Standard : Tech debt is made visible, prioritised, and tackled alongside feature delivery
Purpose and Strategic Importance
This standard ensures that technical debt is explicitly identified, tracked, and prioritised in parallel with feature work to maintain system health and delivery agility. Making tech debt visible prevents it from being neglected, reducing long-term risks and costs.
It supports the policy “Balance Speed with Sustainability” by embedding technical debt management into regular planning and delivery cycles. Without this standard, hidden debt can accumulate, undermining system stability and slowing future innovation.
Strategic Impact
- Improves system reliability and maintainability
- Enables informed prioritisation balancing new features and debt reduction
- Reduces risk of delivery delays caused by accumulating technical debt
- Enhances team morale by addressing frustrating legacy issues
- Supports sustainable, predictable delivery velocity
Risks of Not Having This Standard
- Technical debt grows invisibly, leading to system fragility
- Increased cost and effort for future maintenance and feature work
- Delivery unpredictability due to unplanned rework
- Lower team satisfaction from ongoing firefighting and frustration
- Higher risk of customer-impacting incidents
CMMI Maturity Model
Level 1 – Initial
| Category |
Description |
| People & Culture |
- Technical debt is largely unknown or ignored. |
| Process & Governance |
- No formal tracking or prioritisation of debt exists. |
| Technology & Tools |
- Limited tooling to identify or visualise technical debt. |
| Measurement & Metrics |
- No metrics on debt volume, impact, or reduction progress. |
Level 2 – Managed
| Category |
Description |
| People & Culture |
- Teams recognise debt but struggle to prioritise alongside feature work. |
| Process & Governance |
- Basic processes log debt items but lack consistent prioritisation. |
| Technology & Tools |
- Tools partially support debt tracking and visibility. |
| Measurement & Metrics |
- Some measurement of debt backlog and remediation efforts. |
Level 3 – Defined
| Category |
Description |
| People & Culture |
- Technical debt management is a regular part of planning and retrospectives. |
| Process & Governance |
- Formal prioritisation balances feature delivery with debt reduction. |
| Technology & Tools |
- Integrated tools provide dashboards showing debt status and trends. |
| Measurement & Metrics |
- Metrics guide continuous improvement and risk management strategies. |
Level 4 – Quantitatively Managed
| Category |
Description |
| People & Culture |
- Data-driven decision-making optimises debt reduction investments. |
| Process & Governance |
- Debt metrics influence resource allocation and release planning. |
| Technology & Tools |
- Advanced analytics forecast debt impact on delivery and quality. |
| Measurement & Metrics |
- Quantitative correlations exist between debt levels and delivery performance. |
Level 5 – Optimising
| Category |
Description |
| People & Culture |
- Continuous evolution of debt management based on predictive analytics and feedback. |
| Process & Governance |
- Policies dynamically adapt to organisational learning and business priorities. |
| Technology & Tools |
- AI-driven tools proactively identify, prioritise, and recommend remediation paths. |
| Measurement & Metrics |
- Organisational maturity in debt management drives sustained agility and quality. |
Key Measures
- Volume and criticality of identified technical debt items
- Percentage of technical debt addressed within planning cycles
- Impact of debt reduction on delivery predictability and quality
- Team sentiment regarding debt management effectiveness
- Frequency of debt-related incidents or rework