Senior architecture judgment, without a full-time architect.
For organizations that already have admins, developers, and implementation partners. We own the architecture call on the decisions that are hard to reverse. Your team keeps delivering.
When teams bring in an outside architect.
- You need an architect, and a full-time hire is not on the table.
- Major changes ship without anyone reviewing the architecture consequences, and several vendors each make choices that do not add up.
- An AI or agent initiative is about to add new identities, permissions, and data paths.
We do not replace your admins, developers, or implementation partner, and we do not take tickets. We own the architecture recommendations; your team and vendors deliver against them.
What you keep.
The record stays with you. If the engagement ends, your team still knows why the org is shaped the way it is.
Architecture Decision Records
One for every consequential decision reviewed, including the options rejected and why.
An architecture risk and technical-debt register
Kept current, not delivered once.
Written design review outcomes
The reasoning survives the person who made the call.
An integration and identity dependency map
Built where the engagement touches it.
The difference is not hours. It is how much of the decision we own.
-
Advisory Sessions
Scheduled senior review of specific decisions as they come up. Bring a design, a roadmap question, or a problem. Leave with a position and the reasoning behind it.
-
Standing Advisory
Recurring architecture review across an active program, with access between sessions. We keep the risk register current and flag what is drifting.
-
Design Authority
We hold sign-off on architecture decisions within an agreed scope, before they are committed. Release approval stays with your team.
Six things nobody owns when there is no architect.
These are the standing responsibilities a full-time architect would hold. We hold them without the headcount.
- Architecture decisions
- A clear position on consequential designs before anything gets built. Yes, no, or a better option.
- Platform roadmap
- What gets built when, what waits, and what should not be built at all.
- Standards and patterns
- The rules your admins and developers build against, so the same decision is not remade every sprint.
- Change and release risk
- Which changes in flight are consequential, what they depend on, and what they break downstream.
- Technical debt
- What is piling up, what it costs you, and the order it gets paid down in.
- Adopt or wait
- Agentforce, Data Cloud, AI agents. Whether to take them on now, and what has to be true first.
How the engagement works.
- Baseline
Current state across access, integrations, data, technical debt, and agents. Usually the Architecture Assessment; a recent assessment of your own can stand in. Advisory sessions start without one.
- Standing review
Consequential decisions come to us before they are committed. Each gets a written decision record and a place in the risk register.
- Executive visibility
Leadership gets a short, current read on architecture risk and what it would take to close it.
Scoped after a short call, for a defined term.
Engagements renew by mutual agreement. Every tier costs a fraction of a full-time architect.
Led by a certified Salesforce architect. Trevaun is a Salesforce Consulting Select Partner.
Built the Salesforce integration behind a production agentic customer support platform delivered with Sierra AI.
We sit on the delivery side of these decisions too. Implementations, migrations, and subcontract work are part of the practice, so the advice accounts for what a design costs to build.
For how we reason, read the case against the current implementation model and the access an AI agent inherits.
Questions people ask.
What kind of decisions come up?
New object, record type, or field on something that exists? Middleware, or is a point-to-point call fine here? Can this permission set go to the whole department? Is this the release that takes on Data Cloud? Does this agent need write access, or will read plus a queue do?
How is this different from the Architecture Assessment?
The assessment is a one-time verdict on the whole org that ends with a report. This is ongoing ownership of the decisions as they come up.
How often do we meet?
Cadence and term are set at kickoff, based on how much is in flight.
Who holds release approval?
Your team. Under Design Authority we sign off on the architecture within an agreed scope; release approval stays with you.
Bring a decision you are sitting on.
We reply within one to two business days.