The pricing conversation has been interesting to watch, especially as it relates to development team orchestration and resource allocation. The comments, the ecosystem convergence discussion, and industry thoughts on agency transformation all point to the same thing: we're in the middle of a shift in how development work gets organized.
I mentioned thinking there might be a better approach to this. Here's what I had in mind.
The Orchestration Model
Think about how Kubernetes works - it's a container orchestration system that automatically manages where and how applications run across multiple servers. You don't manually decide "we need 3 web server pods on server A and 2 database pods on server B."
Instead, you define what services you need (web servers, databases, caches) and how they should scale based on demand. Kubernetes figures out how many of each type to run based on current load and metrics, then figures out where to place them based on available resources and constraints.
What if we applied that same orchestration model to development teams?
Instead of throwing senior-level rates at routine maintenance, or abandoning smaller projects because they don't fit traditional agency economics, we coordinate talent based on what each task actually requires.
A technical architect acts like that Kubernetes orchestration system. They look at project requirements and figure out what types of expertise are needed and how much of each. Then they coordinate between client requirements, available talent, and project constraints to assign the right people to the right tasks. Whether that's a senior developer handling complex architecture decisions, a mentored developer working on implementation tasks, or AI handling routine code generation.
It's about matching the right resource to the right task.
Why This Matters Now
The ecosystem pieces we've been discussing are reducing coordination costs: affordable hosting, professional themes under $500, mentored developers through the IXP (inexperienced) program, Drupal CMS for less technical users, Experience Builder for visual personalization. We still need someone to orchestrate how these pieces work together.
That's where the technical architect orchestration model becomes important. It's not about cheaper labor. It's about intelligent resource allocation.
The Human Element
This connects to what Dries wrote about the "accountability gap" in his analysis of AI and agency transformation. AI can generate code and automate processes, but someone needs to own the results and make sure everything's going the right direction. Sometimes AI gets confused. Someone has to guide it.
The technical architect fills that accountability layer while coordinating the broader team.
Looking Ahead
I've been working on how this orchestration model works in practice - the tools, the processes, the communication patterns that make cross-cultural, multi-skill-level teams effective.
The economics are promising. The client gets better value through intelligent resource allocation. The developers get meaningful work that matches their skill level and expertise. And projects that used to be impossible become viable again.
I'll dive into the implementation details in upcoming posts. But first, what's your experience with these kinds of orchestrated approaches? Have you seen coordination models that work well for distributed teams?
The conversation's just getting started.
Add new comment