The biggest problem with the term "technical debt" is that it's thrown about by too many people for too many reasons. Mostly well meaning reasons, but often hig

The biggest problem with the term "technical debt" is that it's thrown about by too many people for too many reasons. Mostly well meaning reasons, but often highly personalized and with literally no intrinsic value or thought attached. More often than not it's used to express a personal preference, rather than a guiding principle. I've seldom seen it used positively, to a point I don't actually believe it has any benefit as a term and given that I don't think it actually exists. It's not an actionable term. Talk about and make cases for system performance, operability, functionality, security, cost, support knowledge and similar and you'll have much easier value based conversations that have a chance of having continued buy in long term from your organisation.