First, apologies to those who may take offense to the term “Kamikaze” as it unfortunately reference a rather unpleasant time in our history…
Now that we have cleared the air of any ill-intention, what, you may ask, do I bizarrely mean by “Kamikaze Architecture”? Simply, Kamikaze (or Suicidal) Architecture is what I would like to coin as a new term that embodies the antithesis of everything just and right about Architecture at its best; anything and everything that guarantees the devastating outcome of a failed architecture and design.
Furthermore, a motivating factor behind this article is that I find we rarely talk about what we should NOT be doing in the context of Architecture enough; sometimes knowing what’s right is not enough to avoid doing what’s wrong, until you have truly experienced everything that could possibly go wrong.
Before reading my list of key “defficiencies” to look out for in Kamikaze Architecture, take a few moments to read this interesting article on how the author of “Pragmatic EA Framework” set out to define Enterprise Architecture in 160 characters or less. This will help set some background as to what EA means in the context of what to do to achieve everything positive that good architecture embodies. A quote of interest from the article:
“The purpose of Enterprise Architecture is to enable an enterprise to realise its Vision through the execution of it’s Mission, whilst enabling it to respond to change and increasing its effectiveness, profitability, customer satisfaction, competitive edge, growth, stability, value, durability, efficiency and quality while reducing costs and risks by Strategic Planning, Architecture and Governance supported by a Decision Support framework in the context of aligning all parts of the enterprise using Models, Guidance, Processes and Tools.”
Now, for a list of some of the many defficiencies to avoid in the pursuit of attaining good architecture:
Architects Everywhere
“Experts” who end up driving and planning architecture and pushing for their own strategy, effectively creating a silo-like landscape of “architects” who have managed to hijack an organization’s Enterprise Architecture and lead the organization towards a highly fragmented landscape.
Business Process Experts (or lack thereof)
Lacking key resources dedicated within your organization (both in IT and the business) to facilitate and help drive the overall integrated design of business processes.
Data Architecture “Stew”
Data architecture gone wrong in a “data stew” spiraling out of control (i.e. duplication everywhere, no lead systems, lack of governance, no data standards etc.).
Large Number of Silo Systems
Too many systems serving too many purposes and suffering the lack of integration, leading to mixed data standards, fractured business processes and isolated teams of “experts” and system owners.
Layers and Layers of Technology
Haphazardly adding layers and layers of technologies supporting a multitude of needs, rather than analyzing the core business problems and resolving them with practical and manageable solutions.
Multiple Architecture Frameworks/Methodologies (or lack of)
For example, TOGAF, Zachman and SAP EAF being used by a variety of sub-groups/projects in an organization with no alignment or integration between them; notably worse when there exists no official and documented use of an architecture framework/methodology demonstrating practiced processes, outputs of artifacts etc.
Multiple ESBs
How many Enterprise Service Bus’ do you need? How about one for starters? That’s the whole reason you have an ESB; single and homogeneous point of integration for all systems/services.
Relying on “Experts”
Relying heavily on external “experts” and/or “opinion tanks” (opposite of the more preferred “think tanks”) who lack awareness of the complex internal processes within your organization; architecture competency has to be nurtured from inside-out, not outside-in.
Acknowledging the fact that this only represents a fraction of architecture deficiencies to look out for, the general idea of what Kamikaze Architecture means and consists of should be understood (I hope). Commendations and respect go out to those who strive to achieve, or at the very least attempt to attain, good architecture. And for those who have not only been thrown into the tsunami-like effects of Kamikaze Architecture, and furthermore nurture its devastating effects to produce chaos to their benefit, you have our blessings (or rather, NOT).