And to be honest, this sort of exercise serves a purpose.  First, it helps to keep technical skills sharp.  Many architects allow their technical/design skills to atrophy – the detail-oriented and often highly technical nature of this type of design is ideal for honing or refreshing an architect’s skills.  In addition, this sort of activity can often reveal new details or aspects of an architecture that escape notice during more traditional analysis.

All of that said, over optimization can be a very real problem if allowed to proceed beyond a reasonable point.  Other than draining resources from more productive endeavors, over optimization can actually result in damage to the integrity of the architecture.  Over specialization of any component of an architecture can result in processing issues within the larger architecture.  A useful rule of thumb is to ask a very basic question: what are we getting from this optimization?  Is the benefit commensurate with the cost/effort of the optimization?  Admittedly, these are subjective questions, but that’s where the experience of the architect comes into play.  The important thing is that, regardless of the personal benefits of this type of activity, the appropriate trade-offs of this activity are being appropriately examined and balanced.

I spoke with several of the architect’s peers (at the time, this individual was unfamiliar to me) and found that this was a nearly universal opinion: the individual in question is clever, has good ideas, but lacks the ability to effectively (and succinctly) convey these ideas.

So how does an architect develop the ability to communicate admittedly complex ideas in a way that is simple, succinct and compelling?  The most obvious answer is practice and feedback – lots and lots of feedback, much of it critical.  Beyond this, there are a few things that I’ve personally found useful:

• Err on the side of explanation – If there’s a chance that anyone might be unfamiliar with some term or concept, take a break and explain it.  Many people avoid this as they feel it detracts from the overall narrative, and in some cases, this is true.  However, taking a break to explain a difficult concept can be accomplished through an adjacent call out box or even a footnote.
• A picture is worth a thousand words – Most, if not all, architects are familiar with the value of diagramming a complex situation.  What many find difficult is abandoning technical schematics in favor of pictures that are vastly simpler, focusing on a few key concepts rather than strict technical completeness.
• Steal from the best – One of the best way to jumpstart your own ability to communicate is to study those who have already reached a level of mastery.  The number of books and blogs on the topic of information design are legion, but you don’t have to take the traditional route of study.  There are numerous magazines and newspapers that offer the opportunity to learn by example (USA Today, the New York Times and Wired magazine all regulatory feature great approaches to information design).

Regardless of how you approach the act of communicating with partners and peers, it is absolutely critical that you approach this part of the job as being equally important to the actual creation of a solution.  After all, if no one understands what you’re proposing, it doesn’t matter how brilliant it is.

• Original ideas that need more development
• Ideas that have already been done
• Ideas that don’t make sense in the current economic system (and don’t create an alternative)
• Ideas that require the startup to be a bank

This isn’t intended to be discouraging – there are a ton of great opportunities waiting for someone to jump on them.  Services like Mint, Wesabe and Prosper are great examples of services that do something new or differently enough to make a real impact.  There are a few simple questions that you can use to save yourself some time and effort when developing an idea:

• Does my idea dance around regulatory issues? You don’t want to mess with regulators.  Trust me on this.  If your idea has a chance of running afoul of one regulation or another, there’s a strong chance that there are several others that you’re not aware of.  If you’ve found one, you need to work with your legal team and start looking for the others.
• Does my idea do something that the banks CAN’T do? The simple fact of the matter is, if your idea is something that a bank could do, they will.  And they’ll do it better than you in all likelihood – they’re the incumbent here and they’ve got all the data.  Look for opportunities where you can aggregate across multiple banks or combine services in a way that regulated corporations can’t.
• Does my idea reinvent a business? Banks (like any established corporation) are notoriously bad at adjusting to large changes in the way business works.  A great example is the time it took most of the major banks to begin offering web-based banking services.  If you can get out there quickly and establish your brand, you’ll likely be sitting pretty for acquisition down the road.
• Will my idea create a bridge between individual consumers/companies beyond the banking relationship? One of the most poorly understood facets of banking is the relationship between consumers, producers and banks.  If your idea can successfully link these three entities in a unique or novel way, its chances of being viable go up significantly.
• Is my idea attacking an emerging or declining area of the business? I hear a lot of people nowadays pitching the next big idea in checking – when checking is a business on the decline with a foreseeable end of life.  Avoid these – go after areas that are emerging and just beginning to build momentum (in the current market, that would be card and mortgage).  Areas in between may be ripe for new ideas, but you’ll probably have a tougher time fighting against more established players (better defined markets tend to favor incumbents).
• Do you work for a bank? This is a tough one – if you already work for a bank, there’s a strong chance your idea might already be in jeopardy.  Most banks have fairly strict policies around the ownership of intellectual property rights even when they don’t have outright non-compete clauses.  Check with your lawyer before you accidentally land yourself in an expensive lawsuit.

If you can answer these questions to your own satisfaction, you may be on to something.  Otherwise, take what you’ve learned and reinvest the intellectual capital into a new venture.