I'll also mention a somewhat related article here, not directly on topic, but likely interesting to those reading about conway's law and architectures: Microsoft Research did some very interesting work on the interplay of code quality and organizational metrics (e.g. how high in the org chart do you have to go to get everyone who committed code to a specific DLL or what fraction of the developers under that lead engineer committed code to that DLL, or etc). Their conclusion, simply put, was that organizational metrics appeared to better model actual end user experienced shipped code quality than more traditional test metrics[0].
I'll also mention a somewhat related article here, not directly on topic, but likely interesting to those reading about conway's law and architectures: Microsoft Research did some very interesting work on the interplay of code quality and organizational metrics (e.g. how high in the org chart do you have to go to get everyone who committed code to a specific DLL or what fraction of the developers under that lead engineer committed code to that DLL, or etc). Their conclusion, simply put, was that organizational metrics appeared to better model actual end user experienced shipped code quality than more traditional test metrics[0].
[0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/the-inf...