Yesterday I brought up the initial conversation around the balance within the solution and the balance within the architect creating the solution. Today I want to add an even broader concept equilibrium within the solution, the architect and the organization seeking the solution.
Several years ago I spent a day trying to balance an egg. Don’t ask me why (mostly on a dare) but I did. I came to realize throughout that process that the balance was between me and the egg, not the egg and the table. When I tried to create balance outside of the egg between myself and the egg I was able to balance the egg.
It wasn’t about trying hard to balance an egg, it was about achieving balance and then applying it to the egg problem. This means sadly if the organization is out of alignment or isn’t near balance the solution cannot achieve balance without a lot more effort.
The process to move from chaos to equilibrium in fact takes more money and energy than he overall value of a balanced solution at that point. The first thing is to achieve organizational balance which of course is nearly impossible. So the real goal is to move closer to balance.
Now balance isn’t moving up some IO scale of IT maturity. Dynamic organizations in the Gartner model have as many issues with unbalanced applications as basic orgs do (in fact they may have mature processes that in the end cause unbalanced application development).
It is a non-process based minimalistic view of architecture, software and solutions. A clear path that has no brambles or structures in the way. A denoted architectural process that is simple and easily applied.