I believe architecture is resemblance of culture and discipline of either organization or architect.
If culture has some issues, then created architecture will be very brittle,
and if the architect has discipline issues then created architecture will be like polyglot that each of languages are useless and suffering others.
Cream on top is the architect decides about some architecture that he has not been involved in doing of it, he is just reading or listening about it. Hence it seems the light at the end of tunnel is growing dim and fading away.
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
-- Albert Einstein
In my firm I am in charge of leading some Java developers and projects. I decided to implement basic changes that will cover:
Java Employee Performance Management
Institutionalizing Scrum and its best practices like code review by utilizing JIRA and Confluence
Implementing Knowledge Work concepts
My own leadership evaluation by members
A Java Team broadcasting channel among firm's employees
Hence, I find all these aforementioned items are related to culture and change management. So I decided to take some Harvard courses and at the end I created a Organizational Chanage Management Plan which in you can find a Java Lobby version of it which is not having any information from my firm and also I have changed all the text of it, as well as removed the figures and diagrams in here. We named this project as: KL(Kuala Lumpur) Java Reloaded 2.0
Please share your thoughts on a better improvement of our changes