top of page

Navigating the Complexity of Technical Debt

Updated: May 9

Navigating Technical Debt Infographic

Technical debt looms large as both a challenge and an opportunity. Like its financial counterpart, technical debt represents the cumulative cost of taking shortcuts or compromises in the development process. While these shortcuts may expedite initial delivery, they often lead to long-term challenges that hinder productivity, increase maintenance costs, and impede innovation. In this comprehensive blog, we'll explore the nuances of technical debt, explore real-world examples, and outline strategies for mitigation and management.

Examples Of Technical Debt

Legacy System Obsolescence in Finance

In the finance industry, legacy systems represent a common source of technical debt. Consider a scenario where a financial institution relies on a decades-old mainframe system to manage core banking operations. While this system may have served its purpose admirably in the past, it now presents significant challenges regarding maintainability, scalability, and compatibility with modern technologies. The lack of documentation and dependencies on outdated hardware and software inhibits the institution's ability to innovate and adapt to changing market dynamics. As a result, the organization finds itself mired in technical debt, struggling to keep pace with competitors who have embraced more modern and flexible systems.

Spaghetti Code in E-Commerce Platforms

E-commerce platforms often grapple with technical debt from poorly designed architecture and hastily implemented features. Imagine a scenario where a development team rushes to add new functionalities to an existing e-commerce platform to meet the demands of a seasonal sales event. In their haste, the team bypasses established coding standards and best practices, resulting in a tangled mess of interconnected code, commonly referred to as spaghetti code. This tangled web of code complicates software maintenance and extension, directly impacting the platform's adaptability and growth potential. Consequently, maintaining and extending the platform becomes increasingly arduous, as developers must navigate convoluted logic and dependencies. The lack of modularization and abstraction further exacerbates the problem, making it difficult to isolate and address issues without inadvertently introducing regressions.

Outdated Libraries and Dependencies in Healthcare Systems

Healthcare systems face challenges regarding technical debt, particularly concerning using outdated libraries and dependencies. Consider a scenario where a healthcare provider relies on a legacy electronic health record (EHR) system that utilizes deprecated third-party libraries for data processing and visualization. While the system may have been cutting-edge at the time of its inception, the failure to keep abreast of technological advancements has resulted in a substantial accumulation of technical debt. The reliance on outdated dependencies exposes the system to security vulnerabilities and compliance risks, as the libraries may no longer receive updates or support from their maintainers. Consequently, the healthcare provider grapples with the dual challenges of maintaining system stability while mitigating the inherent risks associated with legacy dependencies.

Monolithic Architecture in Transportation and Logistics

Technical debt in the transportation and logistics industry often manifests in monolithic architecture, characterized by tightly coupled components and a lack of modularity. Consider a scenario where a logistics company develops a comprehensive software platform to manage its operations, encompassing order management, route optimization, and inventory tracking.

Initially, the monolithic architecture may seem adequate for the company's needs, providing a centralized system for managing complex workflows. However, as the company grows and evolves, the limitations of the monolithic architecture become increasingly apparent. The lack of scalability and flexibility hampers the company's ability to adapt to changing market conditions and customer demands. Moreover, the tight coupling between components makes introducing new features or technologies challenging without disrupting existing functionalities. As a result, the company finds itself constrained by technical debt, unable to leverage the full potential of modern software architectures and practices.

Inadequate Testing and Quality Assurance in Entertainment and Media

The Absence Of Automated Testing Frameworks And Robust Quality Assurance Processes Makes It Difficult To Identify And Address Issues On Time, Leading To Increased Technical Debt

Technical debt may arise from inadequate testing and quality assurance practices in the entertainment and media industry, particularly in fast-paced development environments. Consider a scenario where a media streaming platform rushes to release a new feature in time for a highly anticipated event, such as a major sporting event or awards show. In their eagerness to meet the deadline, the development team foregoes thorough testing and quality assurance procedures, opting instead for ad-hoc testing and manual verification.

While the feature may function as intended initially, the lack of comprehensive testing leaves it vulnerable to bugs, performance issues, and user experience shortcomings. Over time, as user feedback and usage patterns emerge, the platform discovers numerous defects and usability issues that require immediate attention. However, the absence of automated testing frameworks and robust quality assurance processes makes it difficult to identify and address these issues on time, leading to increased technical debt and diminished user satisfaction.

Lack of Documentation in Education Technology

Education technology (EdTech) platforms often grapple with technical debt from a lack of comprehensive documentation. Consider a scenario where a software company develops a learning management system (LMS) for educational institutions, encompassing features such as course creation, student enrollment, and assessment tracking.

While the initial development phase may proceed smoothly, the absence of thorough documentation leaves subsequent developers and stakeholders in the dark regarding system architecture, design decisions, and implementation details. As a result, troubleshooting issues, implementing new features, and onboarding new team members become increasingly challenging, as developers must rely on trial and error or reverse engineering to understand the system's intricacies.

The lack of documentation hampers knowledge sharing and collaboration across teams, leading to siloed development efforts and missed opportunities for innovation. Consequently, the software company is burdened by technical debt, as the cumulative impact of undocumented features and design decisions impairs the platform's long-term viability and maintainability.

Complexity of Integrations in Financial Technology

Financial technology (FinTech) companies often face technical debt challenges related to the complexity of integrations with third-party systems and services. Consider a scenario where a FinTech startup develops a mobile banking application that integrates with multiple external APIs for payment processing, account aggregation, and identity verification. While the initial implementation may proceed smoothly, the accumulation of technical debt becomes apparent as the company scales and expands its offerings.

The complexity of managing and maintaining integrations with disparate systems and APIs leads to increased development overhead, reduced agility, and heightened risk of service disruptions. Moreover, changes to external APIs or service endpoints necessitate frequent updates and modifications to the application codebase, further exacerbating technical debt and impeding innovation. As a result, the FinTech company finds itself grappling with the challenges of maintaining system stability and reliability while navigating the intricacies of third-party integrations.

Performance Bottlenecks in Gaming Software

In the gaming industry, technical debt often manifests as performance bottlenecks and optimization challenges. Consider a scenario where a game development studio releases a highly anticipated multiplayer game, boasting cutting-edge graphics and immersive gameplay mechanics. While the game may garner widespread acclaim upon release, players soon encounter performance issues such as lag, stuttering, and frame rate drops, particularly during peak usage periods or intensive gameplay sequences.

The root cause of these performance bottlenecks often lies in suboptimal code optimization, inefficient resource management, or architectural limitations inherent in the game engine or underlying infrastructure. Consequently, players experience frustration and dissatisfaction, leading to negative reviews, decreased player retention, and reputational damage to the game development studio. Addressing these performance issues requires extensive profiling, optimization, and refactoring efforts, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, further exacerbating technical debt and impeding future development efforts.

Lack of Scalability in Retail Software

Retail software platforms often face technical debt challenges related to scalability and performance under load. Consider a scenario where a retail company develops an e-commerce platform to handle online sales, inventory management, and customer support. While the platform may function adequately under normal usage conditions, it struggles to cope with sudden spikes in traffic during peak shopping seasons or promotional events. The lack of scalability leads to performance degradation, slow response times, and service disruptions, resulting in lost sales opportunities and dissatisfied customers.

The absence of robust monitoring and capacity planning exacerbates the problem, as the company struggles to predict and mitigate potential scalability issues before they impact the business. Addressing these scalability challenges requires a combination of architectural redesign, performance optimization, and infrastructure scaling, which may require significant investments in hardware, software, and expertise.

Strategies for Mitigating Technical Debt

1. Refactoring and Code Cleanup: Refactoring is the process of reorganizing existing code without altering its external behavior to enhance readability, maintainability, and extensibility. This proactive approach to addressing code debt can stave off future software maintenance challenges, ensuring the system remains agile and efficient. By pinpointing and mitigating technical debt through refactoring, teams can prevent it from snowballing into an unmanageable issue. Code cleanup, involving the removal of redundant, obsolete, or unnecessary code, along with the implementation of coding standards and best practices, significantly enhances code quality and consistency. Such practices are crucial for maintaining a healthy codebase, minimizing legacy code challenges, and ensuring sustainable development.

2. Automated Testing and Continuous Integration: Implementing automated testing frameworks and continuous integration (CI) pipelines helps catch bugs and regressions early in development. By automating testing processes, teams can ensure that code changes are thoroughly tested before deployment, reducing the risk of introducing new technical debt. Continuous integration involves integrating code changes into a shared repository and running automated tests to detect integration errors and conflicts. This proactive approach minimizes future legacy code challenges.

3. Documentation and Knowledge Sharing: Effective documentation and knowledge-sharing practices are essential tools in the fight against technical debt and its close relative, code debt. By meticulously documenting design decisions, implementation details, and coding best practices, development teams can significantly reduce the likelihood of technical debt arising from misunderstandings or a lack of context. This process is critical for ensuring software maintenance becomes more manageable, thereby directly addressing legacy code challenges.

Knowledge sharing within a development team fosters a culture of collaboration and communication, crucial for navigating the intricacies of technical debt. When developers share insights, lessons learned, and expertise, it not only enhances individual and team productivity but also elevates the overall quality of the code. This collaborative environment is essential for identifying potential pitfalls early and mitigating the long-term impacts of code debt on project timelines and budgets.

4. Adopting Agile and Iterative Development Practices: Adopting agile and iterative development practices offers a strategic advantage in managing technical debt. Methodologies like Scrum or Kanban emphasize iterative development and continuous improvement, aligning perfectly with the needs of modern software development projects facing legacy code challenges. By breaking projects into smaller, manageable tasks and focusing on delivering incremental value, teams can more effectively identify and address technical debt, thereby enhancing software maintenance efforts.

Regular agile practices, such as reviews and retrospectives, provide teams with opportunities to reflect on their progress, pinpoint areas ripe for improvement, and adjust their strategies accordingly. This adaptive approach is particularly effective in managing code debt, as it allows for the constant reprioritization of tasks based on their impact on the project's overall health and the delivery of value to stakeholders.

5. Investing in Tooling and Infrastructure: Investing in the right tools and infrastructure is a cornerstone strategy in the reduction of technical debt. Tools such as static code analysis, code quality metrics, and dependency management systems play a pivotal role in early identification and resolution of issues that contribute to technical debt. These technologies enable teams to maintain high standards of code quality and consistency, directly addressing common legacy code challenges and facilitating smoother software maintenance processes.

Infrastructure investments, including the optimization of development environments, deployment pipelines, and testing frameworks, are critical for improving the efficiency, reliability, and scalability of software projects. Such investments not only reduce the immediate impact of technical debt but also ensure that teams are better equipped to manage future challenges, thereby minimizing the accumulation of code debt over the lifecycle of a project.

Through the strategic application of documentation, agile methodologies, and the judicious use of development tools and infrastructure, teams can significantly mitigate the risks and impacts of technical debt. These practices foster a proactive development culture, emphasizing continuous improvement and collaboration to overcome the challenges of technical and code debt, ensuring the long-term success and sustainability of software projects.

6. Prioritizing Technical Debt in Product Backlog:

Incorporating Technical Debt Items Into The Product Backlog Allows Teams To Prioritize And Allocate Resources For Debt Repayment Alongside Other Project Tasks And Priorities

Incorporating technical debt items into the product backlog allows teams to prioritize and allocate resources for debt repayment alongside other project tasks and priorities. By treating technical debt as a first-class citizen in the backlog, teams can ensure that debt remains visible and actionable, enabling them to address debt items promptly. Prioritization involves assessing technical debt items' impact, severity, and urgency and aligning them with business goals and user needs.

Tracking Technical Debt in Project Management Systems

Use Tags Or Labels To Categorize Debt By Type


Jira is a popular project management system with features for tracking and managing technical debt. Teams can leverage Jira's issue-tracking capabilities to create dedicated issue types or epics for technical debt, assign severity levels or priority rankings, and use tags or labels to categorize debt by type, or impact (type being most common). By tracking technical debt alongside other project tasks and priorities, teams can ensure that debt remains visible, actionable, and ultimately, manageable.


Trello is a versatile project management tool that allows teams to create boards, lists, and cards to track tasks and collaborate effectively. Teams can leverage Trello to track technical debt by creating dedicated lists or boards for debt items, using labels or tags to categorize debt by type or priority, and attaching relevant documentation or comments to each card. For example, a software development team may use Trello to track technical debt items such as code refactoring, architectural redesign, or dependency upgrades. This allows them to prioritize and address debt items transparently and organized.


Asana is a flexible work management platform that enables teams to organize tasks, set priorities, and collaborate seamlessly. Teams can use Asana to track technical debt by creating projects or tasks dedicated to debt items, assigning due dates or priority levels, and using custom fields or tags to categorize debt by severity or impact. For example, a software development team may use Asana to track technical debt items such as performance optimization, or infrastructure upgrades, ensuring that debt remains visible and actionable throughout the development process.

GitHub Issues

GitHub Issues is a built-in issue-tracking feature within the GitHub platform, widely used by software development teams to manage project tasks and bug reports. Teams can leverage GitHub Issues to track technical debt by creating dedicated issues or labels for debt items, assigning collaborators or milestones, and using custom fields or tags to categorize debt by area or complexity. For example, a development team may use GitHub Issues to track technical debt items such as code cleanup, test automation, or documentation improvements. This allows them to prioritize and address debt items alongside other project tasks.


By Investing In Code Quality, Automation, Documentation, And Collaborative Practices
Teams Can Reduce The Accumulation Of Technical Debt

Technical debt or code debt, along with issues of software maintenance and legacy code challenges, represent a pervasive and complex challenge that can significantly impact project success and team productivity. By understanding the nuances of technical debt, recognizing its impact, and adopting proactive mitigation strategies, teams can navigate the terrain of technical debt more effectively. By investing in code quality, automation, documentation, and collaborative practices, teams can reduce the accumulation of technical debt, improve overall productivity, and pave the way for long-term success.

By leveraging project management systems and tools like Jira, teams can track and manage technical debt alongside other project priorities, ensuring that debt remains visible, actionable, and ultimately, manageable. By embracing these principles and practices, teams can unlock the full potential of their software projects and deliver value to their stakeholders with confidence and agility.

About The Author

Jon White is an experienced technology leader with over 34 years of international experience in the software industry, having worked in the UK, Malaysia, Bulgaria, and Estonia. He holds a BSc (Hons) in Systems Design. He led the Skype for Windows development teams for many years (with 280 million monthly connected users), playing a key role in the team's transition to Agile.

Jon has held multiple leadership positions throughout his career across various sectors, including loyalty management, internet telecoms (Skype), IT service management, real estate, and banking/financial services.

Jon is recognized for his expertise in Agile software development, particularly helping organizations transform to Agile ways of working (esp. Scrum), and is a specialist in technical due diligence. He is also an experienced mentor, coach, and onboarding specialist.

Over the last few years, he has completed over a hundred due diligence and assessment projects for clients, including private equity, portfolio companies, and technology companies, spanning multiple sectors. Contact Jon at


bottom of page