Why Short-Sighted C-Suite Remuneration Can Spell Trouble for Architecture Practices

Over the years I have spoken to many architecture leaders who get increasingly frustrated at the short-sightedness of their c-suite. One particular example whilst I was overseas, was a CIO pushing forward with a multi-million pound programme that had no customers. The customers that they had identified. whom they were building the product for, had told them they didn't need it, but the CIO pushed on with it anyway. Why?

The reason in that case was that the CIO was remunerated based on the success of the product being delivered, not whether it would have any tangible business benefits.

I believe that when c-suite remuneration is based on short-term performance, such as 6-12 month bonuses, it can be detrimental to architects and the architecture practice within an organisation. It does not align with the long-term, strategic thinking that is inherent to architecture. When the focus is on quick wins and immediate results, it can be difficult for architects to make the case for investments in architecture that may not have immediate payoffs.

Additionally, when C-suite executives are rewarded based on short-term results, they may prioritise initiatives that will have a quick impact and look good to shareholders. This can lead to a lack of support and investment in the architecture function, making it difficult for architects to drive change and position the company for the future.

When people are only focused on short-term, they are not able to think in a holistic way and as a result, the architecture practice is built in a way that can't be sustainable for a long period of time. This can lead to a lack of understanding and appreciation for the value that architecture can bring to an organisation, and can ultimately set the architecture practice up for failure.

It can be incredibly hard (as most of you will know) to put tangible values onto the benefit of architecture. More often now, companies have tighter budgets and timescales in which to get programmes delivered. Considering all of the above, it’s no wonder that architecture leaders and practitioners are often fighting an uphill battle.

So what can be done about it? There doesn't appear to be an easy fix. In today’s market you are competing against many other companies to get the best talent, when those companies are willing to pay for short term C-suite incentives, they are more often than not, going to get the person.

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts, or possible solutions.