1. Identify the coordination problem
Who needs to write, verify or own the records? Ask what happens if one organization controls the system. If a trusted operator can meet everyone’s needs, a conventional database is a sensible starting point.
2. Define what must be independently verifiable
Public networks such as Ethereum let users inspect onchain activity. That can support independently verifiable transactions, but transparency also creates privacy considerations. Decide what should be public and what should remain offchain.
3. Choose participation and governance deliberately
Open participation and permissioned collaboration solve different problems. Hyperledger Fabric, for example, uses participant identities and access policies. A blockchain does not remove the need to agree who can act, change rules or resolve disputes.
4. Count the operational trade-offs
Consider transaction fees, confirmation times, key management, recovery and maintenance. On Ethereum, computation requires network fees. Evaluate the specific network and architecture against your product’s needs instead of assuming every blockchain behaves alike.
5. Test the simplest viable approach
Compare a conventional database, a permissioned ledger and a public blockchain using the same requirements. Prototype the most important interaction and measure whether the added complexity produces a meaningful benefit.
Can you name a concrete requirement that your simpler architecture cannot meet? If yes, investigate blockchain. If not, validate the product before adding a distributed ledger.