Recall a situation from your previous experience when you saw that an architectural solution proposed by a team lead or architect was suboptimal. What did you do in such a situation? Did you defend your point of view in any way?

In one of the teams I worked with, the team lead proposed an architectural solution that involved excessive use of global states and singletons to manage configuration. I saw that this could lead to problems with testability and scalability.

I prepared a small prototype of an alternative approach using dependency injection and clearly outlined the benefits: improved modularity, simplified testing, and reduced coupling of components. In the next meeting, I presented my arguments and showed a code example.

Ultimately, the team discussed both options and chose a more flexible solution. It is important in such situations not just to criticize but to offer concrete alternatives and justify them, while respecting colleagues' opinions.