Tech Debt Is a Signal Not a Sin

Tech debt isn't a bug to be fixed, it's a diagnostic signal that tells you why your team is moving the way it is. The piece argues that every line shipped creates a future constraint, and leaders must ask why that constraint exists before deciding how to address it.

Four lenses are introduced: pragmatic (intentional) debt taken to learn fast, required debt that blocks business outcomes, incidental debt that is harmless but ugly, and symptomatic debt that recurs because the system's incentives are broken. By naming the type, leaders can avoid treating all debt as equally urgent and can focus on the real underlying problem.

The article gives concrete tactics: track intentional debt and schedule revisits, prioritize required debt alongside roadmap work, leave incidental debt alone unless it becomes chronic, and for symptomatic debt stop coding and examine organizational structure, incentives, and capacity. These steps turn vague backlog items into visible, actionable decisions tied to business impact.

Ultimately, treating tech debt as information rather than a defect restores trust between engineers and product, aligns leadership on real risks, and prevents wasted effort. The framework helps leaders make deliberate trade-offs, communicate impact in terms executives care about-reliability, cycle time, risk-and keep teams focused on outcomes rather than endless refactoring.