undefined | Better HN

0 pointsAdiqq3y ago0 comments

How deeply do you go in details with that kind of scope? Do you regularly discuss architecture decision with all these developers, so they're all aware of impact? Do they actually understand impact? How do you actually verify that created solutions comply to architecture? Do you support yourself with solution architects?

Personally I noticed, that there's always something to analyze more in-depth, something to document better, yet another thing to teach others, however other engineers that I work with don't really care about creating coherent view of solutions they create and they don't care about providing clear description/instructions/guidelines for their solutions.

So do you depend on developers to prepare complete solutions and only verify, if they do everything that you would expect or do you actually have to guide them through details and support them in design, so you can together create something that works according to architecture?

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

oaiey3y ago

That is the art. Finding the right degree of detail, communicate and verify it correctly. Adapt to changes and refinements of the engineers.

We expect engineers to refine and review the architecture. They are engineers. However, they are busy delivering something while the architects talks with business and define the solution for the next iteration. Solution design takes time, soft skills and expertise. You cannot do that and deliver something.

One of our best solution architects is not capable of programming. He holds a degree on physics. But he is good with finding solutions, managing information and also excellent in communication.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse