Some of you might say that there is a thin line between these two designations, while some might be able to differentiate clearly saying that comparing these two is comparing apples and oranges. But it is true that these two personalities work under same roof to achieve same goal of delivering a project, more appropriately application/system. Ok, there might be someone who performs both the roles for a project.  Then the question to be asked to the person – what is difference when you are an roaming around as an architect and when you are seen as a designer?

While exploring different aspect here, I do not guarantee of a differentiation that a person having height above 6 feet will be an architect and lesser will have to end up as designer.  If we look at the output they generate, then there is a difference, as one produces a set of architecture documents while other produces a bunch of design document. Also sometimes a designer moves to architect role after few years of expertise. But the cause of equality amongst them is the thinking they do to arrive at solution. At the end of day, both are designing system to make it successful.

By definition one would say that an architect in a software/application development project defines skeleton with a bird eye view, keeping focus on primarily non functional requirements (e.g. extensibility, performance, maintainability, etc.). He also has understanding of the functionality of application but in broader perspective than detail.

A designer also puts finer elements to the skeleton, mostly with a smaller view as compared to an architect. Though non functional aspects are kept in mind but the focus is on implementation of functionality.

In short, the scope of work is different.

If we look at the agencies who endorse an architect, we can make out some difference in the parameters they use to certify an architect. Sun certified enterprise architecture knows different types of architectures; available technologies in java stack, how to design solution using different design patterns, and much more, but may not focus on making best use of available infrastructure. Architect may not work on infrastructure sizing.

IBM certifications for architects cover certain type of solution area e.g. SOA architect who focuses on SOA solution related details in depth. This includes infrastructure considerations also.

Though the infrastructure knowledge is required by an architect can be a debatable point, but it is taken here to just tell that the boundaries that recognize one as architect are not very clear.

I know you will have a different view. Please share your views.

More Related Posts in Java