Having some times taken architect like roles, I think the big problem is that architects is a very loaded term, like everything in IT.
You have proper architects, those that design nice diagrams, have proper technical knowledge, and also code, even if small portions when compared with the rest of the team. These I would call proper architects, and tend to explicit mention Technical Architects to make the point.
Then you have the "architects" that do diagrams, spend the time in meetings with customers, plan features per sprint, delegate activities, and so forth. This ones I call managers and always double check if the company isn't using architec as synomim for managers.
At least some shops are more honest, by making use of business analyst or solution architect as synomim for high level management work.
You have proper architects, those that design nice diagrams, have proper technical knowledge, and also code, even if small portions when compared with the rest of the team. These I would call proper architects, and tend to explicit mention Technical Architects to make the point.
Then you have the "architects" that do diagrams, spend the time in meetings with customers, plan features per sprint, delegate activities, and so forth. This ones I call managers and always double check if the company isn't using architec as synomim for managers.
At least some shops are more honest, by making use of business analyst or solution architect as synomim for high level management work.