Monday, November 17, 2003

Who Needs an Architect?

I think this is
a great, short read. It takes a crack at defining a taxonomy of the role of "architect"
and does a passable job of explaining why the term is so nebulous to begin with. The
dig at the AOP at the end didn't hurt my opinion of the piece, either. ;)

The last company I worked at called pretty much everyone
an architect. That always seemed weird. Now I have a better idea why.


  1. Very nice. I like the idea that a software architect should be someone who is trying to eliminate most of the "architecture". Twisted!

  2. It "feels" right, though, doesn't it? Check out some of Don's SOA talks lately for his take on "just enough abstraction". I think you could say the same about architecture and come to the same conclusions as Fowler.

  3. Oh I'm not disagreeing. I think the article is right on.