Ron Washington Arguing the Home Run Call ...
By Rich Anderson
Used under Creative Commons

This is the fifth in a series of blog posts about how we can learn about software architecture by studying and comparing it to the sport of Baseball.  This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

The last post in this series was called "Architecture By Baseball: Coaches", where I talked about how the software architect can work better with the development team by emulating some of the things that a baseball coach does.  Baseball is a little different than other sports that have a Head Coach, in baseball the team leader is the manger.  Like the rest of the coaching staff, he wears the team uniform.  The manager extra responsibility of thinking tactically and strategically during the game and throughout the season.

Tactical during the game

When a player comes up to bat and there are men on base, the manager will often times give the batter instructions about how he is supposed to bat.  If it is a close game with a speedy runner on board, he may be instruction to bunt (called a sacrifice), rather than try to hit safely.  The manager is giving up an out in order to advance the base runner (this is a very tactical move).  Similarly, the manager may give the runner on base the "steal" or the "hold" sign or the "green light" to steal if they feel comfortable doing so.  These choices are not as obvious as they may seem, the manager may chose to give not have the base runner the steal sign even if he is very good at stealing because it might prematurely end the inning.  Nothing is worse than taking the bat out of your best players' hands by ending the inning on a failed steal attempt.

Strategic during the game

The manager must also think strategically during the course of the game.  The strategic decisions start actually before the game begins, when the manager fills out the line-up card.  The line-up card is the list of 9 players (or 10 players in American League Baseball) that will start the game and what positions that they play.  There are a lot of factors that play into the line-up cards on any given day: the opposing pitcher, the historic match-ups, etc.  As the game goes on, there a limited number of players available to the manager during the game for substitutions (25 total players for most of the season and up to 40 for the last month of the season).  The manager must make sure that the best players are on the field at any given time, but they cannot replace players constantly during the game, because unlike many other sports, once a player leaves a baseball game they can not return.  As the game goes on the manager must know when to replace players for fresh players or specialist (pinch runners who are fast, or players who are better at defense).

Strategic beyond the game

Baseball has a very long season with many games (more than twice as many games as most other sports).  The manager must remember this as they are making decisions.  The manager must make sure to give most players a day off here and there throughout the season (there are a few super human players that never need a day off).  The manager must also be careful to not over use the starting pitchers or the relief pitchers during a game, as it can be costly to make the wrong decision.

Software Architects: the balance between strategic and tactical

Like the manager making the scorecard, the architect must make a lot of decisions before the game (or construction) even begins.  Scope is negotiated, technologies selected and proof of concepts identified and executed.  Once the work actually begins, there are dozens of tactical decisions that must be made, but the strategic goals needs to be assessed.  Communication is very key as these decisions are being made.  The manager in baseball has to give signals to the batter, catcher or base runner.  The software architect also has to communicate to the team members effectively so they understand what to do tactically, but he also needs to impart the strategic thought as well (so actually we have it tougher than the baseball manager).   You also have to get the most out of the development team (even if they don't report to you directly).  There is a great quote by one of my favorite baseball managers that talk about this:

I don't think a manager should be judged by whether he wins the pennant, but by whether he gets the most out of the twenty-five men he's been given. - Chuck Tanner

There is no book in baseball or software architecture

Many of the tactical decisions that I talked about have "conventional wisdom" answers to them.  For example, man on first with 0 or 1 outs and the pitcher up to bat, the pitcher should bunt.  This style of management is called "by the book", which is a reference to a mythical set of rules that contain the answers to all situations.  You can imagine the software architecture equivalent.  If it is a function that is needed by more than one platform, or is called by 3 or more applications, it must be implemented as a SOAP Web Service.  That may apply is many or even most situations, but there is no book of rules to follow in software architecture.  There is another quote that fits this notion as well:

"The Book is nothing but a piece of garbage. My book is me." - Chuck Tanner

Third Base Coach

This is the fourth in a series of blog posts about how we can learn about software architecture by studying and comparing it to the sport of Baseball.  This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

Coaches in baseball are unique in a couple of ways compared to the coaches in other sports.  One of the most obvious differences is that in baseball, the coaches actually wear the team uniform.  I personally cannot think of another sport where this is the case.  In some other sports the coaches actually have to comply with a dress code that is vastly different than the players (I think it is the NBA that requires the coaches to wear coat and tie when they are at court side).  Not only do the coaches in baseball wear the team uniform, but they are assigned a number just like the players on the field.  The coach is really a part of the team.

Another key difference between coaches in baseball and coaches in other sports is that two of the coaches in baseball are actually allowed on the field of play during the game.  On the first base and third base lines there are two coach's boxes where the team can choose to have a coach positioned during the game. 

There is a distinction between this and other sports that allow coaches on the sidelines (such as soccer, football and basketball).  When a coach is on the sidelines in those sports, they are totally out of the field of play.  A ball that leaves the field of play is dead.  In baseball the foul territory where the coaches stand is still in play, so a player can catch a foul ball in the coaches box and the batter will be out.  A ball can be overthrown during a play and hit a coach, interfering with the play; there are even special rules that govern when this happens - which is not very often, because the coaches are usually pretty good about getting out of the way.

Coach

The coaches in baseball are literally feet away from the action and are able to interact with the players in a deep and meaningful way.  When a player reaches first base or third base safely the coach can give him encouragement and intelligence about how the pitcher is delivering the ball to the plate.  This can help the player decide if this is a good time to attempt to steal a base or take only a short lead off of the bag (to avoid a pickoff move).

The third base coach is an integral part of the action when there is a man on base and there is a ball hit deep into the gap or down the lines in the outfield.  As the runner on the base is rounding third a split second decision has to be made to send the runner to home or to have him hold up on third base.  The player is in the worst position to make this decision, as his back is to the outfield.  The third base coach is the one who makes the decision to send the runner or not.  If you have ever been to a game in person, nothing is more dramatic that seeing the third base coach swing his arm wildly, followed by a close play at the plate.

So what can we as software architects learn from the coaches in baseball?

Knuckles at third

Wear the Uniform - Often times I see people make too much of a distinction between the architect and the developers who are working on a software development project.  This can manifest itself in a lot of ways, and many of them are bad.  The role of the architect is different than the role of the developer, but they should be seen as one cohesive team.  This statement applies equally well to the designers, testers, DBAs, server tech and project managers on the team as well.

Be a part of the action - Architects are sometimes referred to as Ivory Tower dwellers.  Sometimes this is meant as a joke, sometimes is a half-joke and other times it is just downright true.  As an architect we should strive to be as close to the field of play as possible.  The perception when you are away from the field of play is very skewed.  Get out of the Ivory Tower (maybe press box is a better analogy) and get into the coach's box.

Be a coach - One of the things that I did not note in particular when talking about the coaches is that most of them are former professional ball players themselves (I don't think that is unique to baseball coaches).  They bring with them years of experience that they can impart to the players them are coaching.  Most of us who carry architect in our title were at one time developers ourselves and as a result, we carry with us many years of experience.  In addition to architecting the application, we can make the team more successful by sharing our knowledge with the team. 

Cubs vs Padres May 14, 2008 By Anthony Handley, used with permission

This is the third in a series of blog posts about how we can learn about software architecture by studying and comparing it to the sport of Baseball.  This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

One of the most interesting aspects of baseball is that it is the only sport where the field of play varies so widely.  Most sports have a very uniform field of play that does not vary from stadium to stadium (a football field is always 100 yards long and a basketball rim is always 10 feet above the floor).  One of the reasons I like baseball so much is the charm that the ballparks have with their unique dimensions.  Sure basketball and baseball are played in stadiums and arenas that are different sizes and shapes, but that really does not affect the field of play like it does in baseball.

The quirks found in the ballparks themselves can lead to some interesting occurrences.  For instance the ivy that grows on the outfield walls at Wrigley Field in Chicago, IL will often swallow up a ball so that the outfielder cannot make a play on it.  The flag pole in center field at Minute Maid Park in Houston, TX is actually in fair territory and any ball hit off of it is considered to be still in play (A few years ago this turned a 400+ foot home run by Richie Sexson into a very long single).  Ballparks with roofs also present interesting scenarios as well, like what happens if the ball actually hits the roof?  All these quirks have led to a class of rules know as Ground Rules.  Some ground rules are the same no matter where the game is being played; other rules are specific to that ballpark.  If you are ever at the first game of a series, you will notice that the umpires spend a couple of extra minutes with the manager of the visiting team, making sure that they are aware of the ballpark's ground rules.

What are the ground rules in architecture?

Often time you think of software architecture as a universal discipline.  We have a set of design patterns that we study and use (sometimes we use them weather we know it or not).  Most software is built on a few platforms (mainframe, midrange, UNIX/Linux, Apple, Windows) and we all rely upon a set of standards that are pretty much Universal (TCP/IP, HTTP, Telnet, etc).  One of the real benefits of this is that from a software architecture perspective we can easily move from organization to organization and our skills can be applied pretty quickly, as long as we learn the ground rules of the industry and organization.

Ground rules in software architecture are anything that is specific to the organization (or the industry), as opposed to universal to our discipline.  One of the first questions I usually ask a customer when I talk to them is about their propensity to build or buy then build.  Does the organization have a mix of desktop and web applications or do they only build web applications?  Do they prefer Java or .NET?  Are there industry standard data formats like ACORD that they must use?  Are their regulations like GLB or HIPAA that they must comply with?

Each of these items has nothing to do with the pure discipline of software architecture, but they are things that will affect the design of any system that you will create.  Not knowing the ground rules can greatly impact the solutions that you create, are can even lead to you being "called out".  When you start working with a new organization, you should strive to quickly get a feel for the ground rules.

Can ground rules be changed?

Some of the examples I mentioned can be changed.  An organization that purchases packaged based systems could decide to build a solution from scratch (and the converse is true as well).  A Java shop can decide to try .NET on a new application.  Other ground rules cannot be changed, for example a bank cannot decide to ignore GLB.  In general it will be a significant effort to change a ground rule, so approach trying to change a ground rule with caution, and be prepared to invest a lot of time in the change.

Craig Counsell at third base

This is the second in a series of blog posts about how we can learn about software architecture by studying and comparing it to the sport of Baseball.  This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

In baseball a Utility Player is one that can several positions well.  In baseball there are 9 distinct defensive positions, each requiring a slightly different skill set.  There is some overlap between the positions (for instance a good right fielder will have many of the skills required to play left field).  But some positions require a vastly different skill set (such as catcher and center fielder).  Often times you will hear about a "utility infielder"; a player who can play 3rd base, 2nd base and shortstop.  You will also hear about a "utility outfielder"; a player who can play any of the 3 outfield positions: Left fielder, Right Fielder and Center Fielder.  There are rare players that have the skills and experience that allow them to play all 8 defensive positions (all save the pitcher which is a highly specialized position).  And there are even instances of players who have played all 9 positions (sometimes in the same game, but that has generally been more of a stunt).

Because there are a limited number of players that a team can have on the roster at a given time (25 players for the majority of the season and 40 players during the tail end of the season) a team needs to have a few players that can play more than one position.  A player that can only play one position may be a valuable player, but they limit the flexibility of the team when it comes to making changes, especially late in the ball game.  Often times these one position players will make up for the defensive inflexibility by shining at the plate.  You will often see these players on first base and in left field, because these positions are thought of as being the easier positions to play.

What is a utility architect?

In the first blog post in this series, I described the 5 general skills that an architect should have (Business Process, Software Design, Software Development, Infrastructure and Communication).  I was focused on general skills required, but not on the various specializations that an architect can play.  You are probably familiar with some of these specializations and might even be able to find some of these on business cards running around your organization:

• Software Architect - Someone who specializes in designing the custom written code in a solution
• Data Architect - Someone who specializes in designing the database (or other data storage system) in a solution
• Infrastructure Architect - Someone who designs the portions of the solution that are closer to the physical implementation.  For example the directory layout.
• Network Architect - Someone who designs the data transfer portions of the solution
• User Interface Architect - Someone who architects the flow of the system for the user perspective.  You may be skeptical about this one, but these architects to exist, I met several of them last year when we did our ArcReady event on User Experience.
• <Insert Technology Name Here> Architect - there is a whole litany of architects who align themselves to a particular technology.  If you don't believe me, go do a search job descriptions for .NET Architect, SAP Architect or Java Architect and see the results that you will get.

A utility architect is someone who can play more than one of these specializations reasonably well.  For instance they may be really good at software architecture, but they can also design databases or design the infrastructure for the solution.  Or more likely, they are going to be a true software architect and be able to design a system in Java or Ruby on Rails as well as they would on .NET.  Being competent in more than one specialization increases your flexibility to the organization, because you can be used in more than one capacity.  This is good in a large organization, but invaluable in a smaller organization.

I personally think that all architects should strive to be a utility architect and not just specialize in doing only one thing.  The antithesis of this is an organization that requires a room full of architects in order to decide anything.  I personally experienced this years ago when I got on a conference call about a network issue.  The person that I talked to had introduced himself as a "Layer 3 Architect" a reference to the OSI Model (if you recall that).  We determined that the issue was probably caused by a firewall configuration problem, I told him the ports that he needed to check.  He stopped me mid-sentence and said "Stop there, we will need to get our firewall architect involved in this issue and I just checked his schedule and he is not available for another 2 days".

Pudge on Deck

This is the first in a series of blog posts about how we can learn about software architecture by studying and comparing it to the sport of Baseball.  This series was inspired by the book Management by Baseball.

In baseball scouting one of the biggest compliments that a player can receive is to be called a "5 tool player".  This is a reference to the skills that make up a good, all around baseball player:

1. Hitting for power: When at the plate the player can hit the ball with a lot of power, home runs and doubles are very common.  Runs Batted In (RBI) and Total Bases (TB) are common stats to measure the power that a player shows.
2. Hitting for average: Hitting for power is only one dimension of the performance at the plate (sometimes a player that hits for power will strike out a lot).  When a player hits for average, that means that they reach base more often when they have a plate appearance.  Batting Average (BA) and On Base Percentage (OBP) are common stats to measure how well the player does in this skill.
3. Base running skills: How well does the player handle himself when they reach base.  The obvious thought is how fast the player is in running between bases, but many of the best base runners are not the fastest, they are smart about the leads they take and are effective at breaking up a double play.  Stolen Bases (SB) is the most common stat for this skill.
4. Fielding: Good fielding is essential for a team to succeed.  Sometimes players can be great at the plate, but will be called a "defensive liability" meaning their fielding is sub-par.  Fielding Percentage and errors are 2 stats to measure this tool.
5. Throwing: how well does the player execute throws once they have fielded the ball.  Double plays turned (for infielders) and Assists (for outfielders) are stats for this skill.

When a player shows above average potential in all of these skill areas, he is considered to be a "5 tool player" and will be highly sought after by major league teams.

What are the 5 tools for a software architect?

Using the baseball term as my guide, I wanted to put together a list of the "5 tools" that make up a good architect.  This exercise was actually a lot harder than you might think.  Like many people I think that an architect needs to be a generalist and as a result there are a 1001 things that a architect must need to know in order to be a good architect.  Categorizing these into 5 tools was difficult.  But here is the list that I came up with.

1. Business Process - Process is the way that we get things done.  Software is becoming an increasingly integral part of business process, but it is still only a small part of how things are accomplished.  Process is the "Bigger picture" of software architecture.  Being able to understand how the software solution fits into the overall business process is a critical skill to being a good software architect.  The danger of not mastering the process is that the software solution may be a masterpiece of software engineering, but may be totally useless in the presence of the business problem (okay maybe not totally useless, but sub-optimal for the time spent creating it).
2. Software Design - This is the probably the most obvious of the architecture tools - you have to be able to design a solution.  You might be surprised at how many people who are otherwise brilliant software engineers have trouble designing a software solution, or struggle with designing a solution so that it fits harmoniously with the rest of the software ecosystem.
3. Software Development - An architect must understand how to develop software.  You don't have to spend 100% , 75% or even 50% of your time time actually developing software in order to be an architect.  You do have to understand the capabilities and limitations of your software environment.
4. Infrastructure -  Infrastructure is the architectural foundation of the enterprise and it is the plumbing that makes our software systems work.  Because it is foundational it is often ignored in the same way that we ignore the plumbing when we are walking around in a building.  However when you are designing that building, you have to pay careful attention to it.  And just like other foundational components infrastructure must be maintained and upgraded over time.  A good architect knows how to leverage the infrastructure.
5. Communication - I know there are some people who get to this point and say "Bah - software development, infrastructure?  Where is the governance?  Architects must know governance!"  Governance is important in architecture, but the real value of governance is not in developing a governance strategy, but in communicating the strategy and the importance of the strategy.  The ability to communicate with the technical and the non-technical audience is probably the most important of the 5 skills identified here.

Note:  My colleague and friend Chris Bernard, who is Microsoft's User Experience Evangelist for the Central United States, has written a follow-up post to this one where he talks about the tools that a designer needs.