thank you for your perspective and for reviving this conversation.
Also thanks again Anthony and Lahiru. Anybody feel free to keep discussing.
I like the idea of the more holistic view on the Solution Architect role elevating all the skills into a more general level to benefit the overall solution. In my limited experience the SA usually is the one who really brings it all together in a project. Not only the technical aspects such as infrastructure or RPA workflow design, but most of the time also the business context, some project management and even UX design.
I understand that outside the world of UiPath the title Solution Architect is linked with even deeper knowledge of infrastructure, systems and technology. Is that why you feel UiPath kind of hi-jacked the term?
Sometimes I think there should be a distinction between the Solution Architect role for individual projects and the Solution Architect role for the whole RPA program level.
The project role doesn’t need that much infra knowledge (as stated above) and maybe the more fitting description would be Solution or Automation Designer.
The program role needs much more technical fluency just as you said and in the context of more and more complex automations (or even hyperautomations) the requirements list goes on and on (AI + ML Skills, DevOps Engineering, Mobile Devices, IoT, DLT, …).
Or would that just be an Infrastructure Engineer?