> Ward Cunningham's technical debt concept is a great metaphor, but not such a great metric. Technical debt omits projects canceled due to poor quality. Since a

> Ward Cunningham's technical debt concept is a great metaphor, but not such a great metric. Technical debt omits projects canceled due to poor quality. Since about 35% of large systems are never finished, this is a serious omission. In my experience, projects large and small are typically cancelled because executive management changes their minds, not because of poor quality. Certainly there are lots of famous examples of projects that crumble under their own weight, but I really don't think it's anything like 35%. Business goals change (for better or for worse), market conditions change, egos change, etc. One cultural difference seems to be that a CEO of a Fortune 500 company who writes off a billion dollar investment due to a change in business strategy is a visionary who makes brave decisions, but anyone who writes off a project/division due to a billion dollars in technical debt is going to be tarred and feathered for blundering.