Dear Bob ... Every so often I get the overwhelming urge to vent. While I keep up with the IT community and have worn an IT Manager's 'hat', I am a licensed architect by trade. It really gets under my skin to see IT managers who refer to themselves as an 'architect' or with a job title such as 'Data Architect'. 'Architect' is not a generic word - it is protected by law in all 50 states with language like this: 5 Dear Bob …Every so often I get the overwhelming urge to vent. While I keep up with the IT community and have worn an IT Manager’s ‘hat’, I am a licensed architect by trade. It really gets under my skin to see IT managers who refer to themselves as an ‘architect’ or with a job title such as ‘Data Architect’. ‘Architect’ is not a generic word – it is protected by law in all 50 states with language like this:59 Oklahoma Statutes, 2001, Section 46.8a “A. It shall be unlawful for any person to … use the title “Architect”, “Registered Architect’, “Architectural Designer” … unless the person is registered or licensed under the provisions of this act…” (You can review the whole Act at https://www.youroklahoma.com/architects/index.php?s=rules.html)Think of it this way. If you go through medical school and pass all their licensing exams and internships, you get to call yourself a ‘Medical Doctor’ or ‘M.D.’ You can’t call yourself a lawyer or ‘Juris Doctor’ until you’ve gone to law school and passed the State Bar. The title ‘Architect’ has the same protections.I spent 7 years in college and 3 years as an intern, and had to pass a three-day long examination. I know of people in my profession that have tried for *years* to pass this exam, and I can count on one hand the number I know of that have passed every exam on the first try. I am required to turn in continuing education credits and renew my state license biannually. Like a doctor, I can have my state license revoked if I don’t follow all the rules, and if God Forbid that were to happen I can’t even go to another state, because they all share information. So yes, I take this title and the responsibility that goes with it *extremely* seriously. I realize most people reading this will just say “Sheesh, get over it” and go on with their lives as before. I just gotta say something about it once in awhile, and this time it’s your turn. Thanks for the ear.– DisgruntledDear Disgruntled … You bring up two distinct issues, one semantic, the other legal. Let’s deal with them separately.I wasn’t aware of the legal restrictions on the use of the term “architect” until your letter, so thanks for expanding my knowledge. And I also have to add a disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer. I don’t even play one on TV.So this is just my best judgment as an occasional observer of the law and former watcher of Perry Mason: The IT positions that include the term “architect” in their name are clearly enough differentiated from the profession devoted to designing edifices that any chance of confusion is remote. Which is to say, those who practice the profession of IT architecture are not violating the spirit of the laws you cite, which are certainly intended to protect buyers of building plans from those unqualified to produce them. Whether they’re violating the letter of these laws is open to question. I don’t personally think it would be worth adding to the current caseload glut to find out.Now the semantic issue. Huh. I think it’s pretty much the same after all. Software architects aren’t trying to pass themselves off as professional architects in the edificial sense. They’re operating at a strategic design level – one that’s less detailed than software engineering and much less detailed than software specifications or actual coding. Whether Zachman and his cohorts should have chosen a different term to characterize this level of design is certainly open to debate. But it’s been about 15 years now – that ship has long since sailed.The other issue raised by all this is whether the time has come to establish formal, legal IT certifications. Plenty of people think it’s long past time. Personally, I don’t, because too much is still a matter of opinion when it comes to what constitutes good IT practice. So the current system, in which a variety of schools of thought each establish their own private certifications is, to my way of thinking, good enough. Should you just “get over it”? Oh, I don’t know. It would, I think, be more to the point to help those who practice the trade of IT architecture improve their profession until it reaches the level of those who design buildings for a living.I’m sure we can agree on one thing, though: Using “architect” as a verb should be a felony.– Bob ——– Technology Industry