Rants
Questions
Soapbox
Best Practices
Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
Thu, Jun 7, 2007 23:25 EDT
|
Posted by: Michael Kavis in Rants Topic: ArchitectureBlog: Delivering the Goods
Current Rating: |
I have read several blogs over the past few months arguing over the role of the Enterprise Architect. Architect and architecture means many things to many people. Here is my opinion of what an Enterprise Architect (EA) is.
The EA is responsible for understanding the business mission, strategy, and processes and creating an IT technology strategy that enables the business to meet its goals. In other words, the EA is responsible for making IT an enabler and not a cost center.
To accomplish this, the EA must excel is the following areas:
Many self proclaimed EAs are extremely bright but lack in many of these areas. Notice that programming skills was not mentioned. If the EA is developing software, he/she is probably not fulfilling the role as described above. The EA should have a staff of talented sr. developers who can turn the vision into solutions.
It takes a rare breed to fit the bill of an EA. I have had the luxury of working with many brilliant developers and designers over the years. Many of them struggle communicating technical topics to non technical people. Others focus so much on technology that they fail to align technology with key business drivers.
I have read many blogs that slam EA's who do not code. These folks obviously have a different definition of EA then the one I described. My response to them is that there is a huge difference between being an architect and being an EA.
There are many different types of architects. I will categorize them into three groups: Solutions Architects, Infrastructure Architects, and Enterprise Architects.
Solutions architects focus on one or more of the following areas of expertise:
Bravo Mike. This is a topic I have blogged about recently myself. While some might just consider this a semantics issue regarding someone's title, the true 'Architects' will be vetted out appropriately when seeking their next job.
Jordan Haberfield
Excel Partner
www.excelpartner.com
www.agile-elephant.com
Mike:
I have been in the architecture field for many years and my current title is Chief Architect. In my role I am responsible for an Enterprise Architecture department. I do not do much coding anymore but have done just about every aspect of IT over the years - Coding, systems analysis, project management, R&D, networking, and infrastructure design.
I agree with your definition but I would add architecture is about managing change.
In terms of types of architects. I have created 3 architect roles each with a number of disciplines.
The roles are solution architect, enterprise architect and principal. Within each of these I have defined the disciplines of applications, data & infrastructure.
I thought you might enjoy hearing from someone who has worked in Enterprise architecture for a long time.
Thanks for the feedback and sharing your experiences. I mentioned change management as one of the key skills that the EA needs. As a matter of fact, if I could pick only one area that keeps many architects from ever becoming an EA, change management would be that area. The combination of change management and leadership skills is vital in the role of the EA. You can have all of the other skills I listed, but you can't accomplish anything without the ability to lead and foster change.
Can you expand on the roles and responsibilities of the solution architect?
Sounds right to me...
I'd agree that nobody deserves to call themselves an architect unless they have actually built something...
--