Technical Debt

Technical debt occurs when short-term solutions are chosen over long-term, sustainable ones. While this can speed up development, it creates underlying issues that must be addressed later.
​

The concept of debt serves as an analogy. Choosing quick fixes is similar to borrowing money. The effort required to rework or refactor is equivalent to repaying the principal. The slowdown in development caused by unresolved issues is comparable to paying interest.
​

Technical debt affects both development teams and business operations. It reduces productivity by making new feature development more time-consuming due to unforeseen issues. Maintaining an application becomes costlier as developers allocate more resources to handling existing problems.
​

Stability and performance suffer when unresolved issues lead to frequent bugs, directly impacting user adoption and return on investment. Continuous exposure to technical debt can also contribute to developer frustration and burnout, increasing turnover rates.
​

Clayton tracks technical debt across code, configuration, and security. It uses the Technical Debt Ratio (TDR) as a key metric.
​

TDR is calculated by dividing the estimated cost to fix identified issues by the estimated cost to develop the application from scratch. Every active policy in a project contributes equally to this measurement.
​

Additional metrics include the number of open issues, the estimated time required to remediate them, and defect density, which measures issues per thousand lines of code.
​

Simple, maintainable solutions should always be prioritized. Prudent technical debt may be necessary when immediate delivery is required, but reckless debt such as skipping design due to time constraints should be avoided.
​

Accumulating excessive debt makes it increasingly difficult to introduce new features and increases the cost of addressing existing problems. Business stakeholders will always push for new functionality, making it essential to balance feature development with technical debt management.
​

Clayton categorizes technical debt into five levels:

Teams should aim to keep their TDR below 5% to maintain long-term productivity and agility.
​

Technical debt compounds over time. Business priorities will continue to drive new development, often layering new components on top of existing problematic code. When teams experience turnover, knowledge of past design decisions is lost, making future remediation even more challenging.
​

Effective management requires continuous oversight. Policies should be updated to detect critical issues automatically, and protection modes should be implemented to prevent them from being introduced into production. Tracking technical debt in the backlog ensures visibility and accountability.
​

Maintaining a Technical Debt Ratio below five percent helps sustain long-term productivity. Repaying debt quickly and consistently prevents it from escalating and negatively impacting future development.
​
Learn more on this topic