Technical debt: why quick decisions can prove costly later on

Technical debt is almost inevitable during software development. It is the result of quick fixes and pragmatic choices made under time pressure or the use of a language which step by step is getting out of fashion. What helps in the short term to meet a deadline can in time lead to delays, higher costs and declining innovation. Development teams that want to build robust applications which can stand the test of time need to limit or prevent technical debt in code as much as possible. You can read a set of best practices and insights on how to do this in the article below. 

Technical debt can arise in various ways. Sometimes it is a conscious choice: the team delivers faster, with the intention of improving the code later. More often it happens unconsciously, due to a lack of knowledge, changing requirements, time pressure or simply because the language chosen is gradually getting out of fashion and hence the skills to improve and maintain the application become seriously scarce. Examples include poorly structured code, missing tests, outdated dependencies or architectural decisions that no longer fit the scale of the application. 

Over time, technical debt always increases, and it becomes more and more difficult and costly to add new features or fix bugs. What started as a small shortcut grows into a structural problem that slows down the work of the entire development team because developers spend more and more time circumventing problematic code. 

The disadvantages of technical debt 

Technical debt impacts virtually every aspect of the development process. The most direct consequence is a slower development speed, which means application updates are missing target release dates and budgets are overrun. Adding new functionality becomes more difficult because teams lose valuable time debugging complex, or poorly documented code. Also, new team members find it more difficult to get up to speed and knowledge transfer and experience build-up stalls. 

Poorly structured code also often leads to regression problems: a bug fix in one part of the application can cause new errors in another part. This means that more tests are needed to ensure stability. 

Technical debt also affects performance. Applications run slower and less stably than intended, or become incompatible with modern libraries and cloud environments. As code quality continues to decline, the risks of bugs, security issues and system failures increase. 

Ultimately, the codebase can become so rigid and fragile that the organisation can no longer respond quickly to changing market demand. Technical debt breaks innovation: every change entails too many risks while the willingness of development teams to experiment is drastically reduced. 

Prevention is better than cure 

Technical debt can be prevented by investing in code quality and professional development methods from the outset. This means conducting code reviews, implementing automated testing, applying clear coding standards and scheduling regular refactoring. On top of this, one needs to consistently document architectural decisions and foster a culture in which quality is given structural attention. 

Keeping a good balance is essential. It can be acceptable to deliberately create technical debt in order to meet a deadline – as long as the shortcuts are recorded and time is set aside for later recovery. High performance development teams reserve time in each sprint for maintenance and improvements, and they structurally use analysis tools (such as SonarQube or CodeScene) among all team members to identify and address risks early on. 

Another effective method to combat technical debt is to reserve time and resources for a refactoring phase in the development process. Halfway through the process, time is deliberately set aside in the sprint planning to improve code and remove old ‘dead’ code. No new code is developed during this period. It may be difficult to convince the business, but it ensures stable code and prevents technical debt from building up. 

Dealing with legacy code smartly 

When technical debt has accumulated, an incremental and risk-driven approach helps to regain control of the codebase step by step. First, map out the legacy code and determine which parts pose the greatest risks or cause the most delays. Prioritise based on business impact and start with the most critical components. 

Use the strangler fig pattern: build new, clean code around old modules and replace them gradually. Ensure sufficient test coverage before you start, so that functionality is maintained during refactoring. Set aside time on a structural basis – for example, 20 to 30 per cent of each sprint – to reduce legacy debt and link improvements to new features where possible. If a component is modified, improve it immediately. 

An effective approach combines refactoring, additional automated testing, modernisation of dependencies, improved documentation and – where necessary – rewriting modules. Work incrementally and set measurable goals, such as ‘increase test coverage from 40 to 70 per cent’ or ‘split this module into three separate services’. 

Communication is crucial here: make the value of refactoring visible. Show concretely how technical debt slows down work and how structural improvements contribute to faster delivery, lower costs and greater stability. 

Invest in clean code

Managing technical debt is a continuous process that revolves around balancing fast delivery and sustainable construction. Organisations that invest structurally in reducing existing debt and preventing new debt build high quality code faster, respond more flexibly to market changes and achieve a higher return on investment. It is a strategic choice that directly contributes to the organisation’s competitiveness. 

NetRom Software supports you in tackling technical debt 

At NetRom Software, we understand how complex technical debt can be and how it affects an organisation’s effectiveness. That is why, as part of our services, we also offer clients opportunities to tackle technical debt. 

When customers ask us for support and advice, we often first carry out a comprehensive audit. We examine the current systems and map out all relevant components such as the architectural designs, operating systems, databases and links to other applications. 

In this audit phase, we use both automated tools and manual checks to ensure that we don’t overlook anything and to formulate a complete picture of the current situation in terms of technical debt. Based on this, we work with the client to draw up an action plan to eliminate the existing technical debt and prevent new debt from building up. 

When implementing the action plan, our IT engineers bring fresh insights and an objective view of the existing code base. Because they are not bound by previous choices, they are quicker to recognise patterns and areas for improvement that are sometimes overlooked internally. They dare to take big steps and bring best practices from other projects – leading to more robust architectures and more sustainable solutions. 

Would you like to know more about our approach? 

NetRom combines in-depth technical expertise with domain knowledge to solve clients’ technical debt challenges. Our more than 500 university-educated developers with a hands-on mentality have extensive experience in analysing, prioritising and systematically reducing technical debt in a wide range of technologies and industries. 

Are you curious about how NetRom can support your organization in the field of software development? Please contact us using the online form below. We are happy to share our insights and practical experiences from similar projects.