The Common Architecture Disciplines

A typical enterprise will encounter some or all of the following roles:

• Enterprise Architect – Aligns technology strategy with business objectives.
• Solution Architect – Designs end-to-end solutions within strategic and technical standards.
• Technical Architect – Provides deep domain expertise to bridge design and delivery.
• Business Architect – Ensures technology enables processes, capabilities, and value streams.
• Security Architect – Embeds compliance and risk management into design.
• Data Architect – Governs data as an enterprise asset.
• Integration Architect – Connects disparate systems and platforms.
• Infrastructure Architect – Optimises hosting, networking, and resilience.
• Cloud Architect – Shapes multi-cloud and migration strategies.

This breadth illustrates why “architecture” can quickly become resource-intensive — and why leaders are questioning which roles are truly essential.

Balancing Cost, Capability, and Risk

For mid-sized organisations, establishing all these roles is rarely viable. The operational overhead of a fully staffed architecture function can outweigh the benefits, especially in environments where agility is critical.

Industry best practice suggests starting with Enterprise and Solution Architecture as core disciplines. These provide strategic alignment and solution delivery capability, while other roles (Data, Security, Cloud) can be engaged on demand as complexity, regulatory requirements, or risk exposure increases.

This approach balances governance and cost efficiency — ensuring oversight without creating bureaucratic drag.

Wearing Multiple Hats — and Knowing the Limits

In smaller teams, it is common for one architect to cover multiple disciplines. While pragmatic, this consolidation has limits. Overextension risks gaps in compliance, security posture, and delivery assurance.

At scale, or in regulated industries, relying on “generalists” becomes a business risk. This is where external partners provide value — offering access to specialised expertise without the long-term overhead of permanent hires.

What Executives Should Consider

C-level leaders should frame the architecture question not as “How many architects do we need?” but as:

• What is the minimum capability we need to deliver strategy safely and effectively?
• Where can we consolidate roles without compromising governance?
• At what point does engaging external specialists reduce risk and cost compared to hiring in-house?

Getting this balance right ensures architecture becomes an enabler of digital transformation — not a bottleneck.

The Recusant Perspective

At Recusant, we recommend most organisations begin with a lean model centred on Enterprise and Solution Architecture, scaling to specialist roles as business and regulatory complexity grows. This provides a pragmatic foundation, aligning technology with strategy while avoiding unnecessary overhead.

In a market where architecture roles continue to expand, clarity on “what’s essential” is becoming a strategic advantage.

Executive Takeaway

Architecture is not about titles — it’s about outcomes. A focused core team, complemented by specialist expertise when required, offers the governance, scalability, and delivery assurance that boards and executives demand.