Lego Analogies looking at Architecture

Popular but flawed

Lego blocks have frequently been used as metaphors in explaining complex concepts related to software architectures due to their modular nature. The idea is that software systems can be built by assembling reusable and interchangeable components, just like Lego bricks, to create different applications. This analogy is appealing because it suggests that software development can be simple, fun, and creative.

However, this analogy falls short when considering real-world complexities such as dependencies or legacy constraints which cannot be simply snapped together or apart like Lego bricks. For example, Lego blocks have standardized interfaces that allow any piece to connect with any other piece, regardless of their shape, size, or function. In contrast, software components often have specific requirements and dependencies that limit their compatibility and interoperability with other components. Moreover, Lego blocks are designed to be easily detached and reattached, whereas software components may have strong coupling and high technical debt that make them hard to modify or replace.

Moreover, unlike Legos where each piece is predictable and stable, components within an organization can evolve independently causing unpredictable effects on other parts — an aspect completely missed out if you consider your organizational structure using the simplicity offered by Lego analogies. For instance, Lego blocks do not change their behavior or properties over time, whereas software components may undergo frequent updates, bug fixes, or enhancements that alter their functionality or performance. Furthermore, Lego blocks do not interact with each other beyond their physical connections, whereas software components may communicate with each other through various protocols and channels, creating complex and dynamic interactions that may lead to unexpected outcomes or failures.

Therefore, using Lego analogies to describe software architectures may be misleading and oversimplified, as they ignore the inherent complexity and uncertainty of software systems. A more realistic and accurate analogy may be to compare software systems to biological organisms, which are composed of diverse and interdependent cells that adapt and respond to changing environments. Alternatively, some experts suggest that software systems should not be compared to any physical objects, but rather to abstract concepts such as languages, cultures, or ecosystems, which reflect the social and evolutionary aspects of software development.

Advice for IT architects

If you are an IT architect, or aspire to become one, here are some tips to help you succeed in your role:

• Learn from others. IT architecture is a broad and evolving field, and you can benefit from the experience and guidance of other architects. You can find mentors, peers, or communities online or offline, and seek feedback, advice, or inspiration from them. You can also read books, blogs, articles, or podcasts that cover various aspects of IT architecture.
• Keep learning new technologies and practices. IT architecture is not a static discipline, but rather a dynamic one that adapts to the changing needs and challenges of IT development. You should always be curious and open-minded about new technologies, paradigms, and practices that can help you create better IT systems. You should also be aware of the trade-offs and limitations of each technology or practice, and choose the ones that best fit your context and goals.
• Think holistically and strategically. IT architecture is not only about designing individual components, but also about how they fit together and interact with each other and the environment. You should always consider the big picture and the long-term vision of your IT system, and how it aligns with the business objectives and user needs. You should also anticipate the potential risks and challenges that may arise, and plan for them accordingly.
• Communicate effectively and collaboratively. IT architecture is not a solo activity, but rather a collaborative one that involves multiple stakeholders, such as developers, testers, managers, customers, or users. You should be able to communicate your architectural decisions and rationale clearly and convincingly, using appropriate tools and techniques, such as diagrams, models, or documentation. You should also be able to listen to and understand the perspectives and feedback of others, and incorporate them into your architectural design. You should also foster a culture of collaboration and trust among your team members, and empower them to contribute to the architectural decisions and implementation.