lex parsimoniae

Selling Architecture, Redux

Architecture is a tough sell.  It rarely is linked directly to the delivery of a feature, much less is a feature.  And without that tie-in, business leaders won’t approve the time and expense to build or improve your architecture. Of course, as software professionals, we understand why architecture is important.  You can build almost any [...]

Steve McConnell on Technical Debt

Architecture has always been a tough sell.  Except in rare cases, it’s not a feature that makes the front page of the color glossy sales brocures.  Even though a failed architecture is deadly, it always seems like a struggle to allocate time and budget to invest there instead of adding more features.

Steve McConnell manages to capture the "pay me now or pay me later" dynamics of architecture far better than I ever was able to in this article about Technical Debt.  By recasting a technical subject in terms taken from the Wall Street Journal, he captures the business risk involved here in a way that a CFO can grasp.

If you’re an architect, you’ve got to read this article.

Process isn’t for “relaxed” projects

I’ve been working through some interesting process issues with my employer’s CTO and head of Product Management. The thrust of these discussions is that we’ve revised our Product Planning and Product Development processes, and I’m currently working on documenting what we’ve agreed upon. No sooner had we come up with a plan, however, than a “highly important” project sprung up, prompting discussions about suspending parts of our process because this project was so important. I’ve managed to stop my head from spinning long enough to gather some thoughts…. (read on for more)