I had been lately requested things i considered while using "Smart Designers" inside a company to supply technical oversight towards the multiple teams on the project.
A typical objection for this would be that the designers are outdoors they and cannot, therefore, have say in the way the team develops anything that they're building.
This argument does not hold water, though, as you will find other outsiders who provide needs towards the team. But individuals needs will always be strained via a vendor who decides whether or not they are essential or otherwise.
An organization's Smart Designers frequently provide needs to some team by means of non-functional needs. I think about non-functional needs as "constraints" about how a group solves an issue. Therefore the Smart Architect cannot tell a group how they solve an issue, but could provide constraints about how it's solved-the machine must scale to some certain quantity of concurrent customers, it has to process this many transactions each minute, it has to operate on Linux, it has to integrate with this such-and-such, etc. Non-fucntional needs become product backlog products and could be prioritized through the vendor depending on how important the merchandise owner sights compliance with every. For instance, if your vendor decides that running on Linux isn't critical and also the product might be just like effective on the different server OS, the merchandise owner would remove that non-functional requirement or possibly put it have less the merchandise backlog therefore the team reaches least aware the architect wants it.