6 ms·

I think it’s important that everyone feels like they own the architecture. In practice, it means that everyone puts in ideas and the person or persons in charge

I think it’s important that everyone feels like they own the architecture. In practice, it means that everyone puts in ideas and the person or persons in charge only (gently) nix the ideas that don’t fit with their vision. But it’s important that everyone not feel stifled by a heavy-handed architectural vision that’s dictated from on high. In tech, there’s often many right answers and a leader’s job is to ensure the team lands on one of them, not necessarily the leader’s favorite one. You’ll end up with far more inconsistencies if you have high employee turnover. Team cohesion is often more important than getting all the technical details perfect.

recursivedoubts 4y ago
the noble lie vs. the sympathetically-delivered horrible truth
- curun1r 4y ago
  It’s more like a noble half truth, since the architect leaves themselves open to accepting a good idea that isn’t their own.
trhoad 4y ago
> it means that everyone puts in ideas and the person or persons in charge only (gently) nix the ideas that don’t fit with their vision This. Architects have to have a really quite rare blend of skills: superbly diplomatic yet inclusive, and ideally in it for the long-haul.
waynesonfire 4y ago
> I think it’s important that everyone feels like they own the architecture. You can keep your _feelings_ ... takes a few iterations to spot this toxic bullshit. Be explicit. Not everyone needs to get a participation star. The hired developers that were tricked into a false development process will eventually call out this bs and leave. Depending how gullible they are may take them longer. I dont need to feel like I'm being heard. I need you to hear me if you're going to ask.
- jhanschoo 4y ago
  Note that the comment you're replying to talks about nixing feedback that doesn't fit with the vision (there's still a ton of ways the cat can be skinned), not about nixing all feedback, which seems to be what you're reading.
Fire-Dragon-DoL 4y ago
In movies, you have directors. I think it's similar in development, the lead architect or vp or whatever, drives the vision of the overall architecture, architects shape those big things and drive the devs toward that direction

recursivedoubts 4y ago

the noble lie vs. the sympathetically-delivered horrible truth

curun1r 4y ago
It’s more like a noble half truth, since the architect leaves themselves open to accepting a good idea that isn’t their own.

trhoad 4y ago

> it means that everyone puts in ideas and the person or persons in charge only (gently) nix the ideas that don’t fit with their vision This. Architects have to have a really quite rare blend of skills: superbly diplomatic yet inclusive, and ideally in it for the long-haul.

waynesonfire 4y ago

> I think it’s important that everyone feels like they own the architecture. You can keep your _feelings_ ... takes a few iterations to spot this toxic bullshit. Be explicit. Not everyone needs to get a participation star. The hired developers that were tricked into a false development process will eventually call out this bs and leave. Depending how gullible they are may take them longer. I dont need to feel like I'm being heard. I need you to hear me if you're going to ask.

jhanschoo 4y ago
Note that the comment you're replying to talks about nixing feedback that doesn't fit with the vision (there's still a ton of ways the cat can be skinned), not about nixing all feedback, which seems to be what you're reading.

Fire-Dragon-DoL 4y ago

In movies, you have directors. I think it's similar in development, the lead architect or vp or whatever, drives the vision of the overall architecture, architects shape those big things and drive the devs toward that direction