I am skeptical about the value of architects in modern development, especially when they operate in an ivory tower. The role often results in a pile of Confluence pages and diagrams that no one reads, adds unnecessary bureaucracy, and ultimately slows us down. Many are outdated and worse than scrum masters.To be valuable, an architect must be able to contribute directly to the codebase. If they can't code, their relevance in a fast-paced delivery environment is questionable.
The architect role has become parasitic, consuming resources and time without delivering tangible value to the development process
5 replies (most recent on top)
I am offended! Architects are over rated and paid too much money. We don’t need them. Don’t know what a scrum master is either but sound like they could have a role in New Zealand 7.
There is no hierarchy of roles within the firm. Architects and scrum masters are simply roles but all these posts act like the people and the role are equivalent. If you don’t see how architects provide value possibly you are just blind to other types of value/work that people provide. Stop fishing.
I hate to say it, but AI is a better architect than the human architects.
Facts.
Here we go with the bashing of roles - the usual punching bags - architects and scrum masters. I'd love these know it alls to state what their roles are. How insecure are you clowns - just do your job to the best of your ability - stop worrying about everyone else - this isn't junior high school
I've heard about these "architects" before, but never worked under one.
At the same time, someone still DOES this role, either an individual, or through collaboration.
So in short, I'd agree that the "hands off" role of architects isn't going anywhere, and will be more replaced with someone with another role who's part of a team rather than some guy handing out paperwork.