Salesforce Architecture, Assessment & Optimization

When Salesforce becomes difficult to evolve

There is not always a single obvious problem. Common signals include:

• overlapping automation that is difficult to understand;
• accumulated technical debt;
• code or configuration that is difficult to maintain;
• duplicate, incomplete, or inconsistent data;
• permissions that have grown without a clear strategy;
• performance problems or platform limits;
• integrations that fail or are difficult to monitor;
• reports that do not reflect operations accurately;
• features users do not take advantage of;
• releases that create uncertainty;
• difficulty deciding what to improve first.

Before adding features, understanding the current platform may create more value.

Platform assessment

A technical and functional view of the current state

We review Salesforce from different perspectives to understand how it works and where it can improve. Depending on the scope, we can assess:

Architecture

• data model and object relationships;
• distribution of responsibilities;
• custom components;
• design patterns;
• technical dependencies.

Automation

• Flow and Apex;
• existing rules and automation;
• duplicate or conflicting processes;
• unnecessary complexity;
• behavior under volume.

Security and access

• profiles and permission sets;
• sharing and visibility;
• data access;
• privileges that need review.

Data

• quality and duplicates;
• consistency;
• unused fields and incomplete information;
• readiness for analytics or artificial intelligence.

Integrations

• connected systems;
• authentication mechanisms;
• error handling and traceability;
• dependencies and recovery.

Development

• Apex and Lightning Web Components;
• tests and maintainability;
• platform limits and technical debt.

Delivery and environments

• sandboxes and version control;
• promotions and metadata dependencies;
• change traceability;
• release processes.

Architecture for what comes next

We look beyond existing problems

An assessment can also help when Salesforce needs to support new processes, integrations, teams, data volumes, or artificial intelligence capabilities.

We analyze how the current architecture can affect future growth and which decisions should be made before increasing complexity. This can include:

• evolving the data model;
• automation strategy;
• integration with new systems;
• security design;
• separation of responsibilities;
• readiness for greater volume;
• environment and release strategy;
• data and knowledge readiness for Agentforce or other intelligent capabilities.

Optimization and technical debt

Not all technical debt needs to be addressed at once

After the assessment, we classify findings by risk, impact, and effort.

Risks that need attention

Problems that may affect security, operations, data integrity, or the ability to evolve.

Quick wins

Relatively small improvements that can simplify processes or remove visible friction.

Technical debt

Components that work today but create growing complexity, maintenance effort, or risk.

Evolution

Changes that can create more value for users or business processes.

The goal is to help decide what is worth addressing first and why, rather than produce an endless list of observations.

Salesforce limits

Building on a platform means understanding its limits

Salesforce sets limits to protect platform stability and scalability. A solution that works at low volume can behave differently as users, records, automation, and integrations grow.

We can review situations involving:

• governor limits;
• queries and data operations;
• automation execution;
• asynchronous processing;
• integrations and storage;
• record volumes;
• process architecture.

The goal is to design a solution that behaves correctly under real conditions.

From findings to a roadmap

An assessment should lead to actionable decisions. Depending on the agreed scope, deliverables may include:

• current-state assessment;
• technical and functional findings;
• identified risks;
• optimization opportunities;
• relevant technical debt;
• architecture recommendations;
• quick wins and suggested priorities;
• dependencies;
• a phased roadmap.

Your organization can implement the roadmap with Paradigma, its internal team, or its existing partner.

We can start with a specific problem

Not every client needs a review of the entire org. We can work within a defined scope: automation, security and permissions, data, architecture, integrations, technical debt, limits, data model, AI readiness, or delivery strategy.

Together, we define how far to review and which questions to answer.

An assessment should create clarity

Our goal is to help you answer:

• What is working well?
• Where are the risks?
• What is creating complexity?
• What should we address first?
• What should we prepare for next?