Understanding and Managing Technical Debt: A Software Product Owner’s Guide

Imagine you’re racing against the clock to launch a new feature. The pressure is on, and your team opts for a quick fix to meet the deadline. The feature goes live, and everyone breathes a sigh of relief. Success? Perhaps. But beneath the surface, a hidden cost is accruing—technical debt. This silent burden can grow, slow your progress, and ultimately sabotage your product’s success.

With over 17 years of experience in software architecture, I’ve observed how technical debt can quietly disrupt software products. This article explores what technical debt is, its impact on development, and offers practical tips to manage it effectively.

What is Technical Debt?

Technical debt can be likened to financial debt—the cost you incur when choosing quick fixes or suboptimal solutions in software development to meet short-term goals. Like financial debt, technical debt requires rework, and if not managed properly, it can lead to more significant issues. For instance, a development team might skip writing unit tests to deliver a feature faster, only to face more significant problems later when bugs arise that could have been caught early on. Over time, technical debt accumulates, resulting in a slower development process, higher maintenance costs, and increased risk of security breaches.

Types and Causes of Technical Debt

Technical debt arises in various forms, each shaped by different decisions, circumstances, and approaches to software development. Understanding both its types and causes is crucial for managing it effectively.

Below are six primary categories of technical debt and examples that illustrate how they can emerge in real-world scenarios:

1. Intentional vs. Unintentional Technical Debt

• What it is: Intentional technical debt occurs when development teams make strategic decisions to prioritize immediate business goals, such as accelerating time-to-market or meeting critical deadlines. These decisions are made with full awareness of the trade-offs, with the understanding that the debt will need to be addressed in the future to maintain the software’s scalability and functionality.

Unintentional technical debt arises inadvertently, often due to a lack of experience, unforeseen complexities, or inadequate planning. This type of debt can accumulate over time, often going unnoticed until it significantly impacts the system’s performance and maintainability.

• Causes: Intentional technical debt is often driven by business imperatives, such as the need to quickly release a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) to capture market share or respond to competitive pressures. Teams may choose to defer certain aspects of development, such as comprehensive testing or robust architecture, to address these areas later.

Unintentional technical debt typically results from inadequate testing, evolving project requirements, or misaligned expectations between stakeholders and the development team. For instance, as a project progresses, unanticipated challenges or changes in requirements may lead to design decisions that introduce technical debt without the team’s full awareness.

• Example: A startup may opt to fast-track the development of an MVP to quickly establish a market presence, fully acknowledging that this approach will generate intentional technical debt that must be addressed later to ensure long-term viability.

On the other hand, a development team may inadvertently create unintentional technical debt by selecting an architectural framework that is later found insufficient for the application’s scalability needs, leading to significant refactoring efforts as the product evolves.

2. Design Debt

• What it is: Design debt refers to the compromises made during software development’s architectural or design phases. This can include poor modularization, insufficient documentation, or a lack of scalability considerations.
• Causes: Design debt often occurs when the development team prioritizes speed over robust design or lacks the necessary expertise to foresee future challenges. Over time, design debt can make it difficult to implement new features, leading to a brittle system that is hard to maintain and extend.
• Example: A well-known example is Twitter’s early architecture, which struggled to handle the platform’s rapid growth. The initial design, which wasn’t built with scalability in mind, led to frequent outages and the infamous “fail whale” errors. Twitter had to undertake significant reengineering to overcome this design debt and scale effectively.

3. Code Debt

• What it is: Code debt occurs when the codebase contains poor-quality code that is difficult to understand, maintain, or extend. This can result from bad coding practices, poor adherence to coding standards, or hurried development.
• Causes: Code debt is typically caused by insufficient code review, lack of refactoring, and pressure to deliver features quickly without considering the long-term implications. Moreover, inadequate testing can lead to code debt, as bugs and issues may remain undetected until they cause significant problems down the line.
• Example: In its early years, Facebook faced significant code debt due to the rapid pace of development. The codebase became increasingly complex and difficult to manage, prompting the company to invest heavily in tools and practices to manage and reduce this debt, such as creating the Hack programming language.

4. Architecture Debt

• What it is: Architecture debt refers to the accumulation of issues within the system’s overall structure, often resulting from early architectural decisions that no longer meet the system’s needs. This includes monolithic architectures that resist scaling or tightly coupled systems that hinder modularity.
• Causes: This debt is typically incurred when early architectural decisions are made without considering future growth or flexibility or when the system’s architecture evolves organically without a clear plan. Legacy technologies also contribute to architecture debt, as outdated platforms or libraries may lack support for modern practices, making integration and maintenance increasingly challenging and requiring application modernization efforts.
• Example: Netflix’s transition from monolithic to microservices architecture is a prime example of addressing architecture debt. As Netflix’s user base grew, the monolithic system couldn’t handle the load, leading to significant refactoring and the adoption of microservices to ensure scalability and resilience.

Read also:

Application Modernization With Microservices: Challenges and Best Practices

5.Environmental Debt

• What it is: Environmental debt refers to the challenges that arise from the system’s surrounding environment, such as outdated development tools, legacy dependencies, or infrastructure that doesn’t support modern practices.
• Causes: This type of debt accumulates when the development environment is not regularly updated to keep pace with technological advancements or when legacy applications are not modernized. Development languages, runtime environments, or libraries created years ago often lack support for modern development practices, making them difficult to integrate with newer systems, which increases the effort required for maintenance and leads to technical debt.
• Example: Many financial institutions struggle with environmental debt due to reliance on outdated mainframe systems that are costly and difficult to maintain. Modernizing these systems to integrate with current technologies, such as cloud computing, requires significant investment and effort.

6. Documentation Debt

• What it is: Documentation debt occurs when the system’s documentation is incomplete, outdated, or entirely missing. This can make it difficult for new developers to understand the codebase or for teams to maintain and extend the system.
• Causes: Documentation debt often results from prioritizing feature development over documentation, or from a lack of processes that ensure documentation is kept up to date. Without proper documentation, developers may make mistakes or inefficient decisions that contribute to technical debt.
• Example: The development of the healthcare.gov website is a case where documentation debt played a role in its troubled launch. The lack of comprehensive documentation led to difficulties in debugging and scaling the system, contributing to its initial failures.

Understanding the Nature of Technical Debt in Software Development

Technical debt isn’t inherently bad. In fact, incurring some level of technical debt is often necessary to meet tight deadlines, launch a product quickly, or adapt to changing market conditions. However, the consequences of technical debt extend far beyond the codebase. When technical debt accumulates, it can impede a software product’s ability to evolve and adapt to market demands. Excessive technical debt can slow development cycles, making implementing new features or improvements difficult. This delay frustrates development teams and puts the entire product at risk of falling behind competitors.

Moreover, the cost of addressing technical debt increases over time as more complex dependencies and integrations become involved. In some cases, the burden of technical debt has even led to the failure of entire projects, highlighting the critical need for proactive debt management. 

Below, you can check the impact of technical debt on various dimensions, including the software product itself, its users, and the company:

IMPACT OF TECH DEBT ON A SOFTWARE PRODUCT, USERS, AND COMPANY

Technical Debt in Legacy Systems

Legacy systems, by their very nature, are prone to significant technical debt. These systems, often developed with outdated technologies and architectures, were designed long before modern development practices emerged. As a result, they accumulate complexity over time, making them difficult to maintain and adapt.

For example, a legacy system running on an old programming language version may lack the necessary documentation, and the original developers may no longer be available. This creates a scenario where even simple updates or integrations become risky, as the codebase is fragile and prone to breaking with any modification. The lack of compatibility with modern tools and services further exacerbates the situation, making legacy systems a significant source of technical debt that requires careful management and eventual modernization.

The Challenges of Managing Technical Debt

Managing technical debt presents unique challenges, including:

1. Lack of documentation: Over time, documentation may become outdated or lost, making it difficult to understand the system’s architecture and functionality.
2. Outdated technologies: Legacy systems are often built on outdated technologies that are no longer supported, making it difficult to find developers with the necessary skills to maintain them.
3. Complexity: Legacy systems tend to be complex, with many interconnected components. This complexity makes it challenging to identify and address technical debt without risking the stability of the system.
4. Risk of disruption: Making changes to a legacy system can be risky, as even small changes can have unforeseen consequences. This risk often leads to a reluctance to address technical debt, allowing it to continue accumulating.

How to Manage Technical Debt

Effectively managing technical debt requires a combination of strategic planning, ongoing assessment, and tactical execution. Here’s how you can manage technical debt to ensure it doesn’t hinder your product’s development or impact its long-term success.

1. ASSESSING AND PRIORITIZING TECHNICAL DEBT

Tools and Methods for Identifying Debt: The first step in managing technical debt is to conduct a thorough assessment of the current state of your codebase and infrastructure. This involves identifying areas where technical debt exists and understanding its impact on your product. Tools like SonarQube and CodeClimate can be invaluable for static code analysis, helping you spot issues like high complexity, poor test coverage, or outdated dependencies. 

Prioritizing Debt: Once you’ve identified technical debt, it’s crucial to prioritize it. It’s not always necessary to tackle every type of debt right away, so categorize debts based on their potential risk and impact. For example, debt that could compromise security or significantly slow development should precede minor inefficiencies. 

Additionally, distinguishing between “good” (intentional and manageable) and “bad” (unintentional and harmful) technical debt helps in deciding which areas need immediate attention and which can be scheduled for later.

2. REFACTORING AND CODE CLEAN-UP

When to refactor: Code refactoring should be a regular part of the development process, not just something done when the codebase becomes unmanageable. For minor debt, continuous refactoring—such as renaming variables for clarity or breaking down large methods into smaller, more manageable pieces—can be integrated into daily development tasks. For more significant debt, dedicated refactoring sprints may be necessary. These sprints focus solely on improving the code’s quality rather than adding new features, ensuring the codebase remains robust and maintainable.

In some cases, refactoring might not suffice, especially if the debt has escalated to a point where a complete rewrite of certain parts of the system is more cost-effective. This is particularly true for older technologies that may no longer support modern practices or scaling needs.

3. SETTING UP A TECHNICAL DEBT BACKLOG

Managing technical debt requires a systematic approach, and this is where a technical debt backlog comes into play. A technical debt backlog is a list of all the identified debts, their priority, and status. Each item in the backlog should be clearly documented, prioritized, and assigned to specific team members with set deadlines.

• How to Maintain a Debt Backlog: Integrate the technical debt backlog into your existing product roadmap and sprint planning. This ensures that technical debt is not overlooked or indefinitely postponed. Debt items should be treated just like new features or bug fixes. Assign owners to each debt item and set deadlines for when they need to be addressed.
• Managing the Backlog: Regularly review and update the backlog during sprint planning meetings. This keeps the team aware of outstanding debts and helps prioritize them alongside other development tasks. Consider using Agile or Scrum practices to incorporate debt repayment into the regular development cycle. For example, you could dedicate a portion of each sprint to addressing technical debt.

4. INCREMENTAL VS. COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTIONS

When managing technical debt, teams must choose between incremental and comprehensive solutions. Each approach has its advantages, and the decision usually hinges on the extent and seriousness of the debt.

• Incremental Solutions: These involve making small, ongoing improvements to the codebase. This might include continuous refactoring, regular code reviews, and gradually updating outdated components. Incremental solutions are ideal for managing minor technical debt and for teams that need to balance debt reduction with ongoing feature development.

+ Pros: Lower risk, less disruption to development, and easier to manage within regular sprints

− Cons: It may take longer to fully address significant technical debt, and some underlying issues may persist

• Comprehensive Solutions: Sometimes, technical debt becomes so severe that incremental fixes are no longer sufficient. In these cases, a comprehensive solution may be necessary, such as a major refactor, architectural overhaul, or even a complete rewrite of the system.

+ Pros: Can eliminate large amounts of debt in one go, leading to a more stable and maintainable codebase

− Cons: High risk, potentially costly, and may require pausing feature development

5. PROMOTING A CULTURE OF QUALITY

Managing technical debt isn’t just about fixing problems; it’s also about preventing them from occurring in the first place. Promoting a culture of quality within your development team is crucial. Encourage developers to follow best practices, write clean code, and prioritize maintainability. Regular code reviews, pair programming, and continuous integration can help reinforce this culture and prevent technical debt from accumulating in the first place.

MobiDev Experience: How We Helped Companies Minimize Tech Debt

SUCCESS STORY #1: ELIMINATING TECHNICAL DEBT OF A FINTECH WEB PORTAL TO KEEP THE PRODUCT OPERATIONAL

Client Background

The Wholesale Floor Covering Credit Association of Canada (WFCCA), a cornerstone in the Canadian flooring industry since 1972, serves manufacturers, wholesalers, and distributors across multiple provinces. Their web portal, developed initially on a Ruby on Rails stack and hosted on Heroku, was crucial for members to exchange sensitive credit-related information securely.

The Challenge

By 2022, the technology stack had become outdated, leading to significant technical debt that hindered the portal’s performance and maintainability. The WFCCA faced issues such as non-functional tests, obsolete libraries, and an outdated database structure. Moreover, the original development team had shifted away from the Ruby on Rails tech stack, leaving WFCCA in need of a new partner to take on the task of modernization. The challenge was to update the system and restore functionality, improve test coverage, and ensure long-term stability.

How We Delivered

• Comprehensive Software Code Audit

MobiDev began the project by conducting an in-depth software code audit. This process was essential for assessing the system’s current status, identifying critical issues, and evaluating the severity of accumulated technical debt. The findings were compiled into a detailed Project Review Report, which laid the foundation for prioritizing the necessary upgrades and setting a clear timeline and scope of work.

• Robust Project Documentation

Alongside the technical audit, MobiDev’s business analyst created detailed functional requirements clearly defining the intended behavior and functionality of the WFCCA portal. This documentation was crucial for ensuring that all aspects of the portal were thoroughly tested and any issues were identified and resolved before the updates were released to users.

• Platform Upgrade Completed in 3 Months

Following the code review, MobiDev’s dedicated team upgraded the system from Ruby 2.5.8, Ruby on Rails 5.2.4.2, and Heroku 18 Stack. Despite the complexity of the task, the team completed the upgrade within just three months. This involved updating the software libraries and infrastructure, addressing compatibility issues, and optimizing the overall system performance.

• Extensive Testing and Bug Fixing

In addition to updating the legacy code, MobiDev implemented a rigorous quality assurance process. Regression testing ensured that existing functionality remained intact following the upgrade. The team also discovered and fixed several unrelated bugs that ranged from minor issues to more significant problems affecting the application’s logic. This thorough testing process was vital in delivering a stable and reliable system.

• Comprehensive Project Documentation

MobiDev’s QA engineer created a list of User Acceptance Testing (UAT) cases to streamline the bug-fixing process and ensure clarity in future updates. This document details the testing process, specifying which areas need testing and the expected results, providing a clear roadmap for future quality assurance efforts.

Technical Details

• Backend: Ruby on Rails, Ruby
• Server Hosting: Heroku
• Database: PostgreSQL
• Testing: Regression testing, functional testing

Outcomes

MobiDev’s modernization efforts resulted in a fully updated and stabilized WFCCA web portal. The assigned business analyst and project manager also prepared detailed documentation to support ongoing and future optimizations. As a result, since March 2022, WFCCA members have enjoyed a more stable, secure, and efficient platform, ensuring the continued smooth operation of credit information exchanges.

Client Testimonial

SUCCESS STORY #2: ELIMINATING COMPLEX TECHNICAL DEBT FOR A HEALTHCARE APP

Client Background

Our client, a healthcare provider, relied on a critical application developed over five years by a previous development team. This application was vital for their operations, handling sensitive patient data and supporting various healthcare processes. However, the product was built using outdated versions of Ruby and Ruby on Rails, with a codebase that had accumulated significant technical debt over time. The lack of proper documentation further complicated the situation, making it challenging to maintain and scale the application.

The Challenge

The client faced several challenges with their existing application, including outdated technologies, a fragmented codebase, and the absence of necessary documentation. These issues led to difficulties in scalability, productivity, and adding new features. The client needed a comprehensive healthcare software modernization strategy to address these challenges, improve the application’s performance, and ensure its long-term viability.

How We Delivered

• Comprehensive Software Code Audit: MobiDev initiated the project by conducting an extensive audit of the existing codebase and infrastructure. Our Ruby architects conducted multiple tests to identify critical areas of technical debt and assess the system’s overall health. This audit provided a clear understanding of the challenges ahead and informed our approach to modernizing the application.

• Robust Project Documentation: Given the lack of existing documentation, MobiDev’s business analyst played a crucial role in generating detailed functional requirements. This documentation was essential for ensuring that all aspects of the application were thoroughly understood and properly tested before implementing any updates. It also served as a foundation for the client’s future development efforts.

• System Modernization and Cloud Migration: Following the audit, MobiDev developed a modernization plan that included updating the application to the latest Ruby and Ruby on Rails versions. Additionally, we transformed the monolithic codebase into a modular design, improving scalability and maintainability. Our DevOps engineers migrated the application to Microsoft Azure, recognizing the need for a more robust infrastructure. This cloud platform was chosen for its scalability, security features, and ability to support the healthcare provider’s growing needs.

• Extensive Testing and Bug Fixing: As part of the modernization process, MobiDev implemented a rigorous testing protocol, including regression testing, to ensure that the updated application remained stable and functional. The testing phase also uncovered several unrelated bugs, which were promptly fixed to enhance the overall performance and reliability of the application.
• Comprehensive Project Documentation: To support the application’s ongoing maintenance and future development, MobiDev created detailed project documentation, including a list of User Acceptance Testing (UAT) cases. This documentation provided clear guidelines for future testing and updates, ensuring the healthcare provider could maintain the application’s high standards.

Technical Details:

• Backend: Ruby on Rails, Ruby
• Cloud Platform: Microsoft Azure
• Testing: Regression testing, functional testing
• Infrastructure: Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), Azure DevOps CI/CD

Outcomes

MobiDev’s efforts resulted in a fully modernized and scalable healthcare application. Due to migrating to the cloud and implementing a modular codebase, the application is now more secure, efficient, and easier to maintain. The healthcare provider can now focus on core tasks and innovations without being bogged down by technical debt. Additionally, the comprehensive documentation provided by MobiDev ensures that the client can continue to optimize and improve the application in the future.

Get Out of Technical Debt With MobiDev

At MobiDev, we understand the challenges that technical debt can impose on your business. Whether it’s slowing down your development cycles, introducing security vulnerabilities, or hampering your product’s scalability, technical debt can be a significant obstacle to your long-term success. That’s where we come in.

Why Choose MobiDev for Technical Debt Minimization?

• Expert Audits and Roadmapping: Our in-house consultants and engineers specialize in conducting thorough audit of your software and infrastructure. We meticulously detect and measure existing technical debt, providing a clear, actionable roadmap for its elimination. This ensures your systems remain robust, scalable, and ready to meet future demands.

• Cutting-Edge DevOps Expertise: MobiDev brings extensive DevOps expertise, offering best practices for Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD). Our approach ensures that your development pipeline is optimized for speed, reliability, and quality, reducing the chances of new technical debt accumulation.

• Proven Track Record Since 2009: With over a decade of experience in building, scaling, and modernizing software products, we have a deep understanding of what it takes to keep your software agile and competitive. Our seasoned team has successfully delivered solutions across various industries, always focusing on minimizing technical debt.

• Cloud Integration and Modernization: We are proficient in working with leading cloud services such as Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and AWS. Whether you’re looking for cloud migration & modernization services, we ensure a seamless transition that enhances your software’s performance and scalability.
• Compliance and Security: If your project involves compliance with regulations such as GDPR, CCPA, HIPAA, GLBA, or PCI DSS, MobiDev has you covered. We integrate the necessary technical measures to ensure your software meets these standards, reducing the risk of costly breaches and penalties.

By partnering with MobiDev, you gain access to a team committed to transforming your technical debt into a strategic advantage. Our comprehensive app modernization services are designed to align your software with your business goals, ensuring it remains a valuable asset rather than a growing liability.