What are the best decision-making strategies for technical debt in agile projects?
Learn from the community’s knowledge. Experts are adding insights into this AI-powered collaborative article, and you could too.
This is a new type of article that we started with the help of AI, and experts are taking it forward by sharing their thoughts directly into each section.
If you’d like to contribute, request an invite by liking or reacting to this article. Learn more
— The LinkedIn Team
Technical debt is the accumulation of suboptimal design or implementation choices that compromise the quality, performance, or maintainability of a software project. Agile projects, which value speed and flexibility over upfront planning and documentation, are especially prone to incur technical debt as they respond to changing requirements and customer feedback. However, technical debt can also pose significant risks and costs for agile teams, such as increased complexity, reduced productivity, lower customer satisfaction, and higher defect rates. Therefore, agile teams need to adopt effective decision-making strategies to manage technical debt and balance short-term and long-term goals. In this article, we will explore some of the best decision-making strategies for technical debt in agile projects, based on the principles and practices of agile software development.
The first step to manage technical debt is to identify and measure it. Technical debt can arise from various sources, such as code smells, outdated dependencies, insufficient testing, poor documentation, or rushed features. Agile teams can use different tools and techniques to detect and quantify technical debt, such as code analysis, code reviews, automated testing, user feedback, or metrics. For example, code analysis tools can help identify code smells, such as duplication, complexity, or coupling, and calculate the technical debt ratio, which is the ratio of the effort to fix the debt to the total development effort. Code reviews can help spot potential issues and share best practices among team members. Automated testing can help ensure the quality and functionality of the code and reveal any defects or vulnerabilities. User feedback can help evaluate the usability and satisfaction of the product and identify any gaps or problems. Metrics can help monitor the impact of technical debt on the project performance, such as delivery time, defect rate, or customer retention.
-
Dimitar Kostov
Site Lead for VCF at VMware
Technical debt is the same as financial debt and is managed in the same way -- make sure you pay it up, or you have less cash/resources to do what you want. If you don't manage and pay it with priority, like the financial debt, it will drive you to go bankrupt.
-
Hari S.
Customer Experience Leader - Leveraging AI and emerging tech to transform CX and drive growth
In my perspective, standard guiding principle we follow is to prioritize the resolution of issues that would pose significant barriers to our long-term value delivery. This definitely requires a continuous process of evaluation, where we categorize and prioritize our technical debt based on its potential impact on business operations and the stability of our underlying technology. When it comes to decision-making it is strategically aligned towards maximizing long-term value and benefits, with the understanding that short-term solutions often lead to the accumulation of technical debt. In certain situation, we have to make decision towards short-term for faster market with the understanding that we will balance in upcoming sprints.
-
Prashant Nema
Agile CIO | Transformation Executive | Digital & Data Technologist | Board Advisor
Managing Tech Debt in agile delivery models needs to have dedicated capacity allocated at 15 to 20% in every sprint to ensure continuous tech debt mgmt is happening. Overall tech debt of more than 30% for your product foot print will inevitably slow your agile delivery down.
The second step to manage technical debt is to prioritize and plan its repayment. Technical debt repayment is the process of reducing or eliminating technical debt by refactoring, updating, testing, or documenting the code. However, not all technical debt is equally important or urgent to repay. Some technical debt may have a high impact on the project quality or value, while some may have a low impact or even be beneficial in some cases. Therefore, agile teams need to prioritize and plan technical debt repayment based on the expected benefits and costs of each debt item. For example, agile teams can use a matrix to classify technical debt items into four categories: high impact-high urgency, high impact-low urgency, low impact-high urgency, and low impact-low urgency. Then, they can decide which items to repay in each iteration or release, based on the available resources, dependencies, and customer needs. Alternatively, agile teams can use a backlog to manage technical debt items as user stories, with acceptance criteria, estimates, and priorities. Then, they can allocate a certain percentage of each iteration or release to work on technical debt items, along with new features and bug fixes.
-
Jim Sherlock
Chief Technology Officer
I firmly believe that addressing technical debt should be seamlessly integrated into agile project planning. It's essential to align technical debt repayment with other value-added projects to ensure that the software's quality and functionality continuously improve. Prioritization is key, allowing us to assess the impact of each debt item in the context of the project. This integrated approach ensures that technical debt reduction contributes to the overall project's success and doesn't remain a separate effort.
-
Ravi Prakash Gupta
Head of Engineering, Uppwise | Learner | Student | IIM C- SMP
In my experience of projects management, we've learned that not all technical debt carries the same weight. Some might be a minor inconvenience, while others can significantly hinder progress. Drawing from our hands-on approach, we believe in classifying these debts based on their impact and urgency. By integrating them as user stories in our backlog, we ensure they're not sidelined but addressed in tandem with new features. This systematic approach, complete with acceptance criteria and estimates, allows us to strike a balance. We're not just firefighting; we're strategizing, ensuring that our projects remain agile, efficient, and of top-notch quality. It's this proactive planning that sets us apart and drives our commitment to excellence.
-
Nischal Doshi
Head of Solutions (EMEA) & Global Presales
The impact of the Tech Debt is not always just Technical. We at Accion Labs have observed that the very first place Tech Debt hits is more often than not in the Data Layer. Unclean, inaccurate, inconsistent, disjointed data usually impacts all the layers and even if you wish to address UX / CX layer Tech Debt, you may not get desired results till you address the Data Layer. So, categorizing the KPIs by impact area is important and helps in prioritizing and alignment of the right resources. These impact categories are Business, Structural, Process, Data, and People.
(edited)
The third step to manage technical debt is to communicate and collaborate on it. Technical debt is not only a technical issue, but also a business and organizational issue. It affects not only the developers, but also the product owners, customers, and stakeholders. Therefore, agile teams need to communicate and collaborate on technical debt with all the parties involved, to ensure a common understanding, alignment, and support. For example, agile teams can use visualizations, such as dashboards, charts, or graphs, to communicate the status, trends, and impacts of technical debt to the product owners, customers, and stakeholders. They can also use value propositions, such as cost-benefit analysis, return on investment, or risk assessment, to justify and negotiate the technical debt repayment plans and trade-offs. Moreover, agile teams can use feedback loops, such as retrospectives, demos, or surveys, to collaborate on technical debt with the product owners, customers, and stakeholders. They can also use best practices, such as coding standards, design patterns, or peer reviews, to collaborate on technical debt with the developers.
-
David Whalley
It is, in my opinion, clearly the responsibility of the 'IT dept'/CIO/CTO to ensure that IT is being built responsibility and to balance short term delivery against long term maintenance/scaleability requirements. What I see a lot is teams treat Tech Debt the same way as other requirements and in terms of prioritisation/scheduling they effectively seek approval. While many stakeholders understand the need to control tech debt, most of them will prioritise short term value delivery. Making the argument that it is the right thing to do, will largely fall on deaf ears. So don't do it. The capacity available to stakeholders should be AFTER the IT organisation has determined what capacity needs to be reserved for reduction of technical debt.
(edited) -
Ravi Prakash Gupta
Head of Engineering, Uppwise | Learner | Student | IIM C- SMP
We should consistently observe that technical debt isn't an isolated developer's concern; it resonates across the spectrum, impacting product owners, stakeholders, and even our end-users. Communication, for us, is the linchpin. We believe in transparently conveying the nuances of our technical debt, utilizing visual aids like dashboards to depict its status and trends. But it's not just about one-way communication. Collaboration is key. By integrating feedback mechanisms like retrospectives and demos, we foster a two-way dialogue, ensuring that every stakeholder has a voice in addressing and strategizing around technical debt. This collective approach helps driving our projects towards excellence.
-
Nischal Doshi
Head of Solutions (EMEA) & Global Presales
Not every Tech Debt is caused by Code quality and not all Tech Debt is developer responsibility. As mentioned in previous section (Prioritize and Plan Repayment), we focus on the Tech Debt Impact areas and KPIs aligned to it. Measuring in this way, effectively enables mapping and aligning right stakeholders across the value chain. For example, a Tech Debt impact area of "Business" with related KPIs like Usability etc will map to Business / CX stakeholders and communication flow through to other roles up to developer. Besides the overall communication and collaboration should be enabled through Architecture Governance and Change Management mechanism which by default brings all the apsects of dashboards and decision making.
The fourth step to manage technical debt is to learn and improve from it. Technical debt is not only a problem, but also an opportunity. It can provide valuable insights and lessons for agile teams to improve their processes, practices, and products. Therefore, agile teams need to learn and improve from technical debt, by analyzing its root causes, effects, and solutions, and applying the lessons learned to prevent or reduce future technical debt. For example, agile teams can use root cause analysis, such as the five whys or fishbone diagrams, to identify the underlying factors that led to technical debt, such as lack of skills, knowledge, or resources, or unrealistic expectations, or changing requirements. They can also use impact analysis, such as the debt quadrant or the debt map, to evaluate the consequences and benefits of technical debt, such as increased complexity, reduced productivity, lower customer satisfaction, or higher defect rates, or faster delivery, higher flexibility, or more innovation. Moreover, agile teams can use solution analysis, such as the debt repayment strategies or the debt prevention strategies, to determine the best ways to repay or avoid technical debt, such as refactoring, updating, testing, or documenting the code, or improving the planning, design, development, or testing processes.
-
Ravi Prakash Gupta
Head of Engineering, Uppwise | Learner | Student | IIM C- SMP
Absolutely, technical debt, in our experience, has been a profound learning catalyst. While it presents challenges, it also unveils opportunities to refine our methodologies. Each debt encountered is a mirror, reflecting areas for enhancement. By conducting thorough root cause analyses, we unearth the underlying triggers, allowing us to preempt similar issues in the future. Impact analysis, on the other hand, offers a holistic view of the broader implications, guiding our strategic decisions. It's not merely about addressing the present debt; it's about evolving our practices. This iterative learning ensures that we're not just reacting but proactively steering our projects towards a path of continuous improvement and excellence
-
Edward Mangini
Technologist | Empathetic People Leader | Fractional CTO
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." In order to ensure that we are learning and improving, we have to track the recurrence of technical debt. I've seen many organizations get stuck here. The learning process requires more than just prioritization and planning, it requires that we spend the time to understand how we acquired that debt.
-
Robert Franceschini
Leadership | Strategy | Innovation | Transformation | Technology | Team Building | Execution
Technical debt should be factored into any agile methodology that assumes an iterative development process. As products evolve, mature and expand over time, tech debt is inevitable. In the past tech debt required refactoring a codebase. Now, tech debt might manifest as APIs or services that need to be deprecated or replaced with new components in order to address current requirements. Not all engineering work is greenfield. Often times engineering is brownfield where the old must be changed or removed to make room for the new.
-
Madhuri Mittal
Executive Technology Leader Specialized in Championing Modernization & Digital Transformation | Systems Architect | Cloud Native | Azure and AWS | .NET expertise | Microservices
Based on my experience, technical debt often remains unaddressed until it becomes a critical issue, sometimes prompting a complete rewrite. To mitigate this, the primary objective should be to minimize the accumulation of technical debt from the outset. Effective sprint planning and a robust solution architecture are essential. Implementing rigorous processes, such as architectural reviews, code reviews, and test-driven development, can significantly curb the buildup. Still, some technical debt is inevitable. It's crucial to document these debts in backlogs meticulously and consistently review and prioritize them for resolution. Secondly allocate a percent of time during sprints for tech debt remedy so they get resolved at a steady pace
(edited) -
Luis Salazar
LinkedIn's Top Voice 💡| Potencio a tus equipos y a tu empresa, un paso a la vez.
Technical debt is a cross-functional issue, so it's key to involve all stakeholders in the decision-making process. This includes developers, POs/PMs, and business leaders. Also, it's important to be transparent about technical debt. This means communicating the risks and rewards of the debt to all stakeholders, and keeping them updated on your progress in repaying the debt. Balance the need to deliver new features with the need to reduce technical debt. This is a delicate balance, but it is important to make sure that you are not accumulating too much technical debt, or it will eventually start to impact your ability to deliver new features. And this is a fact: Not all technical debt needs to be addressed immediately. So, Prioritize.
-
Kemal Atik, PMP®
Refactoring should be a regular part of tasks during sprint planning and backlog grooming sessions. Educating stakeholders about technical debt and its implications on the project's long-term success will help timely resolution before they become critical problems. PM should clearly communicate the trade-offs between addressing technical debt vs delivering new features to manage expectations. Turnovers, changing priorities, lack of governance are important contributors to technical debt in agile environments. Automated testing, code analysis, and continuous integration to catch and address issues early in the development lifecycle will be remedy to against those factors in some extent.