Application Architect vs. Systems Architect vs. Enterprise Architect?

Like any other such term, these terms are used differently in different places, and are sometimes interchangeable. Here's what the differences typically are:

• The Application Architect is is what many of us just call the Architect. The person responsible for the highest levels of design and scope for a particular solution/project. You'd bother using Application in the title if there were other types of architects around, and you wanted it clear that this person worries mainly about a particular application.
• The Enterprise Architect is worried about all of a companies solutions. How they rely on each other, how they use each other, how efficient can their common upkeep and improvement be made. He thinks about how all the solutions together support the company's mission. Only a larger company could warrant this grandiose title. The Enterprise Architect is a big shot who meets with the CIO, CTO, and other such big shots.
• The Systems Architect might be considered to have a wider scope than the Application Architect, and less than an Enterprise Architect. This title is sometimes the exact same thing as Application Architect - big shot on a particular project. Sometimes the System part of the title cannotes a wider scope: person who duties include software but also hardware and IT, or someone worried about multiple projects.

I've encountered quite a few architects with varying titles over the years, and I definitely have my own view on the role of each of them, however it does tend to vary from company to company, and even more so from country to country.

Enterprise Architect - responsible for strategic thinking, roadmaps, principles, and governance of the entire enterprise. Usually has a close relationship with the business, vendors, and senior IT management.

Solutions or Systems Architect - responsible for desiging a high level solution to a specific set of business requirements, within the framework laid down by the enterprise architecture team. This solution may span multiple applications.

Integration or SOA Architect - responsible for the integration and/or business service strategy and governance. Since this role usually spans the entire enterprise it is often performed by an EA, however an integration architect will usually work at a more detailed and technical level than an EA. In a SOA, an integration architect may also be a member (or even leader) of the centre of excellence (or integration competency centre)

Information Architect - responsible for defining data models, master data management / ownership solutions, and data quality processes to support transactional, reference data, and reporting systems throughout the enterprise. Often performed by an EA.

Application Architect - responsible for implementation of, and processes within, a specific application or suite of applications. The application in question may be bespoke of a customised of-the-shelf product. Should have deep knowledge of the product/application and will often be consulted by other architects as part of a larger solution

Those are the most common titles in my experience, but there are other architecture roles that you'll see from time-to-time:

• Technical Architect (for me this is the same as an application architect but others may disagree
• Business Architect (defines business strategy and processes)
• Infrastructure Architect (servers, platform decisions, and often security)
• Network Architect (obvious)

Well it sounds like your in school still but looking into the business world and expecting titles on the cards to be as structured as a degree system... its not.

Truth be told the business title is either a company specific job-title to support the internal pay-grade system or the org charts. Its hard to take from one company to another on anything more than very general terms. Its not really a benchmark like a BA or PHD.

As far as titles and job roles go, teams in companies generally break down into Infrastructure (Server setup and networking), and Applications (DB admins, developers) groups. There is a lot of variance by company but that seems to be pretty universal.

I think your best bet in planning is to decide what you like to do, and then study to do it very well. Along the way as an IT guy you have to pick up a little in all areas to be very effective in any area anyway..

Good luck!

What each means really is determined by the company you work for; what some call a Solution Architect others call a System Architect. They're all (assumed) senior positions with some implied oversight of system/software design but aside from that I've never seen one definition that will make everyone happy. "Enterprise" does imply some scope to the position, but it's arguably no different than "Systems" (again, depends on the company). Application Architect usually makes me think of someone who's been around as a senior developer for a while and HR needed a new title to reward performance. Sort of like the way some massive companies lob the "Vice President" title around to the point it doesn't really mean anything besides how many vacation days you get.

What the Hell..

Architect: Application - designs applications Systems - designs multiple applications and coordinates into a system Enterprise - designs systems and coordinates with the other non system aspects of the business enterprise.

Let's not forget salary, bonus and how much time you spend on worrying about your title.