Enterprise Architect, or Something Else Entirely?

The self-proclaimed "Worldwide Leader in Thought" keeps trying to goad me into some sort of pissing contest to assuage his never-ending need to call attention to himself even though he doesn't have anything particularly interesting to say. I enjoyed his sanctimonious accusations that I'm a project manager (true); a process weenie (only when necessary, and true to a certain degree) and not an enterprise architect (false). I found the final accusation particularly intriguing coming from a guy who conned a publishing house a few years back into printing his "practical guide" to enterprise architecture that never, in any of its pages whatsoever, defines what EA is. Which means that he doesn't know what enterprise architecture is, and probably never did except that it probably 'sounded good' in a book title.

OK, the real reason I'm posting this today is to warn the community that others with similar pathologies lurk in their organizations, and what to do about it when those issues raise their respective ugly heads. Here are the routine behaviors of the Thought Leader, and unfortunately, there are more like him in the organizations for whom we toil:

• Routinely bashes consultants, offshoring/outsourcing, project management, business analysts, non-IT staff, etc. - usually with tired and repeated cliches' instead of any real or new insights.
• Believes that all it takes is technology and some vague, unexplained form of 'leadership' to solve business problems. Of course, the 'leadership' really means 'we'll make it up as we go along, depending primarily on how I'm feeling today.'
• Trashes cliches' and bromides like "best practices" while promoting and rationalizing others when convenient, like "people over process."
• Tries vainly to differentiate between providing enterprise architecture services and practicing enterprise architecture with the implication that the former is worth less than the latter. How one is compensated, in what specific kind of organizational relationship, means very little if a sound enterprise architecture is the work product generated. Then again, since he couldn't define EA in his book, he wouldn't know one if he saw it, or even had it pointed out to him.
• Believes that the only means to call people to action is to insult and belittle them. Oh yeah, it will call them to action, but not the kind he's expecting.

So...here's why all of the above happens: while people like him enjoy the trappings and respect of mid-management IT positions like EA, they refuse to be held accountable for any real results. And why should they be when they can always blame project managers, offshoring/outsourcing firms, and consultants for everything that ails their organizations? Most of the rest of us deal with these folks and entities as peers/partners to get work done and systems completed and in production, despite problems and challenges. Taking an always-adversarial approach is a disingenuous method to refute accountability for work product or projects. It may work for awhile, but then as people catch on to the game, it usually becomes a very critical issue for the organization and teams involved. Because there's usually something missing, and that's the work of the person avoiding the accountability.

If you have people like this in your organization, you have two choices to get rid of this type of cancer: rehabilitate them, or let them move on. The risks and costs to your organization are too great to ignore problems like this for long. Prof. Bob Sutton's recent book The No Asshole Rule has great material referencing how much assholes cost their organizations in time and money and is well worth reading and following, if necessary.

Enterprise Architect, or Enterprise Asshole? You decide.

Update: checked my blogstats and it appears that the Worldwide Leader attracted comments from my old friend, the Enterprisey Asshole. Ahhhh Smalltalk, its so 1980s.....

Comments

[Sandy Kemsley]

Well, you can do what I did months ago -- remove him from your feed reader. Lots of other great stuff out there to read, without the bullshit.

[James Robertson]

Well, here's the thing: I can express myself without cursing, which you can't seem to manage. That implies that either

-- your vocabulary is so limited that recourse to cursing is necessary for you
-- you really haven't advanced much past 7th grade

I'm not that curious which it is in your particular case, but others might wonder. In the meantime, you might wonder why I classify you in the same bin with people like McGovern - it has something to do with your amazing ability to dismiss things you don't really understand.

[Bob McIlree]

Well, since Sutton's HBS article and book utilize the word "asshole," it can be argued that while the term could be formerly characterized as cursing, it is now a part of the vernacular. The point being: that fact that you ARE one, and not my usage of language, is the issue.