The monolith is not the problem. The wrong decomposition is.
Microservices promise independence — each team owns its service, deploys on its own schedule, and scales what needs scaling. In practice, many enterprises decompose too aggressively, too early, without the operational foundation. The result is worse than the original monolith: dozens of services with circular dependencies, no service discovery, inconsistent logging and more complex deployments.
Good microservice architecture starts with domain analysis, not with Docker. Services need proper sizing, observability from day one, and a team structure that matches the service structure. We have done this enough times to know where it goes wrong.
Domain Analysis
We apply domain-driven design (DDD) to identify bounded contexts, aggregate boundaries and service ownership. Decomposition is driven by business logic and team topology.
Build with Observability
Every service is built with distributed tracing, structured logging, health endpoints and metrics from day one. Observability is part of the service contract.
Operate & Evolve
Service mesh for traffic management and security, deployment automation per service, and architecture governance to prevent drift toward a distributed monolith.
What we deliver
Identifying bounded contexts and defining service boundaries that match organizational reality. Event storming and context mapping workshops with your architects and domain experts.
Apache Kafka and Azure Service Bus for asynchronous, decoupled workflows. Communication patterns that avoid distributed transaction problems.
Event sourcing for complex domains where audit history matters. CQRS to separate read and write models for performance. Applied where they solve real problems, not as defaults.
Istio or Linkerd for traffic management, mutual TLS, circuit breaking and retry policies. OpenTelemetry for distributed tracing across all services.
Each service owns its data store — no shared databases, no schema coupling. Polyglot persistence: relational where consistency matters, document stores for flexibility, caches for latency.
Namespace-per-team strategies, RBAC for service accounts, resource quotas, horizontal pod autoscaling and pod disruption budgets. Kubernetes managed correctly.
Monolith too rigid or microservices too chaotic?
Talk to an architect who designs services for operational reality.
Tier-1 Insurance Group (Turkey)
A multi-tenant OHS platform needed independent deployment for different business units, strict data isolation and integration with an enterprise data lake.
Microservice architecture with bounded contexts aligned to platform domains. Each service owned its data store. Event-driven communication for cross-service workflows. Kubernetes with namespace isolation.
Each domain team deploys independently. New business units onboarded by configuration, not code changes. Complete data isolation with group-level reporting.
Where we apply it
- Let each team deploy independently without breaking others
- React to business events in real time across all services
- Onboard new tenants by configuration, not code changes
- Handle 10x traffic spikes without architectural rework
- Align service boundaries to business domains, not tech layers
Technologies
Microsoft 
AWS