In today’s highly connected and modular digital landscape, eCommerce leaders are embracing the composable philosophy — modular platforms, API-first tools, cloud-native services, and headless frontends. This MACH-based approach has opened the door for retailers to build highly tailored B2C and B2B commerce solutions. But with this freedom comes risk: complexity, misalignment, and runaway costs. At the heart of this challenge lies a question too few are asking:
System Integrators (SIs), eCommerce platforms, and retail executives must now acknowledge a fundamental truth: any successful project today is not just about implementing a platform. It’s about composing an ecosystem of companies — the payment provider, loyalty engine, PIM, fraud detection system, marketing recommendation engine, analytics layer, and more — all working together under one architecture.
And yet, the practice of Ecosystem Architecture — intentionally selecting, organizing, and governing these players — is often absent. The result? Projects that are bloated, misaligned, politically compromised, and ultimately underwhelming for the retailer.
From Developers to Architects
Over the past decade, many SIs have drifted from their core purpose, System Integrators. Once the masters of integration, they’ve often become glorified consultants or development factories, disconnected from the strategic assembly of the architecture itself.
But now, the job is coming full circle. In a composable world, integration is once again king — and not just technical integration, but ecosystem integration: selecting the right mix of Independent Software Vendors (ISVs), understanding how each connects with the platform and client goals, and crafting a path where all players deliver value together. SIs must re-embrace this role. Not just as implementers, but as Ecosystem Architects.
Too often, partner selection in commerce projects is not based on outcome, but on proximity and convenience. Longstanding relationships, transactional incentives, internal politics, and brand visibility all too frequently drive decisions. This leads to bloated ecosystems where accountability is fuzzy, roles are unclear, and integration becomes fragile.
When things go wrong — deadlines missed, systems clashing, contracts overlapping — the finger-pointing begins. But the deeper issue is rarely discussed: was this ecosystem designed with intent, or did it emerge from legacy habits and market pressure?
The Call for a New Discipline
To correct course, we need to introduce a cultural and structural shift — a new discipline that prioritizes thoughtful architecture over opportunistic stacking. Ecosystem Architecture is that discipline. At its heart is a client-first mindset. It asks the uncomfortable but necessary questions: What is truly needed for this retailer, in this industry, using this platform, under these goals? And how do we assemble that with precision, not assumption?
Discovery becomes the foundation. A System Integrator must explore the project landscape holistically and early — considering goals, constraints, and needs — and map out each solution that needs to be present. From this, decisions should flow based not on who the SI knows, but on what the client truly needs.
Composability is powerful, but it must be intentional. Bringing in more vendors does not guarantee more value. Quite the opposite. Every additional ISV introduces cost, friction, and complexity. The best ecosystems are often the leanest — those where every participant plays a clear, measurable, and essential role.
This is where recommendation becomes critical. SIs must present their ecosystem proposals clearly and defensibly. They must explain why one partner was chosen over another, what trade-offs were considered, and how the selected architecture aligns with performance, cost, and future scalability. These moments are not only technical — they are strategic acts of internal sales, educating and aligning the retailer around a common vision.
To support this effort, we believe Ecosystem Architecture should be recognized as a formal role. It is distinct from solution design or project management. It bridges technical understanding with partnership strategy, client objectives, and the ability to orchestrate collaboration between all players. In many ways, this role becomes the conscience of the implementation.
Building the Bridge from Vision to Execution
Ecosystem Architecture also fills a widening gap — the space between the business side of selling platforms and partnerships, and the technical reality of implementing them successfully. Many commerce projects stumble not because individual components fail, but because no one ever stopped to ask how — or even if — all the parts should fit together.
With a structured Ecosystem Architecture approach — one that includes collaborative workshops, contextual discovery, and careful partner alignment — SIs can build clarity early, reduce friction later, and lead projects with confidence.
This approach is not about checklists and logos. It’s about fluency in the language of integration and value. It’s about having the discipline to say “no” to an unnecessary tool, or “yes” to the partner that brings differentiated readiness for this specific challenge.
The Role of the Retailer
Retailers are not passive observers in this equation — they are the ultimate decision-makers and long-term operators of the architecture. Every ISV brought into the project becomes a financial and operational commitment. It is the retailer who signs contracts, navigates licensing models, manages vendors, and ultimately lives with the consequences of these architectural decisions.
That’s why they must be empowered to interrogate partner choices. When a System Integrator proposes a specific tool or vendor, the retailer should feel confident asking: why this solution? What are the benefits? What are the alternatives? Is this the best fit for our context?
These aren’t signs of distrust. They are signs of maturity — of taking ownership over the very ecosystem that will power the business.
Platforms and ISVs as Strategic Contributors
Independent Software Vendors and platforms also carry a responsibility in this dynamic. As the composable market grows, ISVs must learn to communicate not just their technical capabilities, but their strategic differentiators. What industries do they serve best? Where do they outperform others? How easy is it to deploy and support their technology in a given architecture?
We are already seeing a trend toward vertical specialization — ISVs focusing on retail niches like fashion, grocery, luxury, or industrial B2B. This clarity makes the job of the Ecosystem Architect easier, and the outcome for the retailer more successful.
Platforms, too, must play a guiding role. It’s not enough to be MACH-compliant. Composability is powerful, but without direction it can quickly become chaos. Platforms should offer reference architectures, vetted partner ecosystems, and clear guidance on integration maturity. This doesn’t constrain creativity — it channels it into higher-quality outcomes.
Reflecting on the MACH Alliance
The MACH Alliance has done a remarkable job of evangelizing the core principles of modern commerce architecture. Its contributions to the conversation around modularity, openness, and interoperability have helped redefine the digital commerce landscape.
Still, it is healthy to reflect on the composition of its member base and how the conversation continues to evolve. While today many members are System Integrators and vendors, the continued involvement and inclusion of retailers will further enrich the dialogue. The recent decision by Mariano Gomide de Faria – VTEX , CEO of a global commerce platform, to leave the MACH Alliance sparked debate. His concerns echoed broader frustrations — not with MACH itself, but with how ecosystem complexity can sometimes overshadow retailer value.
Rather than a critique, this is a reminder: we must keep the focus on delivering outcomes. We must resist the temptation to build ecosystems for their own sake. MACH is not at fault — it’s a framework. The challenge lies in how we apply it.
A New Standard for Composable Project Planning
Could Ecosystem Architecture become a standard methodology, like TOGAF or ITIL? Perhaps. The elements are already emerging. Discovery frameworks. Integration mapping. Partner scoring matrices. Post-launch measurement. What’s needed now is consensus and structure.
The core principles are not new. What’s new is their relevance in the age of composable commerce, where the difference between a good project and a great one is rarely about code — it’s about collaboration.
If you are a System Integrator, Platform Provider, or Retail Executive, the path forward is clear. Ask the difficult questions early. Bring clarity to your decision-making. Build with the end in mind.
Don’t treat ecosystems as afterthoughts. Architect them with intention.
Because in the composable era, it’s not just about the technology stack. It’s about the ecosystem you design — and whether that design delivers real, lasting value.
—
Rafael Esberard is a seasoned Digital Transformation Executive, Consultant and Sales Leader specializing in retail and technology sectors. With a strategic, data-driven & customer-centric approach, he helps brands stay two steps ahead by analyzing emerging technology trends and translating them into high-impact sales, retail and loyalty strategies. His expertise in omnichannel integration, articial intelligence and deep market insights enable businesses to navigate complex landscapes, optimize customer engagement, and drive sustained growth. Recognized for his ability to bridge innovation with practical execution, Rafael empowers clients to anticipate market shifts and maintain a competitive edge in an ever-evolving digital economy.
#ComposableCommerce #EcosystemArchitecture #DigitalCommerce #eCommerceStrategy #SystemIntegration #MACHArchitecture #RetailTech #eCommerceLeadership #TechStackDesign #FutureOfCommerce
