Do you feel responsible?
Why do architects don’t take the responsibility for…
…the diverse crises in society, like the climate crises, the financial crises, the crises in nutrition depletions of food, war?
…the collapses of mastodon type of hierarchical institutions, like occurring in public institutions?
…the diminishing of industries, like occurred in the traditional media industry?
…the performance stagnations in businesses, like in the legacies of banking, insurance and pension funds?
…or the systemic disruptions technologies provide, like is occurring in oil industry and the automotive industry with the introduction of electric cars?
Why do architects don’t get recognition for…
…the unfolding welfare in society, like for the numerous appliances used in households?
…the emergences of collaborative social communities, like with the emergences of social media platforms?
…the raise of groundbreaking industries, like with solar energy in the energy sector
…the flourishing boosts of businesses, like with online webshops
…or the systemic foundation for wellbeing that technologies provide, like with the omnipresent availability of information and knowledge available on the internet?
Sure there are heroes like Steve Jobs of Apple, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, and Elon Musk of Tesla and SpaceX. But are they considered architects? By profession? They are called ‘architects of new industries’ in hindsight. Not architecture professionals with foresight.
Architecture Management is the discipline we use for creating solutions for systems and organizations, the very systems and organizations we put in place for the wellbeing and welfare of us all.
The root cause why architects don’t take responsibility and don’t get recognition is because there must be a big omission in Architecture Management discipline, I believe.
Do you kind of feel this omission?
Can you put your finger onto it?
And if the discipline of architecture management does not fulfill this omission, what discipline does?
We cannot point to other change disciplines companies rely on.
We cannot point to the project management discipline for narrow scoping projects and out-assuming contextual and circumstantial events, because project management relies on making projects successful by setting realistic goals in managing effort and deliverables.
We cannot point to the budget management discipline for mitigating risks on money spent, because budget management relies on making profitable investments.
We cannot point to the change management discipline for conducting humane policies, because change management relies on the social values of the organization.
We cannot point to operations or business management either, because when solid operations management or business management completely rely on systems, these practices also completely rely on the discipline of architecture management for providing those reliable systems.
We cannot point to the providers of systems nor the clients of systems for mandating and accepting for the ‘wrong’ or ‘right’ systems to be created, since both roles are inherent in the architecture management discipline.
But, can we point to ourselves?
Surely not, since when you do not understand you have a problem, you cannot take responsibility, let alone be recognized for it.
Still, boosts and busts happen in the systems we create. Old media companies busted. New media companies boosted.
Still, crises emerge, like the climate crisis, the financial crisis, the crisis on nutrition depletions in food.
Still, new technologies emerge that hope to contribute to solve these crises.
Do we have to live in between fear and hope? As if change phenomena overcome us, while we are at the root of them too?
Can we live in understanding and confidence, while guiding change phenomena into desired direction?
There is an omission in the discipline we use for solution creation for systems and organizations. An omission in the discipline of architecture management. A gap to fulfill.
What exactly is that omission?
What is that gap?
Do you have an idea?
Can you give your idea about this omission as a comment on this post?
How do you think we can expand the discipline of architecture management to include taking responsibility of change phenomena like boosts and busts, crises, cascades and ripples happening in the systems we create for the welfare and wellbeing of clients people and society?
Share your idea…
Proceed in good fortune,