Architecture and New Challenges/architectural assessment

The deliverable of an architectural assessment has to be readable and acceptable for the stakeholders involved. It should be clear and concise.

The outlines below are not meant as a form to be filled in by the architect and then to be delivered. They are meant as a mental aid not to forget important aspects.

Focus

During the beginning of a project one should make explicit what is given and what is sought. The outline below, based on part I of the (Dutch) book on architecture can help.

In first instance, do not give specifications, blueprints, principles etc. here but rather explain what is known about them.

the goal of the architectural assessment, for example: assessment of the quality of an existing artefact design of something new modification of somehing that exists reconstruction of the necessary rules for an existing artefact viewpoints the fragment of reality under discussion and what is known about it the artefact (bottom left in the rationality square: a thing in physical reality) Which fragment? Does it exist already? Not yet. Yes, but it has to be replaced. (Why?) Which rules belong to it at present? Yes, but is has to be extended. Which rules belong to it at present? Has the solution domain already been fixed? (e.g. web-application, smartphone-app, Microsoft, open source)? Which and why? Is the necessary knowledge of the solution domain available? Where? What is known about the environment? all other concern systems all unofficial systems whithin the organisation Which hard- and software is used by the intended users when they are not at work? the desired properties (bottom right in the rationality square: What does it have to do, and why?) How are these properties defined? A vague feeling? Vague unhappiness with existing situation? The wish to connect existing systems? By a written specification? Are we sure the real problem is identified? What are the principles of the organisation? Are they written somewhere, for example in a mission statement? Are they internalised by the members of the organisation? the specification Is there a written specification? If yes: Is it really a specification, rather than a blueprint or a pile of technical documentation? Who is able to read and understand it? How much freedom does this specification allow for the choice of a solution? Have all stakeholders accepted this specification? Is it a wicked problem?? the blueprint (top left in rationality square) is there a complete blueprint... of the hardware of the software of the necessary rules for use for maintenance? In which languages or formalisms is the blueprint written? Which tools are necessary for it?

Field of stakeholders

Who is the sponsor? his principles / mission? What has to be expressed? How does the sponsor see the employees of his own organisation? Does the sponsor understand his own possibilities and limitations? Which problem domain knowledge does the sponsor himself have? Does he have domain experts? Where? How will the quality of the artefact be assessed? Is agile development known? Applicable? What are the sponsor's ideas about contractor and architect? Who are the users? Which different groups? Do they own domain knowledge? What kind of people? How do they feel their relation to the sponsor? Principles, ethics, ... ergonomics feeling Has a contractor been chosen? Who? Monopoly? Is the contractor playing more than one role? What is his domain knowledge? State of the art? Limited to certain techniques? Growth and agile development? What is the environment? People neighbouring systems Internet, verkehr Organisations Servers, providers Nature Legislation, roles, etc. How important is experience? Who is the architect? Independent? Playing more than one role? competent? which development methods? Agile, if necessary?

Kwaliteit

Dit is gebaseerd op deel II van het boek.

utilitas is er zicht op de bestaande situatie? onzichtbare wildgroei weet de leiding wat er allemaal is? wil men het serieus weten? worden medewerkers met eigenbouw-systemen serieus genomen? inconsistentie is er organisatiebreed bewustzijn dat de informatie consistent moet zijn, ook dwars door verschillende databases? inkapeseling is de leiding ervan doordrongen dat er winst te halen valt uit de koppeling van bestaande systemen? wordt dit ondersteund, ook wat security- en privacy-vraagstukken betreft? vergeten regels is er binnen de organisatie de wil, in te zien dat bij elk systeem regels horen? EPS-oplossingen wat is de bedrijfscultuur t.a.v. EPS-oplossingen? angst voor verandering wordt hiermee rekening gehouden? of dienen de medewerkers zich maar schikken? menselijke machines als medewerkers met administratieve taken door automatisering overbodig worden, wat is hun perspectief binnen de organisatie? is er een visie op de toekomstige ontwikkeling? wat staat daarover op papier? ruimtelijke ordening verantwoordelijkheid op de juiste plek behoedzaamheid standaarden firmitas is men sich bewust van: stabiliteitsvragen? houdbaarheidsvragen? hoe lang moet iets meegaan? hoe afhankelijk is iets van de omgeving? lokale integriteitsvragen? hoe zeer is iedereen doordrongen van missie en principes? globale integriteitsvragen? venustas wordt er, voor zover van toepassing, bewust gestreefd naar schoonheid m.b.t. statisch uiterlijk? dynamisch gedrag? talen? onderliggende structuren? de menselijke maat: welke aspecten zijn van toepassing? is men zich ervan bewust? lichaam verstand gevoel cultuur

---