We have all been there: you walk into a new client engagement ready to implement modern patterns, only to find a tangle of a 20-year-old legacy system and a wall of resistance from the existing staff. It’s easy to label the old system as "crap" and the gatekeepers as "blockers," but what if that legacy system is the only reason the company survived long enough to hire you?

In this episode of Stories of Facilitating Software Design and Architecture, Michael Plöd shares a powerful story about a modernisation project that was nearly derailed by a "difficult" stakeholder. By taking a massive emotional risk and stepping away from the technical arguments to ask, "Why are you resisting?", Michael uncovered that he was criticising the life's work of the company's original "rockstar developer."

Michael, together with Beija and hosts Andrea, Kenny, and Andrew, explores the critical role of empathy in architecture. They discuss how to reframe legacy conversations using Gregor Hohpe’s concept of shifting from "Economies of Scale" to "Economies of Speed," and why the most important tool in an architect's belt isn't Kubernetes—it’s the ability to ride the "elevator" between the engine room and the penthouse without losing the message.

Key Discussion Points

1. [00:02:50] Conference Driven Development: The danger of throwing buzzwords like Microservices, DDD, and Kubernetes at a problem without understanding the context.
2. [00:06:00] The Hidden History of Legacy: Discovering that the "blocker" in the room is often the creator of the system that earned the company millions.
3. [00:09:20] Contextual Reframing: How to explain the need for change by contrasting the historical need for "Economies of Scale" (centralization/control) with today's need for "Economies of Speed."
4. [00:10:00] The Architect as Path-Maker: Transforming a legacy developer from a defender of the old guard into the architect of the new context.
5. [00:14:00] Professional Resilience: How to draw boundaries and not take professional resistance as a personal attack, allowing you to stay objective in heated modernization efforts.
6. [00:25:00] Riding the Elevator: Why stakeholder communication—translating technical complexity for different audiences—is the number one skill for aspiring architects.

Hello and welcome to another episode of Stories of Facilitating

2

Software Design and Architecture.

3

Today we are joined by, Michael

Plot and Beja Niel Niel, as.

4

I, hopefully I got that right.

5

Um, and, uh, we're gonna

hear a story from Michael.

6

I'm hoping that he's gonna tell

a brilliant story and then we're

7

gonna ask some questions and make

some comments and see what happens.

8

As usual, I'm joined by my,

co-conspirator Andrew Harm Law and

9

Kenny Basser, Michael, the floor is all.

10

Michael Plöd: Yeah.

11

Thank you.

12

Um, I want to talk about a story, that

maybe quite a few folks encounter when

13

they're working on legacy modernizations.

14

I mean, it's a rare case that we work,

in our industry on the Greenfield.

15

Everyone who works in a

larger organization, deals

16

with legacy systems that are.

17

20 years old, 30 years old.

18

Were some old tech maybe

in place, but also maybe.

19

Old processes and, I very often

hear about, from younger folks or

20

from folks who come in externally,

like from external consultants.

21

And I'm an external consultant by

myself, have been for most of my career.

22

oh, this legacy system sucks.

23

This is so bad and we need to

get rid of this, and so on.

24

And my story is, um, a little

bit about, empathy in this case.

25

And, it was a couple of

years ago when I was, uh.

26

Leading architect for a big

legacy system modernization.

27

And there was, this was a very old

system, quite a bit of a cobalt code

28

base involved mainframe systems, but

also, Java swing, user interfaces

29

and, and uh, a lot of that stuff and

a lot of that embedded in a very.

30

hierarchical organization.

31

Yeah.

32

With a lot of command and

control, a lot of micromanagement.

33

They claim to be agile

because they used Scrum.

34

But, it wasn't like really

agile in any way in that.

35

But, there was the decision

to modernize this thing.

36

And of course, all the fancy passwords

were thrown around microservices,

37

cloud, agile, domain driven design.

38

Angular Spring Boot, whatever.

39

Yeah.

40

All the, all the stuff.

41

Uh, DevOps of course as well.

42

And Kubernetes of course,

all the, all the fancy stuff.

43

what you usually hear, when

you do CDD, which I refer to as

44

conference driven development.

45

And, so it was hard to sort these things

out and to really bring in some sense,

46

a part of the modernization frenzy.

47

But, I realized there was one person

who was resisting very, very heavily.

48

In that way, and part of the resistance

I could understand, but there were

49

other parts of the resistance where

I really struggled to get a grip.

50

Yeah.

51

To really get into that.

52

Why is this person acting like that?

53

And, Especially in, um, like, higher

management circles, when the management

54

came together in Germany, it's called

the lan, steering committee is probably,

55

the best, English term for that.

56

there was sometimes vetos about

things where I was like, oh.

57

Why, why is this person acting like that?

58

And there were quite a few voices

that said, oh, someone from the

59

upper management should get him

in control and, uh, whatever.

60

And I.

61

I reached a point where I was so

fed up with that person that I was

62

like, okay, I have nothing to lose.

63

I went up to him and said, Hey,

can I have 30 minutes of your time?

64

Why?

65

What do you want?

66

What do you want?

67

And I was like, sort of a target

for him because I was driving

68

part of that modernization and I

was like the marketing phase also

69

for the modernization, so to say.

70

he was like, ah, what do you want?

71

What do you want?

72

Why should I spend time with you,

blah, blah, and all that stuff.

73

And he, he agreed to

have a meeting with me.

74

And it was at the end of a business day,

like 4:00 PM, 5:00 PM something like that.

75

And I was like, Hey, I don't

understand parts of your system.

76

there is something that I

don't see that you see, and I

77

would like to understand that.

78

Um, you are, you have a history

of over 30 years in that company.

79

You know, way more stuff than I do about

this company, about this system and so on.

80

And I would like really

to, to really understand.

81

Where your assistance is coming

from, because I want to avoid

82

making any mistakes or, not

understanding a certain context.

83

And not seeing a certain context.

84

Yeah.

85

Maybe I'm blind because I'm an

external consultant and I don't

86

claim to know everything because

I'm just an external consultant.

87

He brush me off.

88

He was like, go away.

89

What is this crap all about?

90

Well, you want to throw everything

under the bus and blah, blah,

91

blah, and, and, and so on.

92

And I was like very dissatisfied with that

and left and two weeks later he came up

93

to me and said, Hey, let's meet again.

94

I was like, oh, interesting.

95

And I came into his office and he

said, you need to thank my wife.

96

For this meeting, I was like, okay,

I'm, I'm getting really curious now.

97

He was like, yeah, when you

came to me, I was really pissed.

98

I was really angry.

99

And, I came home and took the

anger, to dinner and my wife like,

100

was like, why don't you tell him

what's, what's this fuss all about?

101

Tell him.

102

And so he was like, yeah, okay.

103

I'm going to tell you now very

honestly, and this, Stays in this room.

104

I am allowed to talk about this publicly,

but in a very, anonymous fashion.

105

So I won't disclose the industry, the

area, or wherever I'm allowed to tell

106

the story, but no further details.

107

Yeah, so, um, I'm not stabbing

his back behind and right now.

108

And, um, he said, well, listen, I started

at this company when I was 16 years old.

109

I am going to retire in five years.

110

And I was what you young folks

now nowadays say the rockstar

111

developer of the company.

112

I created all of this.

113

This is my baby.

114

And now everyone is running around

claiming that this system is a pile

115

of crap and that it needs to go away.

116

And I am struggling with that.

117

Are you actually aware how much

money this system earned the company?

118

And I was like, okay.

119

Thank you very much.

120

Now we are talking, I

understand your context.

121

I understand why you think that way.

122

And by the way.

123

What I always say is, to any external

consultant, or to any facilitator when you

124

deal with legacy, that system must have

been very, very successful in the past.

125

Otherwise, they couldn't pay

your daily rates right now.

126

And, always treat the legacy with

respect and, always assume that

127

no one 20 years ago got up saying.

128

Oh, let's build a really bad system.

129

No one ever did that, I'm very sure.

130

And, um, so, so I was talking with

this person and we talked a little bit

131

about context the context back in the

day was what Greg or Hopi very often

132

says, economies of scale for systems.

133

Yeah.

134

So, reusability, centralization, control.

135

The context has changed, and I'm also

quoting Gregor towards economies of speed.

136

Yeah.

137

And I said, well, you made a lot

of really good decisions in the

138

context that you were in, but

the environment maybe changed.

139

He was like, I never looked

at that from this perspective.

140

And I said, okay, I'm not going

to give you any advices right now.

141

Let's leave this where it is.

142

I'll think about it and I'll come back

to you A week later, I approached him

143

and asked, Hey, do you have more time?

144

I have an idea.

145

And I said, Hey, actually, you

have a really cool chance in

146

your career at this moment.

147

You can be, you are already the

architect and the the developer, the

148

lead developer for the very first,

very successful systems, architecture

149

and system for that company that

earned them millions, if not billions.

150

But you can now open the gate for

a context switch of this system.

151

Yeah.

152

Getting that system ready for a changing

context that's happening now, and

153

you can bring in all your knowledge.

154

About these things, about the

company, about the system to be

155

the path maker for the second, very

successful architecture in there.

156

And he was like, Michael, I want

to kick you out of the room right

157

now because I hate your pro, your

positive attitude all the time.

158

But I let it sink in and a few days

later, I just received a mail I'm in.

159

That opened many doors.

160

And what I want to tell with this story

is don't brush off resistance and always

161

try to find out where this stems from.

162

Yeah.

163

I would say 98% of the people

don't work on, ill intents.

164

Or bad intents, they

don't have bad intentions.

165

But they have a certain perspective.

166

And when you facilitate things

167

When you don't try.

168

And I think that's a key differentiator

between architecture as a hierarchical

169

position of power where you say,

Hey, I'm the big boss architect now,

170

and you do it my way and shut up.

171

And, the discussion is over versus.

172

Facilitating architecture.

173

I think, what, what is very important when

you are a facilitator and when you want

174

to facilitate architecture especially.

175

Yeah.

176

Uh, also when you want to

facilitate architectural change,

177

you need to have empathy.

178

You need to try to

understand these dimensions.

179

you need to understand ver.

180

Resistance from certain players and key

players, stakeholders comes from, and

181

then you can actively work with that.

182

I think that can open many doors.

183

And, this question, Hey, why are you

like, that opened quite a few doors.

184

Hey, could have also gone terribly wrong.

185

Yeah, that they kicked

me out, uh, and so on.

186

But sometimes.

187

You have to take a risk,

and that's risk taking.

188

Yeah.

189

these things can go wrong, but

there is no guarantee for that.

190

And also, part of that empathy is try to

understand the context and no one got up

191

and said, let's build a horrible system

where they will hate us 20 years later.

192

Uh, no one ever did that.

193

No one probably thought about

that system existing 20 years

194

later when they designed it.

195

So that would be my story

that I want to tell.

196

Kenny Schwegler: thanks.

197

So you the, at the end especially, I'm,

I'm very curious, because at the end you

198

say, I take a lot of risk and I think a

lot of people, myself as well in the past,

199

taking that, that does a lot to a person.

200

When he kicked you out, sort

of like kicked you out or

201

say it's nonsense, right?

202

There was two weeks in between.

203

how did you feel in those two weeks?

204

did you ever meet him then,

and how did you cope with that?

205

I'm very curious because many people

probably find it hard to do this

206

because they feel very uncomfortable

getting into that situation.

207

At least I am still to this day,

feel very uncomfortable with that.

208

Were you.

209

Michael Plöd: Um,

210

I think I have quite a bit of

a resilience with these things.

211

So, um, I don't know why.

212

I can't tell you I didn't

train that or whatever.

213

I can live very well with

people not liking me.

214

Yeah.

215

So that gives me that, that doesn't

mean that I don't care at all.

216

Yeah.

217

Uh, but I can, uh, I can draw

very good boundaries for myself.

218

I don't know why, how that came to place.

219

I never explored that.

220

I'm not a psychology person or anything

like that, but it is like that.

221

of course I encountered him in meeting

and I just ignored the situation.

222

I just dealt with it

like this never happened.

223

I remained professional.

224

I didn't take it any,

in any personal thing.

225

I always say, You can toss a lot to

my head in a business context and I

226

can still go out to a bar with you.

227

Yeah.

228

Um, so, so that doesn't mean that

I appreciate any toxic behavior or

229

there are certain boundaries to that.

230

Yeah.

231

Um.

232

For myself, I can draw very

good boundaries, I think.

233

so that it doesn't bother me too much.

234

but I thought about that, taking

that risk very, very explicitly.

235

So I was prepared for various

situations how that could go along.

236

Yeah.

237

So when I do that, that stuff, I

just don't do that intentionally.

238

Oh, let's go in there and whatever.

239

So I weigh in the pros and cons and I

already have a plan how I deal with that.

240

If things like that happen.

241

Beija Nigl: But I think what you

just said, the splitting of, the

242

person and the conflict or the topic.

243

Something that I feel like, makes it

very essential to feel respected, even

244

though you might disagree on something.

245

and that already helps people to

actually be digest what you just said.

246

uh, about this, what

you said, Kenny, like.

247

helped me in this is to accept that some

people need time, and especially when

248

it's about switching perspective and being

like saying, okay, I was wrong, or, this

249

takes a lot of time to jump over your own,

like shadow to, to be like, okay, shit.

250

maybe I need to, I need to switch.

251

And this takes time and being patient

and to learn to be patient and to

252

tell one yourself every once again,

be like, Hey, give the people time.

253

He won't get anywhere if you stress

them, let them come back to you

254

instead of forcing it too much.

255

That helps me in such situations,

256

Kenny Schwegler: I,

257

Beija Nigl: at least.

258

Kenny Schwegler: you said

something very interesting.

259

So I, I do, uh, so

everyone's different, right?

260

So I do have a personal problem

with people not liking me.

261

But, what you said was very interesting.

262

I think we should take the

same approach, which I always

263

try to ask to people as well.

264

And I think that's a learning

point, is before you go into that

265

discussion or that conversation.

266

Try to already imagine.

267

And it's a stoic thing actually.

268

I found out later on stoics do it a lot.

269

The stoics are not emotionless.

270

They already went through the emotion

before it happened so that in the

271

moment they are more, grounded.

272

So I think that's an interesting.

273

thing that I do as

274

I imagine what will happen during

that and I weigh the pros and cons

275

and then I already went through

276

what was going

277

on Not always right

278

Andrea Magnorsky: I find that really.

279

find it really interesting

that you're able

280

to set really good boundaries while at

the same time you're able to be highly

281

empathetic.

282

Uh, I think that is a

very, very hard skill.

283

'cause I find, for example, have high

empathy, but if it's someone that is

284

attacking me personally, I find that

very hard to, like, it's something

285

that that cost me emotionally.

286

It's a, it's emotional work I

have to Do Do you find that.

287

You have to do work or is it you are

doing the boundary stuff and it doesn't

288

require any emotional work for you?

289

Michael Plöd: I don't, take these

offenses personally, to be honest.

290

because I think, you can, for

instance, exchange me for Andrew,

291

for you, Andrea, for Kenny, and

the result would be the same.

292

It's not, uh, it's not, I, I don't

think that I personally get attacked.

293

I think the position that I am in

is the one that is being charged.

294

So, uh, I don't, I, I don't

think that this person thinks I,

295

Michael, am a full-blown idiot.

296

I think, this person has a problem

with the task that I have, with the

297

position that I'm in, and I think that

is the first, boundary that I draw.

298

Andrew Harmel-Law: Yeah, I wanted to,

there's, so I think there's one thing

299

you said, Michael, I thought was super

interesting 'cause people talk about like.

300

Certain types of people take

risks and they always mean like

301

intellectual risks or like financial

risks or some other kind of risk.

302

But you took like an emotional risk

with yourself just to like, like I

303

would be like Andrea, I get, Very

physical reactions to these things and

304

whether I can like, think about, you

know, intellectually I could be like

305

they're talk, like everything you said,

I'll still feel it really physically.

306

Physically in meetings, which is not fun.

307

but then the person as well,

then you gave some space and

308

they took an emotional risk.

309

And I think that, especially in

software where we get super emotionally

310

involved in what we build the

results of those things, which is

311

exactly what you described, right?

312

that kind of risk is a really big.

313

Key part of this, and it's

less, it's less talked about.

314

I think people are like, oh yeah,

we just, we we ran fast and broke

315

things and you didn't, you like went

slow and like listened to people and

316

that had the biggest impact, right?

317

The more you push this person, it probably

would've got worse, worse and worse.

318

Right?

319

Then his wife would've been, yeah, you're

right, this Michael ge, a complete jerk.

320

You should really make his life hell.

321

But instead it was different.

322

So.

323

Kenny Schwegler: I

completely agree, Andrew.

324

it's a construct, but because we do

get emotional, because, angriness

325

is also an emotion that people

don't construct as an emotion, but

326

there's always underneath that.

327

So I think that's something we

should talk about more often.

328

Beija Nigl: Yeah, and I mean something

that also I tell my teams that I work

329

with when we have discussions, that

it's not about my idea or your idea,

330

but it's about ideas that one person

brought up or another person brought up.

331

But if you get too Emotionally attached to

the idea or to your idea, or for example,

332

in Michael's story to your change.

333

If Michael would've said, Hey, this

is, I want to drive this change because

334

this is my initiative, then you get

emotionally attached and then it's harder

335

to detach this from you as a person.

336

and that also helps a lot.

337

it's hard.

338

It's easier to say and to consult

other people to make, Hey, don't take

339

it as your decision or your idea.

340

still it helps to repeat it for one

other people, but also for yourself.

341

Andrea Magnorsky: I I have practical

342

to

343

you

344

are they acting like this?

345

I I do believe people are self-consistent.

346

My question is, how do you

manage to carve out time?

347

Because even this half an hour investment

and this other hour investment, as

348

consultants, we tend to, need to,

uh, have to explain all of our time.

349

and sometimes I can't invest in

all the whys I want to answer.

350

Um.

351

And, and this is, this is a, a, a

hard problem for the consultants

352

and also for the companies.

353

So I think both are disserviced by our

lack of discretion on the usage, our time.

354

Sometimes I just do it anyway because I

think it's a risk to the project, like

355

a high risk, it also means that we're

losing on some, good key learnings.

356

I wonder how you manage that or if you

kind of build in some, some, you know,

357

discretionary use of meetings, whatever.

358

Michael Plöd: Um, I must say that I've

rarely been in an environment where I

359

had to justify 30 minutes of my time.

360

On a time sheet, maybe I was just lucky.

361

but that 30 minutes or something, or

scheduling a meeting with some key

362

stakeholder has never been seen as

something that I have to justify.

363

And if someone would've come to me and

asked, Hey, why did you, what, what were

364

these 30 minutes on your time sheet for?

365

Or this one hour on your time sheet for?

366

I would say, Hey, listen, I'm.

367

One of the driving

architects, for this change.

368

And I think stakeholder management

and dealing with stakeholders and

369

talking to stakeholders is one

of my key tasks of an architect.

370

Yeah.

371

Um, I, I would say it's not my

task to what I, let's say, set

372

up some really low level details

in the Kubernetes installation.

373

Yeah.

374

Maybe.

375

Yeah, I think it's my task to

bring, to align the perspectives of

376

various stakeholders together and

to create a shared understanding

377

about this modernization.

378

And this is one of the key stakeholders.

379

So, I think it's, integral part

of my job to talk to this person.

380

And if you have a different perspective

381

on the work of an architect Yeah.

382

Uh, we have to talk

about my role in general.

383

So that would be the thing that I would

say if someone would've challenged that.

384

Andrea Magnorsky: like

385

know,

386

in a

387

see that I'm not allowed.

388

Michael Plöd: What I, what I always

say, I sometimes, teach software

389

architecture foundation courses for

the I-S-A-Q-B and what I say in these

390

trainings to aspiring young architect.

391

It is that, Stakeholder, communication

in a way that is suitable for

392

certain stakeholder groups is one

of the most important key skills

393

for any architects in my eyes.

394

Yeah.

395

So I think, if you would ask me what is

the key skill of a really good architect,

396

it's like, I love quoting Gregor Hopi.

397

it's riding Gregor's elevator.

398

being able to talk to stakeholders on

various levels with various perspectives

399

in a way that they understand you.

400

Yeah.

401

Don't bring out a life coding

session to the C level.

402

Yeah.

403

And don't bring, McKinsey style,

slide decks to the engineering team.

404

Yeah.

405

Uh, to, to, to say in

a very blunt fashion.

406

And I think that's one of the most

important skills as an architect

407

Kenny Schwegler: and I want to add to

408

Michael Plöd: for me.

409

Kenny Schwegler: not not to

an architect, to architecture.

410

you look at domain driven design, the

most important aspect of domain-driven

411

design is understand the problem.

412

Who knows the problem

413

stakeholders.

414

Beija Nigl: If you don't have the

people on board, you cannot drive

415

any change because the changes in

the people are not in the system in

416

the end.

417

Andrea Magnorsky: this is, this is,

uh, it's been, uh, wonderful to have

418

uh, for for joining us, uh,

Michael and Beja, and, uh, we'll

419

see you again in the next episode.

420

Goodbye.

421

I.