I’ve just read the blog entry [1] Enterprise Architecture: From Incite comes Insight… which asks whether we really need Architects any more.

It seems to work on the basis that delegation of authority is the right thing to do, therefore as architects are all about keeping authority at a higher level then they are bad (although this could well be a bit of a thought experiment so I won’t pass judgement on this suggestion).

For me though it highlights something which is not quite an urban myth, but something similar.

Decisions should be delegated as far down as possible.

I have several problems with this.

1. People at the bottom (and I include myself in this) often don’t have all the facts so it can be difficult to make the right decision.
2. Generally the biggest problem I find in large organisations is making decisions at all, in which case allowing 500 people to be potential decision makers makes it harder to pin someone down to make a decision than if there is just one potential decision maker.
3. Great organisations usually have a very clear purpose and objective. This is set from the top, nowhere else. Clear direction makes successful organisations and you need good leaders who make decisions
4. People at the tops of organisations are (generally) paid a lot of money to lead them. Why let them off the hook and allow them to blame everyone else for not making the wrong decisions?

I’m all for delegation, but let’s get the balance right.