Managing Technical Debt: What did the architecture design flaws reveal about your software?

As organizations transition to a virtual environment, the need to address risk and compliance concerns remain, instead, insurance organizations prefer to incorporate new solutions that integrate easily with core and legacy systems, also, the other thing is that enterprise architectural planning or the strategy, that you need to orchestrate all these different technologies, and how you create your long-term investment plan is going to be a long journey.

Technical Debt

And technical debt can increase every day as developers introduce architectural flaws and code quality issues into the code base, either unintentionally or through neglect of proper coding and design rules, so you can pay off technical debt, architectural debt of the kind that is causing you to write bugs in a way that decreases the amount of time it takes you to write code, and without introducing bugs as a side effect, furthermore, whether it results from ignorance, accident, or strategy, all software-reliant systems carry some technical debt.

Expensive Team

However, embracing security as an integral part of the DevOps process helps ensure the consistent quality of your software with each release, and saves you the headache of technical debt, you need to work harder to make the debt known and address the debt up close and personal before it gets out of hand. As a result, it is a debt that is incurred when a team chooses an expedient but flawed solution that has to be paid, usually with interest, at a later date when the overlooked problem is even bigger and more expensive to solve.

Technical debts reduce the velocity of delivering stories, so the team and client must come to agreement on how to balance the short-term yields (only deliver functions) and the long-term payoff (getting rid of technical debt), sometimes organizational culture is so anti-design and anti-systems thinking that the EA has no chance, also, therefore, the problem of measuring and managing technical debt is closely related to managing risk and making informed decisions about which delayed tasks need to be accomplished, and when.

Conceptually, technical debt is anything in the code that makes it harder to work on than it could otherwise be, and when you allow it to exist it progressively becomes easier to accumulate more, in an era when more developers are deploying and coding faster than ever, architectural reviews need to happen at the speed of your development teams deployment. As a matter of fact, industry research has revealed how technical debt harms the quality and maintainability of software systems.

Validating features in production, additional automation, better reviews and thorough testing are among a few things that will help to drive-up your code quality, and your team knows it, bugs seldom exist in isolation. As a rule, one noticeable symptom of technical debt is represented by code smells, defined as symptoms of poor design and implementation choices.

Architecture is there to advance the ability to deliver features quickly, decrease the number of defects and reduce the risk to your organization, workflow of a process or system for the team to review before it is implemented in code. Also, with technology architecture growing in strategic importance, more architects will likely play a larger role in system operations and join software development teams designing complex technology.

Stories which reduce technical debt may have little or no immediate benefit to users, organizational design, project management and enterprise architecture skills. In summary, currently, most approaches to managing technical debt focus on dealing with technical debt at source code level, while few methods deal with technical debt at architecture level.

Want to check how your Managing Technical Debt Processes are performing? You don’t know what you don’t know. Find out with our Managing Technical Debt Self Assessment Toolkit: