Extending the Architect Role Ontology to the rest of the business

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A business and the individuals within it could really benefit from extending the role ontology to cover all positions.

The survey of advertised Australian roles previously discussed, revealed that the Project Management roles are just as fragmented as that of the Architect roles.

Project roles have appended terms such as indicated in the small sample below:

  • Manager,
  • Coordinator,
  • Leader,
  • Officer,
  • Analyst,
  • Architect,
  • Planner,
  • Director,
  • Engineer,
  • Agile,
  • PMI,
  • Prince 2.

The terms, used singly, in combination and inconsistently can increase confusion as to what skills are needed to satisfy the required roles. Roles can also be focused on industry (Construction, Financial Services, Aviation, etc), function (Security, Automation, Safety, FMCG, etc), product set or methodology and indicates levels of seniority.

Undoubtedly, there will be many other families of roles that are equally badly defined.

The development of a business-wide ontology would provide a level of rigour to how roles are categorised and described.

Coupled with a skills repository, a business would receive a definite benefit when required to identify resources to undertake a defined piece of work. Additionally, being able to identify the appropriate roles needed, identify the requisite skills and comprehend who, in the existing resource base, can fill these roles. Where no existing resources can fill the role requirements the business can go to market, better targeting candidates, saving potentially both time and money.

As a Human Resources tool, a well-developed role ontology would be invaluable. Ideally an industry agnostic/generic reference ontology could be developed with industry specific overlays being made available.

Not all roles will be needed within a business at all times but having an understanding of how a role is structured and the skills required to fulfill its responsibilities, will allow for greater agility and the ability to better target roles to satisfy business needs.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Extending the Architect Role Ontology to the rest of the business

  1. Peter t says:

    Missing from the project roles list is Analyst which numerically would be greater than coordinator, manager, officer and leader combined.

    Treading on Human Resources department toes with the above.

    I think they would agree with much of what you have listed along with the architect classifications of late however relabeling of project process and product features means business struggles to maintain a view on what is actually happening vs what is ‘on trend’ in the market place.

    Clever marketers refine and improve with the input from those doing the work but all too often cloud and distract with false urgency and human psychology. “The more things change – the more things stay the same”.

    The marketing distractions are one of the biggest threats to standardizing role ontology.

Comments are closed.