I Create Capability Models. But I’m Called an Architect
- Sunil Dutt Jha
- Apr 29
- 3 min read
Updated: Apr 30
My title says Architect. My work says something else. I create capability maps—customer capability, risk capability, finance capability. Boxes. Hierarchies. Groupings. This is useful work. But is this architecture?
Why Do I Believe I’m an Architect?
There are familiar reasons. I map the enterprise at a high level, defining capabilities across functions in a neatly structured way. What this actually means is that I am organizing the enterprise into logical groupings. I use industry frameworks and reference models—standard capability maps.
What this actually means is that I am aligning to known classification structures, not defining how the enterprise actually behaves. Leadership uses these models for discussions—strategy, transformation, prioritization.
What this actually means is that the model supports communication, but it does not define execution logic.
My role is positioned as Enterprise Architect, and capability models are seen as architecture artifacts. What this actually means is that the artifact is visible, but the underlying structure may not be.
What I Actually Do
Let’s be precise. I identify capabilities, group them logically, create hierarchical views, and align them with business functions. All of this is valuable. But structurally, this is classification.
Want to read more?
Subscribe to architecturerating.com to keep reading this exclusive post.
