Interesting (and IMO very true, sadly enough ) quote from the full article (view from CBR):
"Recent Computer Business Review stories about enterprise architecture vendors like Telelogic and Troux Technologies have seen how vendors are trying to emphasize the message that architecture needs to be "actionable". They recognize that enterprise architects and the architecture models that they have been known to create are often misunderstood or sidelined by both the business and technology departments in many cases.
While architects clearly have a valuable role to play, clearer definition of exactly what architects bring to the table and how the architectural representations that they create can have a positive impact for both IT and the business is sorely needed.
A consensus on what constitutes a professional architect - as well as acknowledgment from the EA vendors that architecting for its own sake is of little value - should go some way to raising the profile of architects and making their proposition more compelling.
Until then, architects will often find themselves doing a thankless task: in the IT department's view often oblivious to the real technical challenges facing the organization, and from a business perspective producing architecture models that are too complex to understand, let alone act on."
We are not there yet!
Full article at Computer Business Review Online