The Frontend Architecture Review: A Template for CTOs

Every CTO I've spoken to can tell me what's wrong with their backend. They know their p99 latency, database query times, error rates. But ask about frontend architecture and you get "it's... React" followed by a vague sense that things could be better.

I've conducted over 30 frontend architecture reviews. This is the template I use, adapted so you can run a meaningful assessment yourself.

The Six Dimensions

1. Component Architecture & Reuse

Are components well-structured? Is there a shared library? How much duplication exists?

Red flags: Multiple implementations of common UI elements, components over 300 lines, no clear distinction between generic and feature-specific components.

Check: Count duplicate components. More than 5 duplicates = immediate attention needed.

2. State Management Coherence

Is there a clear, consistent strategy for managing state?

Red flags: 3+ state management approaches, server data stored in client state, prop drilling beyond three levels, no caching strategy.

Check: Ask three engineers "how do you manage state?" Three different answers = problem.

3. Build & Developer Experience

How fast is the developer feedback loop?

Red flags: Dev server cold start over 5 seconds, HMR over 500ms, production build over 60 seconds, still on Create React App.

4. Testing & Confidence

Can the team ship with confidence?

Red flags: No automated tests, mostly snapshot tests, no CI running tests, team afraid to refactor.

5. Onboarding Velocity

How long until a new developer ships their first feature?

Red flags: Over 5 business days to first PR, no written docs, architecture exists only in the tech lead's head.

6. Code Consistency & Patterns

Does the codebase feel like it was written by one team?

Red flags: Multiple patterns for the same operation, inconsistent naming, no linting rules, PRs involve style debates.

How to Score

Rate each dimension 1-5:

• 1: Critical — actively blocking the team
• 2: Poor — causing regular friction
• 3: Adequate — works but has gaps
• 4: Good — solid with minor improvements possible
• 5: Excellent — a competitive advantage

Total out of 30:

• 24-30: Your frontend is a strength
• 18-23: Solid with specific areas to address
• 12-17: Significant gaps impacting output
• Below 12: Actively working against you

What to Do With Results

Don't fix everything at once. Rank by business impact, address the lowest-scoring dimension first.

Highest-ROI interventions are usually: build tooling (fastest win), component architecture (unlocks faster delivery), state management (reduces bugs).

If three or more dimensions scored below 3, your frontend isn't just "not ideal" — it's slowing down your business. The good news: the highest-impact fixes are usually the most straightforward.