Skip to main content

No test - inconceivable. Not Technical Debt.

Technical Debt

The software term "technical debt" is getting a lot of play on the air waves.  But I do not think we are using it the way Ward was when he invented the term (a metaphor) to explain to his buisiness team why creating software fast to get feedback was a good thing.  But that they had to be willing and able to sustain a pace of repayment on the debt of doing just good enough design to get product feedback.  Their form of repayment was constant refactoring.  Always keeping the software model moving toward the best possible business model, which modeled the real world.  Using many XP practices to enable the repayment plan of the debt they were consciously assuming.

In this vain, technical debt does not cover the process of writing bad code, of poor design, of skipping steps (such as testing).  Those behaviors would be considered to be incompetent design and implementation.  That behavior results not in debt at all but a breach of the inherent contract between development team and the business. The warranty of merchantability.


The warranty of merchantability is implied, unless expressly disclaimed by name, or the sale is identified with the phrase "as is" or "with all faults." To be "merchantable", the goods must reasonably conform to an ordinary buyer's expectations, i.e., they are what they say they are. For example, a fruit that looks and smells good but has hidden defects would violate the implied warranty of merchantability if its quality does not meet the standards for such fruit "as passes ordinarily in the trade".

This industry (software development) is deceiving its customers and pass off bad products as if they just have a little bit of debt to be repaid.  As if the product was a 3 year old car with a 5 year loan.  One purchases the car and the debt.  But I suggest that is not the same thing as purchasing software the has been created in such a poor fashion as to have no unit test, or no acceptance test. Little if any way to become the application it appears to be.  A car on the outside but with a faulty electrical system, blown engine, and bad transmission, but really good tires and paint.

A case in point - a team wishes to upgrade the compiler that produces their application.  They have little to no tests for the application - it just works.  They then ask for a test group to provide the effort required to prove that the compiler upgrade doesn't cause any bugs.  I do not think one can pass off the warranty of merchantability to the test team and expect good things to come from this - pass the hot potato behavior.  This is not technical debt - it is incompetency - it is inconceivable.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
-- Inigo Montoya


Ward Cunningham on the creation of the "Technical Debt" metaphor.


I think we keep using the phrase technical debt - but it doesn't mean what we think it means.  Technical debt means a conscious decision to defer up-front design and research in the product development, in order to get to market with a model that is capable of becoming the the desired solution, and capable of eliciting the customer feedback that we desire, which proves that the product is evolving in the proper direction.  And provide return on investment earlier.

See Also:

A Technical Debit - Collateralized Debt Obligation you should not invest in

The SQALE method is particularly devoted to the management of the Technical Debt (or Design Debt) of software developments. It allows:
  • To define clearly what creates the technical debt
  • To estimate correctly this debt
  • To analyse this debt upon technical and business perspective
  • To offer different prioritisation strategies allowing establishing optimised payback plan.
Managing Software Debt - by Chris Sterling

3 comments

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.

Introduction

Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…

What is your Engagement Model?

What must an Agile Transformation initiative have to be reasonably assured of success?

We "change agents" or Agilist, or Organizational Development peeps, or Trouble Makers, or Agile Coaches have been at this for nearly two decades now... one would think we have some idea of the prerequisites for one of these Transformations to actually occur.  Wonder if eight Agile Coaches in a group could come up with ONE list of necessary and sufficient conditions - an interesting experiment.  Will that list contain an "engagement model"?  I venture to assert that it will not.  When asked very few Agile Coaches, thought leaders, and change agents mention much about employee engagement in their plans, models, and "frameworks".  Stop and ask yourselves ... why?

Now good Organizational Development peeps know this is crucial, so I purposely omitted them from that list to query.

One, central very important aspect of your Agile Transformation will be your Engagement model.  

Exercise:: Definition of Ready & Done

Assuming you are on a Scrum/Agile software development team, then one of the first 'working agreements' you have created with your team is a 'Definition of Done' - right?



Oh - you don't have a definition of what aspects a user story that is done will exhibit. Well then, you need to create a list of attributes of a done story. One way to do this would be to Google 'definition of done' ... here let me do that for you: http://tinyurl.com/3br9o6n. Then you could just use someone else's definition - there DONE!

But that would be cheating -- right? It is not the artifact - the list of done criteria, that is important for your team - it is the act of doing it for themselves, it is that shared understanding of having a debate over some of the gray areas that create a true working agreement. If some of the team believes that a story being done means that there can be no bugs found in the code - but some believe that there can be some minor issues - well, …

Refactoring - examples from the book

Martin Fowler's book Refactoring:  Improving the Design of Existing Code has a simple example of a movie rental domain model, which he refactors from a less than ideal object-oriented design to a more robust OO design. Included in this Refactoring_FirstExample.zip Zip file are the Java source code files of the Movie, Rental, and Customer classes. Along with a JUnit CustomerTest class. Using these example source files you too can follow along with the refactoring that Fowler presents in the first few chapters of his book.


Metrics for a Scrum Team (examples)

What metrics do you collect to analyze your scrum team?

We live in a world of data and information.  Some people have a mindset that numbers will diagnose all problems – “just show me the data.”  Therefore many directors and senior managers wish to see some list of metrics that should indicate the productivity and efficiency of the Scrum team.  I personally believe this is something that can be felt, that human intuition is much better in this decision realm than the data that can be collected.  However, one would have to actually spend time and carefully observe the team in action to get this powerful connection to the energy in a high-performing team space.  Few leaders are willing to take this time, they delegate this information synthesis task to managers via the typical report/dashboard request.  Therefore we are asked to collect data, to condense this data into information, all while ignoring the intangible obvious signals (read Honest Signals by Sandy Pentland of MIT).
What if …