What is Technical Debt and How to Avoid It

In the fast-evolving world of HR Tech, where software drives everything from job advertising to onboarding, tech vendors are constantly making decisions about how to develop their tools. But not every decision made in software development is a long-term one, and that’s where technical debt comes in. It’s an often hidden issue but has significant ramifications for platforms and their users.

What Is Technical Debt?

Technical debt refers to the trade-offs made during software development to deliver functionality quickly, often at the cost of clean code and long-term efficiency. It’s similar to borrowing money - you can make short-term gains, but eventually, you’ll have to pay it back, often with interest.

The most infamous example of tech debt was the Y2K problem, where many software developers only allowed for a 2-digit year entry (YY) instead of the now standard 4-digits (YYYY), because it was easier to store the date in a consistent, 6-digit, DDMMYY format. When the year 2000 rolled around, everyone had to scramble to ensure that millions of computers around the world didn’t think it was the year 00.

Michal Nowak, SVP Engineering at SmartRecruiters shared his views "Technical debt can become a silent killer for the engineering teams. Duplicated code, design shortcuts, leaking domain, bad tooling choices - the impact of these problems often compound over time and can suck the life out of engineering teams. Accumulated technical debt will negatively impact your product's time-to-market, quality, and the amount of “Keeping the Lights On” work you need to perform."

Over time, these shortcuts add up, creating a bloated and inefficient system that’s harder to maintain and slower to evolve. If this debt isn’t “paid down” by refactoring and cleaning up the codebase, it can severely limit the agility of the platform.

In a 2020 podcast, Roopesh Nair, former CEO of Symphony Talent, addressed the challenge of technical debt by completely rebuilding their platform from scratch, recognising that the accumulated debt was "too much to pay." Starting in 2015, Symphony Talent embarked on a comprehensive redevelopment process, utilising modern technologies to rebuild both the front and back ends of their systems. By late 2018, all clients had been upgraded to the new platform, which Nair described as "experience cloud." This effort allowed Symphony Talent to integrate multiple technologies into a unified platform that could better serve their clients.

SmartRecruiters has another approach. Nowak continues “a great way to deal with existing debt is to continuously set aside a portion of your time for productivity investments,” they told us. “Your team may dedicate 10% of their capacity to debt repayment. Engineering leaders should track and understand their teams' investment profiles—e.g., time dedicated to building new marketable things, supporting existing customers, keeping the lights on (KTLO), and productivity (i.e.: fixing tech debt).”

Ultimately, they tell us that “Debt can often be avoided by implementing a software design review process. Similar to code review, this means engineers making hard-to-reverse design decisions will ask other engineers to comment on their changes. There are dozens of different implementations of this process, and it’s used by some of the most respected tech companies out there.”

Are Older Platforms Suffering Under Technical Debt?

Technical debt affects all platforms, old and new, but the risk is certainly higher the older the platform is. Many consider the "big" players in HR Tech who have been around for years and have built extensive systems as the most reliable options. But these vendors often carry significant technical debt with legacy platforms that were developed in a different era of technology.

Many of these platforms have grown through acquisitions, patchwork solutions with ageing codebases and poor documentation, making them sluggish to adapt. Compare this to newer start-up's, which start with a clean slate and benefit from more modern software architecture and better engineering practices. They don’t have to deal with the burden of past decisions that require constant maintenance.

Older platforms can be more cumbersome, slower to innovate, and prone to bugs, making them a less attractive option when agility is critical.

Nowak explains that getting companies to focus on fixing Tech Debt is so difficult because “Productivity work always competes with customer-facing projects, which means engineering leaders often need to convince other stakeholders to invest there.” They say that the secret is to always try to build an ROI analysis for productivity investments, and platforms like GetDX can help engineering leaders understand where to look for these opportunities and how they might impact their teams.

Is Technical Debt a Showstopper?

Too much technical debt, especially when it’s not being addressed, should be a massive red flag for anyone relying on a software platform. But how can you tell if your chosen HR Tech provider is drowning in it?

A key indicator is the structure of their release cycles. Vendors who are serious about reducing technical debt will dedicate time and resources to fixing issues and refactoring code, not just cranking out new features. A vendor that prioritises quick wins over long-term stability is more likely to be playing “whack-a-mole” with problems, instead of addressing the root cause.

You should also look at a vendor’s new feature velocity—how fast they churn out new features. While rapid deployment may seem like a sign of progress, it can also signal trouble. As highlighted in our prior blog, Re/designing your Talent Tech Stack, vendors with older platforms may have accumulated significant technical debt, making frequent updates risky. Additionally, feature velocity should be balanced with quality, as rushing new releases without addressing underlying issues can lead to more debt in the long run. Understanding both the age of the platform and its recent feature delivery history can help you assess whether the provider is keeping pace with innovation or simply masking deeper issues .

How to Spot Technical Debt When Evaluating Vendors

When considering Talent Tech providers, how can you assess their level of technical debt? It’s not always easy, but bringing subject matter experts into vendor pitches can make a huge difference. Developers familiar with software architecture can ask the right questions and help you "kick the tyres" on the platform.

Questions like:

How old is the codebase?

How often do you refactor the code?

What language is this platform built in?

What engineering processes do you have in place to improve code quality and mitigate debt?

These questions can reveal a lot about how much technical debt a platform carries and whether the vendor is actively working to reduce it. A platform that hasn’t had its codebase updated or cleaned up in years is likely sitting on a significant pile of debt—and that can slow down future development and cause issues for users.

If you’re reading this you might be thinking about your existing tech stack. It’s probably clear in your mind if tech debt is a problem. If you’re evaluating new tech, another tactic will be to invest much time in client referencing. Ask customers about regression, unplanned downtime, new feature velocity, roadmap delivery and speed to squash bugs.

Conclusion

In the world of HR Tech, technical debt is an invisible but powerful force. Left unchecked, it can cripple a platform’s ability to adapt, scale, and deliver value to its users. For businesses reliant on these systems to attract, hire, and manage talent, understanding the technical debt a vendor carries should be a crucial part of the decision-making process.

Choose a vendor that takes technical debt seriously—one that’s willing to pause, fix issues, and refactor when necessary. Because when it comes to Talent Tech, a platform built on shaky foundations will always leave you paying the price later.

About Us

Australian based with a global presence, we’re a Talent Operations and Tech Consulting firm with a reputation for excellence. Proudly independent, our team solve your structural hiring challenges by adding capability and capacity when and wherever you need the help.

We offer a full suite of services around and key service lines: Tech Stack design, Implementation and Talent Operations as a Service.

Interested to find out more? Get in touch, no pressure, just a casual chat about your TA vision and challenges.