Demand for enterprise solution architects

The NZ architecture market is changing, there has been a rapid decline of organisations hiring dedicated enterprise architects. Instead I’ve seen the rise of the Principal or Enterprise Solution Architects (for ease of use I am just going to use principal architects, I see this and ESA’s as relatively interchangeable). These are in essence the merging of two roles, enterprise and solution. Traditionally these sorts of roles have existed in organisations that have a very small architecture practice, those that cannot afford to have a dedicated EA team.

I completely understand the benefit of these hybrid roles, in fact for most NZ organisations, I think they should move more towards this. I don’t believe there are that many orgs in NZ that are large enough to consume a dedicated EA practice. This is not to say enterprise architecture isn’t important, quite the opposite, I just don’t think there’s enough work for them to consume a fulltime role.

It’s all well and good for organisations to want architects that can have a foot in both delivery and strategy, but are there enough architects to deliver these sorts of roles? The short answer is no. Don’t just take my word for it, at present there are XXXX amount of these roles open in Auckland, most if not all of those companies are struggling. So the question goes to, why?

• Pipeline – during covid, the demand for architects went through the roof, architects that had been in permanent roles their whole lives were all of a sudden offered $150 - $160 per hour for contracts. Had they not made this jump, a good proportion of them would’ve continued to ply their trade and likely progress into a more strategic role. However, with many going to contracting (where you get paid for your current skillset), you start to have a gap.

• Desire – In the past, I wrongly assumed that most architects wanted to go through the normal path of solution architect -> enterprise architect, however what I’ve learnt in recent years is that this is not the case. So much so, that in a recent poll I ran XXXX amount weren’t interested in progressing, they were happy to stay in a delivery focussed SA role.

• Disjointed Progression – This is a critical one. Of most of the organisations who are currently hiring for a principal/ESA they generally want someone who can hit the ground running. By this I mean they want someone who can do the enterprise and delivery element of the role. The problem is, if you are already a principal architect, why would you move to another principal role? Most architects like to move because they want to progress their career. This feels more like shuffling the deckchairs on the titanic.

• Money – Because it’s a relatively new role to many orgs, they don’t necessarily know what the pay range should be. I’ve seen the pay range anywhere from 160K – 240K for a principal/ESA. Interestingly though, even the companies who are able to pay in the 220K - 240K are still struggling. I don’t necessarily think throwing more money at it, will necessarily solve the problem, but it certainly helps.

So what can organisations do, if you are looking to build a practice and need principal architects?

• Overseas Options - I’ve helped a few organisations hire architects from overseas. They are generally orgs that are in odd locations, or in one instance only had $135K to pay for architects. This method more of a slow burn, but you can get some seriously good operators for an affordable price. This will depend on whether you are an accredited supplier or not. You’d be looking at a turnaround of 3 months for this process, but you’ll get your ESAs.

• Juniors & Augmented Enterprise Architects - You could look to invest in smart up and coming solution architects who will be able to do the delivery, and pair them with senior architects who can come in and deliver the strategic work you need done. There are many contracts EA’s out there who are happy to do short-term even part-time contracts, get in, deliver, get out. I am using this method with a couple of clients at the moment.

• Contractors - Not the preferred option, I think it’s in general quite hard to do much enterprise thinking with a straight contracting team. Orgs do it, but it’s incredibly expensive and it’s not building the internal capability that you want in the long run. If you needed to move quickly, this is a good option but not idea.

• Location Flex - I don’t like this option because I don’t think it’s great to have architects scattered around the country, especially when you are just rebuilding. But I have seen it done successfully; you can find capable people, but just have to accept you won’t see them in person all that often.

• Increase Salary - This is fairly obvious but isn’t an option for everyone. The more you increase your salary the higher chance you are of finding people. Although money isn’t necessarily that drives everyone, it certainly can help.