At work we have this terrible “Enterprise Architecture” team comprising of highly paid people who haven’t written a single line of code and who don’t know the intricacies of our business but keep proposing complicated “Event Driven Architectures” and “Micro this and Micro that” and just reciting the latest buzz words just to keep appearing cool.
It’s insane how much total cost they add to the organization, both directly and indirectly.
This still results in a lot of compromises and problems. Anyhow they should be there talking to the developers in a 2-way fashion so that then end result is not entirely "from on high".
IME architects tend to be people who tell your team that you should be using Azure Cosmos after a Microsoft salesman takes them out to lunch. They last coded 5 years ago.
They are acting rationally within their belief system of making money.
Enterprise software is exactly that, software used by enterprise -- it doesn't signify any good qualities (far from it) only that it provides a cost-effective software solution to a defined business need.
The issue is when corps get bailed out, overfunded, or have revenue mostly outside of software (e.g. gov't contracts) as it eliminates cost-effective from the equation... so you just end up with buggy messes (code as a cost center).
You'd have to work in the tiny niches where tech is the true product to find good development ...and even then...