In today’s volatile business environment, where digital agility is crucial, CIOs and CTOs are constantly balancing the speed of innovation with the stability of their systems. Technical debt—the hidden cost of rapid scaling—poses a unique challenge, affecting everything from product delivery timelines to team morale.
As organisations plan for the years ahead, smart decision-making is essential in navigating the balance between adopting new technologies and maintaining resilient core systems. Technical debt management is a key piece of this puzzle, and understanding how to tackle it effectively can empower teams to be more agile and efficient.
In a recent discussion, a panel of experienced DiUS consultants explored technical debt from all angles—how to define it, communicate its impact, and manage it in a way that sustains innovation. Their insights provide practical guidance and hard-earned lessons, offering a clear path to help organisations turn technical debt management into a strategic advantage.
The unseen weight of technical debt on culture and teams
Technical debt isn’t just about code; it’s about culture. Like rust accumulating beneath a ship’s hull, technical debt may start as an unseen burden, but over time it grows, making it harder to navigate forward. Warner Godfrey, Principal Consultant at DiUS, captured this urgency perfectly: “Imagine you’re a passenger in a race car, barreling into a corner, and you’ve passed the brake marker. This sense of impending disaster is what it feels like when technical debt starts piling up unchecked.” Technical debt, therefore, is more than a developer issue; it’s a strategic consideration that influences everything from developer satisfaction to business agility.
Unchecked debt can weigh down a development team, impacting not only the velocity of their work but also their morale. When developers spend more time fixing legacy issues than building new features, burnout becomes inevitable. Mike Hughes, also a Principal Consultant, shared that stakeholders generally fall into two groups: “Those who have seen the consequences of ignoring tech debt and those who haven’t. The second group needs much more convincing to prioritise it.” This gap in experience can lead to conflict between immediate business goals and long-term technical needs.
Defining technical debt in simple terms
For non-technical leaders, technical debt can be explained simply as the accumulated cost of quick-fix solutions or outdated systems that gradually slow down development and increase maintenance needs. Just as deferred maintenance on a building can lead to major repairs down the line, neglected technical debt grows more expensive over time. Ignoring it doesn’t just slow down future projects; it risks damaging the foundation of the entire organisation’s digital strategy.
The cost of ignoring technical debt
Ignoring technical debt has far-reaching consequences beyond just slowing down feature delivery. As debt piles up, developers become frustrated, productivity wanes, and talented team members may even leave. Dan Livolsi, Principal Consultant, recalled an extreme case from his early career: “A team eventually resigned because they couldn’t keep up with the endless cycle of maintenance. It was costly—not only financially but in terms of morale and brand reputation.” In severe cases, the cost of losing an entire team over unresolved tech debt can cripple projects and cause lasting damage.
For customers, an unstable codebase results in longer wait times for improvements, degraded user experience, and missed opportunities for competitive differentiation. Matthew Kairys, another Principal Consultant, shared a striking example where a single bug fix took six months due to system fragility, underscoring how neglected technical debt can stall critical business operations.
A commitment to continuous improvement
For today’s tech leaders, addressing technical debt isn’t just a technical task; it’s a commitment to fostering a culture of continuous improvement. By embedding debt reduction into everyday development processes, leaders can create an environment where each touchpoint with the codebase strengthens it. “I’m a big fan of the ‘Boy Scout rule,’ where whenever you touch a piece of code, you leave it in a better state than you found it,” said Richard Thompson, Lead Consultant. “Over time, these small improvements add up, reducing debt without halting progress.” This approach reinforces that debt reduction is not just about code; it’s about creating a resilient, agile foundation for sustainable growth.
Mike Hughes shared that integrating debt reduction into feature development has proven successful in gaining stakeholder buy-in. “Instead of pitching debt as a standalone effort, we tell stakeholders, ‘We’re doing the new feature, and as part of it, we’ll tackle the tech debt in that area.’ This way, it’s less about making a trade-off and more about enhancing capabilities while we build.” This incremental approach is a strategic shift that aligns technical debt management with ongoing development, making it easier for stakeholders to appreciate the value.
Framing technical debt as a business concern
For many decision-makers, technical debt can seem abstract or even an indication of poor engineering. Bridging this understanding gap is crucial. Grace Wu, Lead Consultant, focuses on framing debt in terms of business outcomes: “I try to map tech debt to business value, explaining how addressing it helps us deliver features faster and meet customer needs better.” This framing turns technical debt into a business enabler, making it more relatable for non-technical stakeholders.
Data also plays a vital role in illustrating the impact of reducing technical debt. Bryan Signey, Principal Consultant, shared a powerful example: “We estimated that by automating repetitive support tasks, we could cut support time by 50%, freeing up resources for more valuable work.” Demonstrating the productivity gains from reducing technical debt helps stakeholders see its value and can lead to more collaborative prioritisation.
Developer experience and team satisfaction
Technical debt doesn’t only affect delivery speed; it influences how developers experience their work. Matthew Kairys noted that using a UX-inspired approach to evaluate developer experience can identify common pain points and areas for improvement. “Developer happiness metrics can indicate where debt is creating friction and impacting morale,” he explained. This perspective sees developers as internal customers, and addressing their pain points not only boosts productivity but also supports retention.
The leadership legacy of managing technical debt
For CIOs, CTOs, and Heads of Engineering, technical debt management goes beyond code quality—it’s part of the legacy they leave. Consider the following:
- Are we truly set up to support long-term growth, or are we building on shaky foundations?
- Do we allocate resources to maintain our systems with the same rigour we apply to new features?
- How does our approach to technical debt reflect our commitment to sustainable growth?
- Are we prepared to prioritise resilience over speed when necessary?
Actionable outcomes: One project team saw a 30% increase in feature velocity after reducing technical debt through process automation and modular refactoring. This gain enabled the team to innovate faster, meeting market demands while fostering a collaborative, forward-thinking culture.
Tackling technical debt is a continuous journey. Just as a well-maintained ship glides steadily forward, a well-managed codebase can support an organisation’s long-term vision, enabling it to adapt to change and capture new opportunities. Addressing technical debt isn’t a one-off task; it’s a commitment to building a sustainable, resilient future for the entire organisation.
A legacy worth pursuing
As custodians of the organisation’s digital backbone, are we committed to a future where agility and resilience coexist? How we tackle technical debt today will define our organisation’s capacity to adapt, grow, and lead in tomorrow’s competitive landscape. Embracing this responsibility today can mean a more agile, innovative, and resilient organisation tomorrow—a legacy worth pursuing.