EAs: are you providing value for money?
From the archive: written before or outside the Architect Tomorrow newsletter, so it may be out of date.
Whilst this is an article aimed mainly at an EA (Enterprise Architecture) audience I am sure many of the principles apply elsewhere for those working in technical strategy roles. Also note this not specific to my current or any previous place I’ve worked - it’s a generalisation of what I have seen (and heard about) across different verticals.
Enterprise Architects have a challenging role; EAs need to think expansively about:
- Current business and technology challenges
- Future directions of the business and the overall vertical market(s)
- Disruptive forces (both in terms of technology trends and new business models)
Whilst engaging with a variety of different types and shapes of business and technical stakeholders (often including vendors). In order to do this successfully they need to be connected to (and influence) the day to day technology transformation and project delivery agenda too - or they risk becoming classic “Ivory Tower” Architects.
Here are some questions to ask yourself (which I often ask myself to keep myself honest) in order to assess whether you are providing full value to your organisation:
What [re-usable] assets am I creating?
I’m not just suggesting the creation of documents and output purely to try and justify the existence of EA here. But it is important that it is clear to stakeholders what EAs deliver to the organisation (beyond consultancy and guiding services to projects and programmes).
How much of my time is being spent on strategy vs change activity?
If you have to do timesheets this one is relatively easy to assess. And of course this will depend on where you have been asked to play across the spectrum of strategy to project / business to technology dimensions.
Would someone in another organisation with my job role be undertaking this kind of work? Are leaders in my field working in this way?
This is where it helps to use things like LinkedIn forums and contacts through BCS to benchmark yourself against peers outside the fishbowl you are in. After all Architecture is often reflective of the culture, pressures and structures in place at the organisation.
What am I learning? How I am developing myself or others?
Doesn’t always have to be technology related (I like to balance between business and keeping on top of tech trends) - could be consulting skills or behaviours. Doesn’t always have to be all about me either - I am supporting the development of others through coaching or support?
How many challenging conversations am I having?
If I am not getting push back from stakeholders then I am probably not being bold or disruptive enough. This applies equally to Vendors, project teams, business owners etc I am influencing.
Many EAs progress to the role via Solution Architecture and the danger is that they stay in the comfort zone of solution delivery. After all reactive solution delivery is much clearer place to be than the strategic thinking that is required to create roadmaps and strategy.
But crucially EAs mustn’t get caught up in the “Project Cult” as a “super senior Solution Architect” - or least not long term (I do appreciate there are times where the business needs a seasoned IT pro to guide or rescue a strategic piece of change). Most organisations are targeted to be “billable” / capex or project utilised and often this extends to the EA teams too. But my argument against this is there are plenty of people delivering change - the trick is to achieve a healthy tension between the guiding strategic thinking and governing delivery against that strategy. After all if there is clear strategy and reference architecture for projects to follow project delivery should be far smoother/quicker and programmes should build on and build out enterprise capability. But someone needs to be given the latitude (and budget!) to create that framework of guiding material.
Achieving this balance is tricky. Too much strategy disconnected from delivery creating PowerPoint slides (the “PowerPoint Architect”) from on high won’t deliver value - as the strategy won’t be realised (or it won’t be realisable as it is not grounded in reality). Getting stuck in with (non-strategic) solution delivery probably means your organisation isn’t getting full value from your skills and experiences either. Obviously this all very much depends on what your brief and main focus is. But I would say don’t be afraid to challenge your brief and be disruptive (in a constructive way). I have landed some of my biggest wins by doing this - but your mileage may vary depending on the appetite for change!
Very interested in your views on this topic and also whether this is the kind of article you find interesting.
Originally published on LinkedIn. Comments and discussion live there.