readiness brief, or boundary map

Patterns from prior work

Anonymized examples of the kind of architecture pressure this work is built for.

No client names, fake outcomes, or invented metrics. These are domain patterns and pressure points from prior work.

Core banking transformation

Worked across core banking modernization contexts where integration boundaries, cutover sequencing, reconciliation, and operational ownership had to be made explicit.

Digital banking onboarding

Experience across retail and business banking onboarding flows where many dependent systems needed consistent contracts, exception handling, and support paths.

Credit union integration

Experience with credit-union retail banking platform integration across 20+ systems, where system-of-record boundaries and cutover risk mattered.

Payments stream

Business banking payments stream experience involving downstream impacts, exception handling, reconciliation, auditability, and operating ownership.

Healthcare and insurance integration

Healthcare and life-insurance integration experience where interoperability, data quality, reliability, and workflow ownership mattered.

Applied AI product work

ExpenseJournal product work applies OCR/AI extraction, semantic search, human confirmation, telemetry, evidence reporting, and privacy/supportability thinking.

Productized advisory

Focused reviews with decision-ready outputs.

Offer 01

Architecture Decision Sprint

Best for
A team facing a platform, integration, cloud, core banking modernization, digital banking integration, commercial lending system integration, payments modernization, or AI architecture decision and needing a clear recommendation.
Inputs
Current diagrams, backlog/roadmap, integration inventory, constraints, operational concerns, and stakeholder concerns.
Deliverables
Decision memo, architecture options, risk register, recommended path, and owner/action list.
Output artifact
8-12 page architecture decision memo.

Offer 02

AI Production Readiness Review

Best for
Teams moving from AI prototype to production workflow with RAG, search, LLM evaluation, evals, or agentic workflow boundaries.
Scope
RAG/source boundaries, model/tool usage, retrieval freshness, human-in-the-loop review, fallback paths, LLM evaluation/evals, telemetry, cost controls, and auditability.
Deliverables
Readiness scorecard, failure-mode review, control checklist, and production hardening plan.
Output artifact
AI production readiness brief.

Offer 03

Integration Modernization Review

Best for
Teams moving from BizTalk/ESB/on-prem integration toward Azure Logic Apps, APIs, event streams, Service Bus, healthcare interoperability, HL7/FHIR, ISO 20022-aware payments modernization, or cloud workflows.
Scope
System-of-record map, API/event boundary design, sync vs async tradeoffs, retries/idempotency, reconciliation, contract ownership, auditability, and cutover risk.
Deliverables
Modernization risk map, target integration boundary model, migration sequencing recommendations, and rollback/reconciliation checklist.
Output artifact
Integration modernization map.

Offer 04

Cloud Modernization Risk Review

Best for
Teams planning multi-cloud architecture, Kubernetes/container platform, serverless, migration, or modernization work where reliability, rollback, cost, and ownership are not clear.
Scope
Dependency and cutover review, rollback strategy, OpenTelemetry/observability model, support ownership, cost/performance tradeoffs, and release sequencing.
Deliverables
Modernization risk register, sequencing plan, operating controls, and executive recommendation.
Output artifact
Cloud modernization risk brief.

Sample artifacts

Concrete outputs a delivery team can use.

These are stylized previews of the kinds of advisory artifacts, not fake client deliverables.

Architecture decision memoDecision needed

Options compared · Recommended path · Tradeoffs and risks

Risk registerRisk

Impact · Mitigation · Owner

Integration boundary mapSystem of record

Contract owner · Sync/async mode · Failure/retry path

AI readiness checklistRetrieval freshness

Evaluation · Human review · Fallback path

Rollback and reconciliation checklistCutover risk

Rollback step · Reconciliation owner · Recovery signal

Owner/action listNext action

Decision owner · Technical owner · Delivery follow-up

When this is useful

Use it before the commitment hardens.

  • Before a cloud migration commitment
  • Before replacing BizTalk/ESB patterns with cloud workflows
  • Before shipping AI/RAG/agent features into production
  • Before a platform/vendor decision
  • When delivery teams disagree on architecture direction
  • When executives need a technical decision they can act on

When this is not useful

Clear boundaries keep the work useful.

  • Not staff augmentation
  • Not generic transformation slideware
  • Not long strategy theater
  • Not implementation-only coding body shop work
  • Not vendor sales support disguised as architecture
  • Not advice without access to real constraints

How a review works

A practical path from context to decision package.

01

Intake

Goals, constraints, diagrams, backlog, incident history, integration inventory, and stakeholder concerns.

02

Architecture read-through

Boundaries, dependencies, integration contracts, failure modes, rollback paths, telemetry, and ownership gaps.

03

Working session

Challenge assumptions, compare options, and align the decision criteria that matter to delivery and operations.

04

Decision package

Memo, risk register, recommendation, rollback/reconciliation notes, and next actions with owners.

Why product-building matters

Current build work keeps the advice grounded.

Because I am actively building AI-assisted products, the advisory work is grounded in current production concerns: extraction quality, retrieval, human confirmation, telemetry, cost controls, privacy boundaries, and supportability.

ExpenseJournal is not the consulting pitch. It is evidence that the advisory lens stays close to real AI workflows, cloud operations, and product delivery constraints.

Next step

Bring the decision you do not want to get wrong twice.

Start with a modernization question, an AI readiness review, or an architecture decision that needs a clear recommendation.

Book architecture review Email a modernization question Use the architecture review checklist