Feeds

What we really think of IT architects

Slippery enough to crawl under a snake's belly wearing a top hat?

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Build a business case: developing custom apps

Workshop The feedback from last week’s article, What the heck is an IT Architect anyway?, has been a genuine pleasure to sift through (even the remark that suggested I should work in IT for a dozen years or so - thanks, Jake, I’ll keep that in mind).

Zooming in on the software guys (but thanks, network guys, for your feedback), the general perception seems to be that there are good architects and there are bad architects. Bear with me here – so far so obvious, but there are some distinguishing characteristics. Good architects are indeed typified as ‘chief builders’ – those who have risen to the top of the stack through graft, and who now know how to apply their knowledge.

One of the things that goes to make up a good architect, IMHO, is experience. It's all about taking what you've done before and applying it to new and different situations.

At heart I'm just a techy coder that has been doing it for 20+ years and I need a proper title to make me feel important. So I guess the 'chief builder' moniker fits. To continue the metaphor I've been there, done that and taken the pain.

Nowt wrong with a good title if its deserved… But meanwhile, we have the less-good architects. The criticisms were legion, but generally, the harshest words were saved for those who lacked hands-on experience. Architecture is filled with people not good enough to actually design an application.


Most of the "Architects" that I've come across have been charlatans, hiding their total lack of technical knowledge behind a smokescreen of bullshit and Powerpoint slides.

I do work with architects who are 'not technical' and I wonder how they survive. Chief builders who have never laid a brick...

An IT Architect is someone who designs a system but doesn't understand how it works or what functionality...

At worst, they're the twits that can't do a real job and are paid to read whitepapers because it's too hard to fire them.

Get it off your chests, folks! Speaking of titles – there seems to be plenty of evidence that these are not always as deserved as need be. Could it be that the title of ‘architect’ is sometimes awarded for organisational and status reasons rather than on technical merit? These respondents certainly thought so:

It's just a term used by some ponces to try and get themselves bigger pay packets.

Usually names like ‘architect’ are given to people instead of pay-rises, in the mistaken belief that they will give an individual prestige and respect. The problems only arise when the recipients of these bogus titles start to take themselves and their honorifics, seriously.

It's all about people with low self esteem trying to give themselves a perceived (by them anyway) boost in status, an air of professionalism.

Ouch. While such remarks are not the majority, these comments nonetheless give an indication of how bad things can get. What can be done to prevent such scenarios? The key is to integrate architecture with development, and keep in touch with reality, think our illustrious Reg readers.

The whole ivory tower architecture thing just leaves us cold. If you develop and you're any good you architect anyway.

If their vision, architecture, or advice doesn't work or flow end-to-end, its up to them to stay in the game and help resolve it. Walking away saying "it’s an implementation detail" is really weak.

The minute you ignore what the techies actually have to achieve to pull your designs together is the moment when you turn into a useless PowerPoint jockey with your head in the clouds.

Truly exceptional architects are too valuable to waste them watching technology PowerPoints and reading the web, as they are needed to actually make things that work today and tomorrow.

The key concept, it would appear, is one of closeness between architecture and development. The wider the gap, the harder things get – plans become less relevant, communications become more strained and so on.

As a final point however, let’s note that few were actually disputing the importance of architecture. This could well be one of those occasions however where the role defines the person – for good or for ill. Might a perfectly good senior developer, when ‘promoted’ to architect, feel they should distance themselves from the day to day of it all, to get that strategic view? It certainly seems possible.

Thanks for all your great feedback. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Why has the web gone to hell? Market chaos and HUMAN NATURE
Tim Berners-Lee isn't happy, but we should be
Microsoft boots 1,500 dodgy apps from the Windows Store
DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! Naughty, misleading developers!
'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
And now a message from our sponsors: 'STFU or else'
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Linux turns 23 and Linus Torvalds celebrates as only he can
No, not with swearing, but by controlling the release cycle
Scratched PC-dispatch patch patched, hatched in batch rematch
Windows security update fixed after triggering blue screens (and screams) of death
This is how I set about making a fortune with my own startup
Would you leave your well-paid job to chase your dream?
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.