Re:inventing modern-day IT architects

This post builds on The Architect Elevator (an excellent analogy of architect's role in an enterprise) by Gregor Hohpe and is relevant for all IT architects irrespective of domain.

Challenges for architects

Traditionally, an architect is supposed to make architectural or high-level design decisions. This definition has not changed much however the IT environment in which the architect operates today has changed drastically in last decade. This has been creating problems for architects to perform their role and in turn their organizations. You may be wondering the change should be creating opportunities but how is it creating problems?

First, the environment is getting complex year by year. The pace of technology evolution is too much to catch up even for technology specialists. I did highlight this challenge in my earlier post. Second, the project lifecycle is getting shorter. Businesses do not want to wait for years for something to implement in order to stay relevant in this digital era. This is reducing the need to taking big upfront architectural decisions on project or product and thereby eliminating the need for having highly experienced (lead) architect in the team. In short, architects are finding it tough to justify their roles.

The third problem faced by architects is agile IT development environment. This is because an architect, by definition, is perceived as a bottleneck. Development team cannot really be self-organizing if it needs to approach the company or group architect to make decisions. In that case your team is either in chaos or in learning mode. If you are IT service provider, you run into delivery risks and if you’re product company, you face market risk as it could delay your product launches.

New role of architect

Today an architect title is misnomer. Actually, it is nothing but an experienced technologist or principal IT engineer. Google does not consider “architecture” a separate skill. As you advance in engineering career at Google, you may find yourself leading projects and this naturally involves more design and less coding. But nobody’s sole job is to “architect software”. Typical engineering career progression is SE [Software Engineer], Senior SE, Principal SE, Distinguished SE. Similarly, ThoughtWorks has no formal architect titles. Most likely, it will be senior consultant and the role keep varying. Check out this presentation on the topic.

An architect can be so much more than just "dispenser of architecture guidance". An architect should be treated as having something missing in the team. That something is knowledge. The architect can play a big role in making sure the team comes into learning more, by making time for the team to learn about architecture, and learn how to make important decisions about architecture.

An architect should be thinking "why is there an architect role here, anyway?" and then make it their job to make sure that everyone is an architect. When the architect is no longer the bottleneck, he/she can start learning new skills beyond architecture, just like any other member on the team. That's because an architect who's no longer THE architect, is simply a team member.

Progression into architecture leader

Ok, you have been architect (rather technologist I should say) for many years. Now what? Do you change your track to managerial role or stay on same track to move up. How to turn yourself as a technology leader?

Often IT architecture roles are classified as individual contributor roles with no direct reports. This is irrespective of type of architect i.e. application or solution or any other architect. Hence, while as an architect, you must work towards couple of things :

1. To act as an unofficial leader in the team that mentors and teaches people in your team about IT architecture
2. To make themselves redundant - that their knowledge is spread enough so that they are no longer a bottleneck

As you get more and more senior, you get into ‘shared roles’ i.e. your job is to make sure the various teams don't need you to solve their own problems. When your job is done, you can start propelling your skills in new directions, because you will have lots more free time on your hands. Sounds exciting?

In essence, an architect must strive to be a leader in a specific area. There are many great books in the market on leadership, a separate topic of discussion but in simple terms, leadership consists of two key aspects – Followership and Influence. There is subtle difference between the two. While followership is natural outcome of being at a ‘senior position’ but influence is not. Both can be mutually exclusive. In simple words, a person at formal leadership position can have followers but less influence than another person not at formal leadership position.

Architects, mostly considered as specialist, do not enjoy formal leadership position so they have to leverage other aspect i.e. influence to expand to establish their leadership. Within the organization, management must treat 'architects as people leader' giving them followership to groom technical leaders. Outside the organization, Thought leadership is only path to take who want to create their own brand and followership. So, take the lead and good luck!

OPEN for your opinion and comments ...