As engineers, we love efficiency — in our code, our processes, and even our conversations. It’s no surprise, then, that we often rely on shorthand to describe complex issues. One phrase that gets tossed around regularly in software development circles, often accompanied by a sigh or a shrug, is “technical debt.”
But here’s the problem: saying “technical debt” doesn’t actually say much at all.
The Vagueness Trap
“Technical debt” is a catch-all term that can mean wildly different things depending on the context. It could refer to outdated dependencies, lack of test coverage, messy architecture, poor documentation, or even quick fixes that were never cleaned up. While the metaphor of debt is useful — a trade-off that incurs interest over time — it becomes less helpful when used as a vague placeholder.
When we rely on such ambiguous language, we risk miscommunication. Non-technical stakeholders like project managers may not understand the true scope of the issue. Even our fellow engineers might misinterpret what we mean. And perhaps worst of all, our future selves might look back at a Jira ticket labeled “technical debt” and wonder, “What was I talking about?”
The Power of Specificity
Let’s consider a better approach. Instead of saying:
“I need a week to address technical debt.”
Try something like:
“We’re having trouble building the frontend codebase. Storybook isn’t working because it’s on a very old version. We’re seeing a lot of errors in NPM, likely due to outdated dependencies. We’ll need to update several packages to get the build process stable again. After that, we’ll run a full regression test to ensure we haven’t broken anything in this legacy codebase we’re now maintaining.”
Now that tells a clear story.
Suddenly, that ask for 40 hours of work doesn’t feel like a black box. The project manager understands the time investment. Your teammates understand the technical hurdles. And your future self will thank you when combing through task histories or commit messages months down the line.
Why It Matters
Being specific about technical challenges isn’t just a matter of good communication — it’s a cornerstone of effective collaboration. When you speak tangibly:
- You build trust with stakeholders by making your work more transparent.
- You foster better planning by clearly defining scope and effort.
- You reduce confusion within the team and avoid duplicate efforts.
- You document your work in a way that’s useful for future maintenance.
Make It a Habit
The next time you’re tempted to say “technical debt,” pause and ask yourself: What exactly is broken? What needs to be fixed? What’s the impact if we don’t address it?
Describe the problem in concrete terms. Use real examples. Reference the specific tools, files, or systems involved. The more tangible your language, the more powerful your communication becomes.
Clarity is key
“Technical debt” may be a convenient phrase, but convenience doesn’t always lead to clarity. By speaking tangibly, you give your teammates — and yourself — the context needed to make smart decisions, prioritize effectively, and move forward with confidence.
So let’s retire the shrug-and-sigh version of “technical debt,” and start telling the real story behind our engineering work.