You don't have to give up coding
I've already written that architects should get involved with the code and there's a flip side to this where I'm constantly asked whether architects *can* continue to code if they are to climb the corporate career ladder. This is a shame, particularly if these people really enjoy the technical side of what they do.
My take on this is yes, absolutely, you can continue to code. For me, it's quite frustrating to hear interview candidates say, "well, I understand that I'll have to give up coding to become an architect or to progress further up the career path". There are lots of organisations where this is the expectation and it's reassuring that I'm not the only person to have been told that coding doesn't have a place in the senior ranks of an organisation. Something that really struck a chord was a quote from somebody at the closing QCon London panel recently.
We’re losing all of the senior technology mentors into management positions.
As a software architect, you take on a great deal of responsibility for satisfying the non-functionals, performing quality assurance, making sure the software is fit for purpose, etc. This *is* a senior role and coding is one of the very best ways to make sure the project is successful. I have some thoughts on the whole career progression thing that I'll save for another day, but I want to reiterate what I say to everybody that comes through our doors for an interview. No, you don't have to give up coding.
Re: You don't have to give up coding
Coding isn't the be-all and end-all of a successful developer's skills. Many skills that are employed during development will also be exercised when engaged in other tasks (eg, analysing, designing, breathing etc.).
I don't mean to imply that architects shouldn't code. Far from it - they should as it's a very effective way of defining and maintaining an architecture (and fun too). I just wish people wouldn't get so hung up on thinking that coding is the only way to get satisfaction from a project. Someone who worries whether they'll have to "give up coding" probably hasn't enjoyed anything other than development and so is probably not ready to be considering anything else yet.
At the very least I would expect the amount and nature of development to change otherwise they're just evolving into a very expensive development resource!
Re: You don't have to give up coding
I think it is all about "can't" vs "shouldn't". People think that architects shouldn't code. The reality is that they usually can't because of time pressure and because they can't be experts in every technology. Certainly in the large IT company I work for, no one has ever said I shouldn't code, but the reality is that I really don't have time...
That said, I am grappling right now with how I keep my technical skills without coding, but I think the answer is the difference between understanding a technology (i.e. knowing what it can and can't do, knowing when to use it) and being able to actually use it. Sometimes knowing how to do it is actually a problem- when you are a hammer specialist, everything looks like a nail...
I think as an architect it is ok to just talk the talk, as long as you are humble enough to defer to people who really understand stuff when you need the detail.
Tom
Re: You don't have to give up coding
Re: You don't have to give up coding
Re: You don't have to give up coding
I agree. I am comparatively new to the role and finding it hard. I feel like I am expected to be all things to all people... The developers want an arch-developer, the project managers want a techy project manager, the client wants a strategist...
Specifically on your point about coding, I'm not sure that coding is the only way to keep the respect of the developers (although I take your point). I think that they only really loose respect when you loose touch and start suggesting things that will never work...
Tom
Re: You don't have to give up coding











