Frontend development is traditionally a monolithic process. Your company will set up one team to develop an application's user experience. While this approach works — and might even be optimal, depending on your circumstances — it's worth considering whether an alternative might suit your requirements better.

By breaking up the components of an application's experience and developing them separately, you can introduce new levels of efficiency and flexibility to your app team. The micro-frontends approach, much like the microservices trend in backend development, is designed to create a faster, simpler experience for your engineers while creating a product your various user groups will enjoy.

Despite its advantages, micro-frontend development isn't the right method for all cases. Does it suit you? Learn more about it to make the call for yourself.

What is micro-frontend architecture?

Micro-frontends are separate components of an app's frontend experience, each developed separately. This modular approach allows you to put separate teams on each different view or section of an app, providing discrete services or serving different audiences.

The separate app experiences developed through micro-frontends can be divided up by user profile, behavior or function. The process closely resembles the trend of using microservices for backend development — the key concept is decentralization. Parts of an app that would traditionally be handled in a large, monolithic style are now compartmentalized.

While the separate teams shouldn't lose touch with one another, as they are working toward unified goals, they are now freer to pursue development in their own ways. This enables a quicker roll-out of new features, as well as faster responses to user feedback. Certain parts of the app ecosystem can now receive updates without compromising the stability of the whole.

Users benefit, because they receive new app functionality on a faster, more responsible cadence. They also gain access to stable, reliable app infrastructure. It should be noted that these advantages are only available if your company manages the development process effectively. A failure to implement best practices can result in unintended effects like integration problems and inconsistent app performance.

Use cases: good vs. bad candidates

Breaking down the pros and cons of micro-frontends will help you make the decision whether to use this method for your development project. Before even checking those benefits and drawbacks, however, there are a few simple checks you can make to decide immediately whether your company is a good candidate for micro-frontend development.

Good candidates

Your company is likely a good fit for micro-frontend architecture if:

• Your app is large in scale, and you either do have or could have multiple teams working on it at the same time.
• You are willing to incorporate different frameworks and technologies to suit specific parts of your application.
• You need to iterate and deploy various app features quickly to target your audience effectively.
• You offer a number of products or services that are accessible through a single platform or application.
• There are pain points in your existing development approach, such as slow development cycles, difficulty adding features or troubles with maintaining a consistent user experience.

Bad candidates

Your business should likely think twice about engaging in micro-frontend development if:

• Your project is smaller in scale, and the costs of managing multiple codebases would outweigh the benefits.
• Your engineers are inexperienced in dealing with decentralized architectures, which could result in integration and performance problems.
• You have limited resources for monitoring and overseeing the increased complexity that would affect deployment, testing and monitoring.

Pros and cons of micro-frontend usage

If you're still curious about putting micro-frontend solutions to work in your application, it's time to focus on the beneficial and negative effects that affect companies when they use this methodology. Both the positives and negatives stem from the same concept: Frontend development was once one process, and now it's many, working in tandem.

Advantages

Diving an application team into multiple groups, each tackling a different aspect of the frontend, changes the math behind several of the most common development priorities and processes. Rather than overseeing one monumental piece of tech, engineers are focusing on independent parts of the job. This releases them from some of the limitations that come with scale, with results including:

• Faster development cycles: Since multiple teams can work independently on various application features in a micro-frontend model, it's faster to iterate and deploy new versions of each. The lack of major interconnections leads to quick, efficient cycles.
• Enhanced engineer productivity: Engineers can specialize in specific domains when working on micro-frontends. This means they can apply a deep knowledge of certain aspects of a project, cutting down on bottlenecks and staying productive.
• Technological flexibility: There's no need to compromise on technological tools or development frameworks when working on micro-frontends. Each team can work with its own preferred assets, allowing them to select the ideal match for their goals.
• Easier scaling capability: When teams split into a micro-frontend model and each work on a separate component of an application, they can scale those aspects up or down independently. This allows them to respond to user demand for specific features.
• Simplified maintenance: Caring for an app after it goes live is a major concern for companies today, and when components are divided into micro-frontends, the process changes radically. No longer linked so closely, features can receive patches, updates, bug fixes and other changes with reduced impact on the different pieces of the app.

Challenges

Of course, such a radical approach to application development isn't guaranteed to deliver success. The standard method of frontend development evolved as it did because it provides a simple, straightforward process. Adapting these methods to embrace micro-frontend methods means coping with a whole new style of engineering, with knock-on effects for both team management and general app upkeep. Negative consequences to watch out for include:

• Increased integration complexity: Since every one of the small components in a micro-fronted model receives its own independent development, teams have to work to integrate them into a unified user experience. Will the app perform up to expectations? Will it deliver a cohesive look and feel as users move between views? These are essential questions for developers to address.
• Coordination among teams: As with any process that involves multiple teams in place of one, micro-frontend development brings the risk of siloing and miscommunication. Any organization that adopts the methodology will have to prepare employees for the new style of work through intelligent team structuring, attentive employee skills training and the creation of a company culture to support micro-frontend usage.

If your organization is prepared to conquer the challenges inherent to micro-frontend development, it can begin shifting over. Taking a thoughtful approach to adopting the methodology will give your business the best possible chance of realizing the benefits.

How do micro-frontends work in practice?

Looking at micro-frontend development as a theory can only take you so far. You can examine its likely impact — and the real effect it's had on major companies — to learn more about its potential and prospects.

How have real companies used micro-frontends in action?

Some organizations having success by dividing up their app development include:

• Spotify: There are a wide selection of different views in the Spotify web player — playlist management, search, user preferences. By having independent teams work on each of these features and more, Spotify keeps itself agile and able to iterate quickly.
• IKEA: The IKEA e-commerce page is divided up into micro-frontends. Each of these views receives independent updates, freeing the IKEA team to respond to user preferences and market data without risking that these changes will break the overall web experience.

How should you handle change management?

Starting to use a micro-frontend model requires well-considered change management best practcies. So many of your internal processes will have to shift; this level of focus is the most straightforward way to get results. Priorities to address include:

• Training your developers: Are your people ready for the more narrow, specialized micro-frontend approach — and can they communicate effectively to make sure the resulting app feels cohesive? These are important topics for training.
• Adjusting team structures: Breaking a monolithic frontend development team intro groups handling specific aspects of the process is a delicate operation, one that should be addressed strategically.
• Creating a suitable organizational culture: Shifting your organizational culture to treat micro-frontend development as part of your identity is a useful step. Normalizing the methodology will help your people stay on track with their adjusted responsibilities.

Why work with experts on micro-frontend frameworks?

From assessing your suitability for micro-frontends to adopting the related practices, every step of the transition can have a massive effect on your application's performance. Working side-by-side with third-party experts is a direct way to increase your chances of success.

Transcenda's consulting teams have engaged with a variety of companies across industries, and have a history dealing with both the cultural change and tech evolution aspects of transformation. By engaging with our team, you can plan out your new identity as a micro-frontend developer and apply the necessary practices in a considered way, tailored to your needs.

‍Connect with Transcenda to receive an assessment of your best development prospects guided by our expert team.