I had an interesting conversation with a recruiter the other day who claimed the job title of "Technical Architect" was nearly redundant in the City of London's investment banking sector. Instead of looking for technical architects, he claimed that city organisations are looking for experienced developers with business knowledge who can take ownership of the software development lifecycle.
As somebody that works in the capital markets sector, I was initially quite shocked by this statement. Although I don't necessarily agree with it entirely, I do think there is *some* truth to it.
I do think there's merit in retaining a job title that implies some differentiation between developer and architect because I think that they are sufficiently different to warrant this. As you can see from the role profile for software architects that I put together, an architect influences a software project in a different way to a developer. It's a very different role. In summary, I think there's a big difference between being an uber-developer and being an architect. And that neatly brings me on to the topic of our next London user group - "From Developer to Architect". The date is Thursday 6th December and there will be some books up for grabs. It's going to be a good session. Full details to follow.
For those of you that work in the financial services industry, what are your thoughts on this? Do your projects have an "architect"?
Simon is an independent consultant specializing in software architecture, and the author of Software Architecture for Developers (a developer-friendly guide to software architecture, technical leadership and the balance with agility). He’s also the creator of the C4 software architecture model and the founder of Structurizr, which is a collection of open source and commercial tooling to help software teams visualise, document and explore their software architecture.