Was sind die besten Wege, um ein vielfältiges Architekturteam zu führen?

Desde mi experiencia, el respeto implica necesariamente el conocimiento. Existen grupos que por el solo ejercicio del trabajo cotidiano, se decantan y exhiben los potenciales de un grupo de trabajo, persona por persona. Entendiendo que un colaborador es un ente en formación y con expectativas de ser lo que son, pero tambien con capacidades en muchas materias, nutridos de su experiencia no solo profesional, sino personal. Un lider conoce a su grupo, lo impulsa y reconoce las fortalezas o destrezas necesarias para liberar sus posibilidades en situaciones determinadas, que lo mismo facilitan procesos que redundan en facilitar las tareas asignadas. En suma, el liderazgo que lee el momento y establece estrategias claras para cumplir metas.

As an data architecture manager, we discuss and debate over multiple options that are available at data centralization vs decentralization, Data elt/etl patterns, Data/Delta lake design patterns. The conversations should be encouraged and every option presented should get fair chance to evaluate how it fits to current demands of the users or business problem statement. Choosing one option among others might be purely about the unique challenge that problem demands. The other options brought to the table might fit for the other scenarios, so every option must be respected and viewed as learning for next implementation.

One of the most important aspect of architecture group is to communicate road map about when and how data teams to adhere and implement new changes and techniques that data platforms bringing to light every release. The ideas/options must be present in a very articulative manner so the data engineers, analysts and the end users able to follow the path. Any changes we are bringing to development or deployment cycle, we should follow 1) Proposal of Change 2) Why change is necessary 3) Groups Impacted with change 4) How change will be implemented 5) Validate change providing expected results. The communication will drive teams together and helps to navigate most complex challenges we encounter in the data world.

As a manager for data architecture, I believe that collaborating inclusively is essential for delivering high-quality data solutions that meet the needs of our diverse stakeholders. Collaborating inclusively means respecting and valuing the perspectives, experiences, and contributions of everyone on the team, regardless of their background, identity, or role. It also means fostering a culture of openness, trust, and feedback, where everyone can share their ideas, opinions, and concerns without fear of judgment or exclusion. By collaborating inclusively, we can leverage the collective intelligence, creativity, and innovation of our team, and create data solutions that are more robust, reliable, and relevant for our customers and partners.

Many of the challenges we encounter in data world are related to collaboration issues between the folks in a team or between teams. As a leader in data architecture I strongly advocate to have a collaborative working environment that enables to interchange requirements, problems and ideas to solve the issues. Team collaborations will also help to improve data availability and reduce redundancies in enterprise data policies. Collaboration will also help the teams to bring up changes and people can freely bring their valuable ideas to table.

Acostumbrados a evitar el conflicto, para los grupos de diseño y/o obra es complicado evidenciar los planteamientos divergentes y asumir que el proceso de diseño/obra no es lineal. No obstante, su aborde respetuoso, la busqueda de consensos, la voluntad de plantear alternativas se convierte en una tarea necesaria para lograr objetivos. Entendiendo que muchas veces no existe una solución, ni es el unico objetivo posible. El conflicto evidencia posturas e interes contradictorios y muchas de las veces, no tienen una solución posible, sino muchas alternativas que logren destrabar conflictos y evaluen la capacidad de explorar posibilidades.

Good architectural designs ideally emerge using "abductive reasoning," where the selected design is the best fit among a set of plausible alternatives. Ideally, a firm should have systems in place for producing as many alternatives as possible in a given time, originating from different people. Instead of one pyramid headed by one person, the firm should be a set of pyramids- each advocating its own point of view based on measurable criteria. The entire firm should subscribe to the concept of letting the "best alternative" win. Unless this kind of approach is taken, the firm risks of being caught in its own bubble of design philosophy. This has been a major motivation for TAD, the design software that I develop and use in my own practice.

Diverse teams need clear goals. A decision-making framework can help: 1 - deciders make a decision 2 - decision is circulated briefly to ask affected for comment 3 - deciders quickly address and integrate feedback 4 - if there's unaddressed feedback, deciders commit to revisit that feedback in a fair timeframe, but dissenters commit to implementing the decision now Tough decisions can be made in a few hours if everyone buys into a framework like this. Sidebar: It's very important to have deciders -- this needn't always be a manager, it can be different holders of expertise for different decisions. But "decision by committee" will hold you back: don't do it!