June09Discussion

@dagb I really liked the discussions during the evening! Hot outside, and hot topics inside. #IASA

@kristoffer79 @ketilv @jhannes "Architect" might be a temporary name. Tech Lead or Chief Engineer might describe the role better.

IASA Conclusion from yesterday. An architect is an leader. Leadership is about communication and creating a learning organization.

Architecture is easy, thats only technology. Beeing a sw-architect is more. Analysis, communication, coaching, bringing the best in people.

@jhannes Erosion of shared responsibility results in failure in delivering the right solution. Build culture, not a single authority. IMHO

@kristoffer79 really wish you had come to the meeting yesterday. Hefty discussions till late. We do agree on most issues.

Even considering the nice weather this evenings #IASA meeting at #scotsman was well spent. http://bit.ly/16F40y

@javatotto @jhannes @baardl Architecture thinking needs to wired into project culture, but often there is need for a leader

@baardl Yes I liked last #IASA meeting 2. Had to leave for last bus til Elverum. DId you continue for long?

@jhannes I'm not saying you should ignore personnel risks, but won't that be a problem in all knowledgebased work?

@jhannes cn U complete remove personnel risk? I cn believe in reducing it, in a sw prj (working lk an ant colony?) sounds a bit utopian..

@javatotto @jhannes @baardl Self-organizing teams can organize architecture too! An "unofficial lead developer" is preferred in my world.

@baardl @jhannes @javatotto I believe "architect" is an out-of-date title, at least for actual developers.

@jhannes @baardl +1 on the bottleneck theory. "Architects" gone in meetings cause ad-hoc architecture decisions anyhow. Get rid of them!

@baardl Self-organizing team do need architecture, but probably should be wary of having "one Architect"

@baardl The problem of The Architect is not the name but the bottleneck. If some one has the authority, shared responsibility is eroded.

@baardl Fire the architect, hire a coach instead.

@javatotto Centralized architecture responsibility doesn't scale and is very susceptible to personnel risks.

@dagb The whole idea of self-org teams is to remove personnel risks. I'm living it now.

@dagb We integrate 1 new member per iteration, rotate freely between tasks, only linear slowdown when someone's missing. Pair prog FTW

@leifauke Self-organizing != anarchy. The group agrees on working principles and we're is hired to deliver features. That's "law" enough.

Great discussions at last night #IASA meeting - even agile project needs an architect :) http://bit.ly/Uypvg presentations on-line RSN :)

@jhannes @baardl self-organizing teams need "someone" to make balanced and consistent design decisions across teams and time.. which is...

@kjetilv re #autocratecture : it is a responsibility... who/how and by what name - I do not really care :) #IASA

@jhannes shared responsibility does not fulfill the responsibility of balance across team and time successfully in the real world..

@kjetilv plural is fine by me.... as long as the responsibility is carried out successfully :)

@kristoffer79 the title may be outdated.. but projects/developers does not do a better job at architecture today than 10 years ago

@jhannes who is talking about centralized architecture responsibility? lack of org.scope does not scale at all! http://bit.ly

@jhannes @javatotto And the dysfunctions of siloism, with the waste of hand-offs. Seen it in practice (too) many times.

@baardl any sizable code base needs architectURE for longevity. whoever champions it may call themselves architect, if they want.

@javatotto you assume that balance and consistency require a single source and/or authority. new word! "autocratecture"

@javatotto then I don't see the value of focusing on that special "someone" -- unless you mean "someone" could also be plural?

@jhannes sounds nice, but no disadvantage for nobody if someone fills leading roles. Anarchy has never proven to work anywhere. False beauty

@jhannes Decisions made by BAD leaders create bottlenecks :) and decisions made by BADLY oganized groups create bottlenecks

@jhannes @dagb @javatotto We assume there is a defined target. Leading is setting path to target. If this is done by a cooperate lead, fine!

@jhannes @dagb @javatotto Overall leadership is making sure individuals or groups perform decisions leading to target and responsibillity for results