Structural Thinking and Operational Philosophy on Technical Debt

gpt-4-turbo has translated this article into English.

I was once asked in an interview, “How do you manage technical debt?” At that time, I had not clearly defined the concept of technical debt, so I am writing this article to organize my thoughts.

Language Alignment of Technical Debt

• Technical debt must be clearly segregated.
• Debt is the result of a decision that requires a repayment plan,
• A decision that was problematic but lacked a repayment plan is not technical debt but technical failure.

Technical Debt is Not Just Managed, but Operated

• It’s not just about listing and recording,
• You must design and implement a structural resolution strategy.
• I operate technical debt on an execution basis.

Time-Based Classification of Technical Debt

1. Decisions Made by Skipping Processes

• Examples: Skipping tests, omitting code reviews, not adopting automation, etc.
• Characteristics: Low interest, long-term repayment possible
• Philosophy: Prevention and repayment are possible through the introduction of tools and improvement of frameworks

2. Decisions Made Without Postponing Decision-Making or Technical Validation

• Examples: Lack of structure design, unverified scaling, introduction of temporary structures, etc.
• Characteristics: High interest, immediate repayment necessary
• Philosophy: A prepayment plan (1st, 2nd, 3rd) and an alternative plan are essential

Technical Failures Should Not Be Disguised as Technical Debt

• Debt arises from a ‘choice with a plan to repay’.
• Problems identified later are not debts but failures.
• The moment you misuse this as technical debt, the organization chooses justification over reflection.

Minimizing the Occurrence of Technical Debt is Crucial

• Structural prevention is key rather than post-occurrence management.
• Design tools, automation, linting, mocks, and templates to prevent the debt from occurring at all.

Conclusion

Technical debt is not just a result of lacking technology.
It is a result of responsibility for judgment and structure.
I believe that technical debt should be prevented with tools, deferred judgments should be absorbed through design, and failures should be structurally addressed as failures.
This is my operational philosophy of understanding technical debt.

I hope this is helpful to those who need it. This content is based on a real experience I had during an interview, and it reflects my standards that have structurally resolved technical debt and bottlenecks in various domains.