[4WIW]

The article sounds over-engineered. Tech debt is a term that helps to explain to the management why you are working on improving the internals of the system instead of adding features. You manage tech debt just like any other work item in the backlog: prioritize and execute, or delete. What else am I missing?

Dirty laundry is never an asset.

[ownagefool]

Yeah, I think you're thinking about debt wrong with the last statement.

If you can borrow at 0.5% and have a fairly reliable system to get 10% returns, is your debt and ability to borrow "dirty laundry" or an "asset"?

[4WIW]

While I understand the borrow concept, I can't see how it is useful here. Returns come from your doing something, not from not doing something. Deciding what actions would bring best returns is the essence of planning. What's special about tech debt in this picture, vs for example product features you delay for few cycles later?

[ownagefool]

Because all tech is debt.

Even the code you're proud of is going to need a maintenance lifecycle. If you don't maintain that debt, it compounds to the point you cannot.

Debt is a useful concept because almost every business person understands the risks, but most successful people will borrow anyways.

Where the analogy fails is because we pretend like "if only we pay all the tech debt down everything will be fine". Basically our problem is we think the concept doesn't apply to tech we like.