Throughout the, often stormy, journey of deciding what I think I can contribute to  prospective employers, I have frequently pondered my job title.  Heck, I have even conferred with industry greats to glean what they would consider my most appropriate job title would be considering my interests, abilities, and aspirations.  I have often been ashamed of my very broad areas of experience.  The shame stemming from a self-contrived notion that not being a profound expert in one succinct area of IT made me a loser among geekdom. 

Over time, I have learned from managers, coworkers, and through self-observation that I am really good at making end-to-end solutions work—especially in areas where “no man has gone before.”  Fringe system integration solutions seem to materialize in my mind with relative ease.  Being very knowledgeable of many different IT technologies and approaches to integrating technology, as it turns out, does fit a job title pretty nicely.  I find that I am well suited to being an Architect.  While being an expert in every facet of an IT project is not typically a requirement—being really knowledgeable in most of the areas is very useful.  As an example—you might not need to know the most efficient method for executing a CRC checksum on a binary blob, but you must know that a coder on the project needs to develop an efficient method.   A broad swathe of technological know-how, the ability to communicate well, and an innate ability to lead make the best IT  Architects., in my opinion at least.

IBM has a very nice description of what an IT Architect is:

In terms of position in the organization, the architect is the technical lead on the project and should have the authority to make technical decisions. The project manager, on the other hand, is more concerned with managing the project plan in terms of resources, schedule, and cost. Using the film industry as an analogy, the project manager is the producer (making sure things get done), whereas the architect is the director (making sure things get done correctly). As a result of their positions, the architect and project manager represent the public persona of the project and, as a team, are the main contact points as far as people outside the project are concerned. The architect, in particular, should be an advocate of the investment made in creating an architecture and the value it brings to the organization.

The architect is also involved in organizing the team around the architecture and should actively contribute to planning activities as a result, since dependencies in the architecture translate to the sequencing of tasks and therefore the skills required at particular points in time. On a related note, since the success of the architect is closely linked to the quality of the team, participation in interviewing new team members is also highly appropriate.

So, I am happy to announce this shift in my professional repertoire.  For the near-term, a life of Architecture is where I will be focussing my attention.  I hope to meet many more Architects that might be out there along the way.  SHOUT OUT!