It’s the Edison Ratio again — Thomas Edison’s famous explanation of genius as one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.

The Edison Ratio is why I haven’t yet written about the subject suggested by long-time correspondent Bob Ballard, enterprise architecture.

Way back when I developed what I thought was an enterprise architecture methodology for my then employer, Perot Systems. Its goal was to rationalize and create a plan for the evolution of a client’s portfolio of installed technologies, strongly connected to the client’s business direction.

It worked well — well enough that I based the “Managing Technology” section of my old IS Survival Guide book on it.

Turns, out, though, that in the eyes of most practitioners I’d mistaken the tail for the dog and vice versa.

Ever wonder why good code is so hard to find? In his consistently brilliant xkcd.com, Randall Munroe explains the situation: Write fast and write junk. Write well and your software is obsolete before you’re done.

It’s Waterfall vs Agile, of course. And the debate, unsurprisingly, is more often tribal than rational — my team is better, which I can prove by pointing out the other team’s flaws.