Besides solutions out of leadership and communication, it turns out that focus on two essential architecture viewpoints could help in similar situations: 1. Value streams (VS) view provides a common understanding on how the company creates value for its customers and other stakeholders (including sales force, brokers, after sales services agents, etc.). VS gives end-to-end representation of value adding activities done by all various business functions, thus providing a common context for meaningful participation of different departments in the company's value delivery. 2. Business Capability Map (BCM) represents all needed abilities to fulfill value delivery, in a simple yet clear way, and independent of business unit/division structure.

- Identify key stakeholders and set a clear timeline for when decisions need to be finalized. - Involve influencers from both teams to align on shared goals and desired business outcomes. - Monitor progress through regular check-in meetings, using User Stories or JIRA in an Agile/Sprint framework. - Foster open and transparent discussions, addressing any product gaps and incorporating them into the roadmap or suggesting workarounds (such as customizations). - After reaching key milestones, conduct a retrospective analysis to evaluate successes and identify areas for improvement. - Celebrate small wins and key milestones throughout the journey to maintain momentum and team morale.

If Marketing and IT are in conflict over an architecture decision, the issue might be from a lack of clarity about accountability and the nature of the decision itself. It could also be that the business opportunities and benefits are not fully understood, needing some risk management.

Honestly, the best and fastest way to fix this is to nominate senior leaders from both IT and Marketing. Have those leaders serve in the other department for one to two full-weeks with real-world assignments. They will definitely need someone to shadow and support them in their effort, however the perspective gained will be invaluable. Once their work assignment is completed, invite senior leaders from both departments to sit in a full-day session to discuss the gaps around architectural decisions. The perspective of the senior leaders who participated will be genuine, timely, objective (to a great extent), and motivated to find a way to collaborate and close the gaps. Nothing beats trial by fire!

To bridge the gap between Marketing and IT over architectural decisions, start by fostering open communication. Arrange regular meetings where both teams can voice their concerns and perspectives. Emphasize the shared goal of enhancing the business and find common ground. Use a neutral facilitator to guide discussions and mediate conflicts. Translate technical jargon into business terms and vice versa to ensure mutual understanding. Highlight the benefits of collaboration, such as improved customer experience and operational efficiency. Encourage a culture of respect and empathy, acknowledging each team's expertise and contributions. This collaborative approach can help align their goals and foster cooperation.

Establish a collaborative framework focused on shared goals. Facilitate cross-functional workshops to align priorities, ensuring both teams understand the business impact of technical choices. Use clear, non-technical language to explain IT constraints while translating marketing needs into actionable tech requirements

Align marketing and IT by focusing on shared business goals and facilitating discussions to understand each team’s priorities. Use tools like capability models to bridge gaps and establish governance, with marketing leading customer-facing decisions and IT ensuring stability. Deliver quick wins, such as integrating tools, to build trust and demonstrate value. Develop a unified technology roadmap that aligns marketing’s engagement goals with IT’s infrastructure priorities. Address conflicts by presenting trade-offs in terms of cost, speed, and risk, and promote cross-functional teams to encourage collaboration and alignment.

Develop a Shared Language: Marketing and IT often use different terminology and metrics. Establishing a common vocabulary can help both teams understand each other’s perspectives better and reduce misunderstandings. Leverage Data-Driven Decision Making: Use data analytics to support discussions and decisions. When both teams can refer to the same data, it helps ground conversations in facts rather than opinions, leading to more objective decision-making. Involve Stakeholders Early: Include representatives from both departments in the early stages of project planning. This ensures that both perspectives are considered from the outset, reducing friction later in the process.

Take the time to really understand marketing's concerns. Understand how the decisions will impact the customers and add value to the business. It is not about that architecture or marketing wants but what will add the most value to customers and the business.

This is way more clear-cut than people think. Marketing may or may not know really what they want (which is a completely different, but common, challenge). But IT's role is purely in the service of the business. In this case: Marketing. The challenge is to find out Marketing's real needs (as opposed to what they think they need). And then IT needs to find the most efficient way to solve those needs (and only those needs). If Marketing and IT still disagree, it's either that: - Marketing haven't fully articulated their need (send in the Business Architects and Analysts to help - the SAS of requirements). or - IT aren't fully respecting Marketing's needs and presuming they know better (again, send in the Bus Arch and Analysts to mediate)