Architecture Capability

Last year a smart guy name Peter Cedheim and I (with the assistance of some gamla rävar, or old foxes, such as Dennis Selin) finalized a model to evaluate the architecture capability of an organization. After a lot of work we concluded that we could vizualise an organizations maturity with regards to architecture (software or system) using six different aspects or perspectives.



We posited that maturity-wise the organization go through the following:
[undefined/ad-hoc-->initial-->project focused-->product focused].

While I still agree with myself and Peter in theory I think that some of the underlying ideas deserves to be scrutinized yet again but from a different perspective. Clearly an excercise for an "after work".

Working with "the amoeba" was very interesting (during the course of the work it came in all shapes and forms, at some point we even had two complimentary amoebas) especially since we had to think a lot about what differs a mature organization from the next. And more importantly how do we move forward? How do we improve, to what benefit and cost, and how do we prove the improvement? I'm happy to write that the model has been field-tested and proved to be a good foundation even though some rough edges still need a bit of sand-paper.


It would be interesting to hear other opinions with regards to architecture capability... do we have the wrong aspects? Have we simplified the maturity-steps to much? Is this complete nonsense?

Waterfall, Iterative, Scrum and Lean

I've seen summaries or quick-guides like this around the Internet...

I don't agree with this picture. Do you?

An interesting quote

I don't know how I ended up there yesterday, on some random guy's Twitter page... so I can't provide a link to it...

But anyhow he, the random guy, wrote this:

"SCRUM brings coordination of action, which is critical. Software architecture brings coordination of intent and insights."

Maybe not the most shocking or difficult line to come up with but hey he wrote it and I didn't... I kind of wished I did though 'cause I like it.

So if you look at it from that perspective how do you coordinate intent and insight? Maybe we should embrace that there is more to it than producing documents, excel sheets and UML-models? That there is a lot more to "architecture" than the technical aspects that we somehow like to indulge a little bit too much in?

The first thing I would start with I would steal/borrow/use from Scrum and the agile "world" where one common theme is the importance of Product Management. Step one for "Architecture" would be to reconnect (or strenghten the relationship) with Product Management in order to increase the insight in both ends.

Step 1 from a bigger perspective would probably be to look at Product Management directly so that "architecture" (and everything else) has something functional to reconnect to...

A force for simplification

Today I finished writing a one-pager on Architecture in an agile context to be used at an Ericsson conference coming up. While the corner-stones of agile development really isn't anything new, the way it has been presented and "sold" to the development community has really started what can only be described as a revolution. Ok ok it didn't exactly start just now, the Agile Manifesto was carved out almost 10 years ago and a lot of software-heavy industries has already moved a lot in that direction. However in industries with tangible products combined with embedded software the shift has merely begun.

I live under the impression that in traditional software companies the agile ideas, normally, take root in the developer community and then spread out from this epicentre of coders. In many of the embedded companies I've seen though I think a different angle could be more beneficial: start the cultural shift beginning with the "architects".


If it weren't for the traditional fredagsfika coming up, I could expand my idea a bit. Maybe next time.

Men hur, eller but how?

How do one start blogging? I don't know. This is the first time. Do I have anything interesting to say? If you ask me, yes, I am interested in my own opinions... for the rest I let you decide.

I tend to contemplate a lot - when biking, when trying to sleep, when working, when driving - about different challenges in my area of expertise... what I lack is a good way to store these ideas, both good and bad... very bad at times, or even start a discussion around them.

Where I work, Know IT Technology Management, we are a lot of people who like to do this, contemplate and discuss, and while we occasionally get long interesting e-mail chains going about different subjects I think it is a waste of interesting ideas, hot debates and energy when we don't share it with whomever who is interested (in order to build even better ideas). So if I could write one post interesting enough to get at least 1 comment from one of my very talented co-workers I will celebrate with a beer, a Belgian beer.

Why English? Well I don't know. I felt a bit international today and maybe I'm already so high on this "me me me" rush from all this blogging that I acutally think that some day one of all my English-speaking friends will find this little corner of the Internet.