Comments on: Agile Architects Reimagined? Not at the top of the pyramid, but perhaps aside. http://agilepainrelief.com/notesfromatooluser/2007/05/agile_architect.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=agile_architect Best practices for your goals Wed, 09 May 2012 22:13:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Mike Witters http://agilepainrelief.com/notesfromatooluser/2007/05/agile_architect.html/comment-page-1#comment-313 Mike Witters Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://agilepainrelief.com/2007/05/agile_architect/#comment-313 Good post. I agree to the overall idea that you are expressing, but I still see a place for the role in agile development. By title, I am an Architect - but in reality I'm a glorified programmer with more broad experience than most people on the teams I am on. I definitely don't want to exude superiority over the members of my teams or force sub-optimal designs on them just because 'I said so'. I like to include everyone's input into the high level design decisions that need to be made, such as what technology(ies) to use for integrating with legacy systems. I really like the point you are making with the pyramid and I totally agree that the Architect should be more beside it then on top of it. But, in certain circumstances, there may be differences among one or more of the team members about a particular design choice. If the team cannot come to a unanimous decision on which path to take someone has to have the final say to specify one of the design choices as the _most_ correct one. As the arbiter (or otherwise named designated final authority by whomever is paying the bill) of the team, the architect is required to make this choice and communicate it to the team. To me, a big part of this issue is simply with the semantics of the title 'Architect'. Hence my use of 'arbiter' above, and your use of 'coordinator'. What do you think? Good post. I agree to the overall idea that you are expressing, but I still see a place for the role in agile development. By title, I am an Architect – but in reality I’m a glorified programmer with more broad experience than most people on the teams I am on. I definitely don’t want to exude superiority over the members of my teams or force sub-optimal designs on them just because ‘I said so’. I like to include everyone’s input into the high level design decisions that need to be made, such as what technology(ies) to use for integrating with legacy systems.

I really like the point you are making with the pyramid and I totally agree that the Architect should be more beside it then on top of it. But, in certain circumstances, there may be differences among one or more of the team members about a particular design choice. If the team cannot come to a unanimous decision on which path to take someone has to have the final say to specify one of the design choices as the _most_ correct one. As the arbiter (or otherwise named designated final authority by whomever is paying the bill) of the team, the architect is required to make this choice and communicate it to the team.

To me, a big part of this issue is simply with the semantics of the title ‘Architect’. Hence my use of ‘arbiter’ above, and your use of ‘coordinator’.

What do you think?

]]> By: MikeWitters.com http://agilepainrelief.com/notesfromatooluser/2007/05/agile_architect.html/comment-page-1#comment-314 MikeWitters.com Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://agilepainrelief.com/2007/05/agile_architect/#comment-314 <strong>Architects in agile development</strong> I read a good blog post that basically tries to re-define the common Architect role for agile development methodologies. I do agree with his premise, but have a few extra qualifiers I would throw into his statements. The agile softwar... Architects in agile development

I read a good blog post that basically tries to re-define the common Architect role for agile development methodologies. I do agree with his premise, but have a few extra qualifiers I would throw into his statements.
The agile softwar…

]]>