Back to all topics
team-management

Conway's Law

Organizations design systems that mirror their communication structure.

Tiny Summary

Conway's Law: "Organizations design systems that mirror their communication structure." Your architecture will reflect your org chart, whether you like it or not.


The Law

"Organizations produce designs whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure." — Melvin Conway, 1967


Examples

Microservices: Many small, autonomous teams → Microservices architecture (one service per team)

Monoliths: One centralized engineering team → Monolithic architecture

Frontend/Backend split: Separate teams → API-based architecture with clear separation

Silos: Teams don't talk → Duplicate code, incompatible systems


Why It Happens

Teams design what they can control. Can't coordinate across teams → Build separate systems. Interfaces reflect org boundaries: Team A + Team B → API between them. Same team → Direct function calls. Incentives measured by team output → System boundaries follow team boundaries.


Inverse Conway Maneuver

Want microservices? Create small, independent teams first. Want unified system? Merge teams before building. Architecture follows org structure, so fix org structure first.


Real Impact

Amazon: Two-pizza teams → Service-oriented architecture (became AWS)

Spotify: Squad/tribe/chapter model → Loosely coupled, autonomous services

Traditional enterprise: Large siloed departments → Monolithic, tightly coupled systems


Key Insights

You can't fight Conway's Law. Want different architecture? Change the org chart. Communication patterns dictate system design. Microservices require organizational changes, not just technical ones.