Carl Walden,
Database architect is not lead of DBAs by default: you can be good in product but be bad leader
Database architect is person who know product very good (see link to Microsoft Certified Architect Program and find what Architect need to know )
http://www.microsoft.com/learning/mcp/architect/default.mspx)
There is nothing in my post about lack technical skills required for leader
I said:
To be leader you do not need to be database architect - it is about leadership skills first then knowledge of your product\business\industry\etc.
All the description of database architect in the article: can be found in regular job description for senior DBA position \ DBAs lead :
Define the administration scope in terms of targets and risks / costs Build up an optimized processes model which can maximize the ROI for the current resources Pioneer in evaluating / choosing the right mix of technology Explore / create innovative methodology to adapt to business environment. Act as a facilitator / advisor for the stakeholders to best use the data system / asset. -------
In real life - it is all about your company business culture (mostly $$$).
Yes, you can tell your boss - lets try something new...
Sure, but in middle of your conversation you will get call from end-user about all system is slow -that bring you back to the Earth...
---
Eugene
I'm confused. Database Administration Architect? What about the same person on the database developement side? DBDA? Business Intelligence? BIA?
Not trying to be a smart-alec, but i would think Database Architect - designs solutions. Database team leader/supervisor/manager - leads the database professsionals.
Great ideas in the article, though.
Sorry old chap I might have misunderstood your intentions and hope am forgiven? You are deadly right this is what I like about our profession we agree when we have to and disagree when we have to disagree, thanks for your understanding. All the best.
I found this article useful, who worked as a SQL Developer and DBA can met the DBAA position. I'm similar type of DBAA Person.
Thanks for the posting good article.
Krishna Mohan
This just seems like HR talk and dropping coined terms in an attempt to give something life that doesn't or needn't exist. Everything described should be intrinsic to the DB development team. The CIO or CISO would meet with them, define business need and process and they would develop it, maybe even with a project manager's oversight.
Seems to me this is the emperor’s clothes and is an unnecessary position. DBAs should have an understanding of business flow and data management needs and offer solutions that will provide the best ROI for the business; that is why businesses hire them. Adding another "A" to a title doesn't change this, but it is a nice way to try to get more money out of clients.
Sorry although it is a good article you the description is too grey and too broad to be effective. A DBAA should be more of the same person as a System Architect just for the database side. In fact these people exist and have many titles sometimes broken into smaller units.
Tim,
What you need to remember here is that regardless of how you look at it every organisation has different ways for doing business. From where I am coming from I have always being the bridged between the business and the technical team, the business need someone who knows and understand the business with really good communication skills to relate the business needs into technical realities, also to enable the development team to produce good coding to reduce maintenance cost in the long run. Perhaps you are coming from a company that is the way your CIO/CISO likes to do their stuff there is no right or wrong approach here as long as the business as well as the organisation as a whole meet its objectives then is cool. If the business keeping on losing money then the shareholders as well as the board will have someone’s head on their plates, the first will be either the CISO or the CIO, and then comes the CEO. Title changes comes about as our day-to-day business and the technological needs changes all we have to do is embraces it and make a room for it within our establishment and see how it will shape the business as well as the organisation in question as a whole. Whichever you look at it, someone somewhere will surely incorporate such title I bet you 1-month tops. Our modern day of business has changed everything is now depending on DATA which the business relies on for decision and operation purposes and the database also being the backbone of the company that gives the DBA/DBAA more opportunities to be creative such as the value of the data, distributing and storing. I personal consider database management not as a normal job rather I look at it as an ART work which enables me to demonstrate my imagination and creativity to support the business as a whole. This is my position and how I honestly welcomes Jeffrey article, to some of you it might sound unnecessary and waste of money as said, but most HR will buy it and incorporate it within their environments either we like it or not is going to come on board. All the best.
I quite agreed with your point here as long as one is happy that is the main very important point to consider. Why should I move up if am happy with what am doing? Someone who might consider such moves might be someone who lacks some DBA skills and out of hours support or calls is too much for them therefore they might consider going up. There is nothing wrong with that is their choice but I will always like to be a DBA regardless of going up because is in my blood and my make-up’s.
