How to Manage Technical Debt in Mobile Apps

Mobile apps evolve quickly, often with pressure to roll out new features or updates at record speed. In this rush, developers may take shortcuts, leading to what’s known as technical debt. While technical debt can get a product to market faster, it often comes at the cost of maintainability, performance, and future development flexibility. This article dives into what technical debt means specifically for mobile apps, why it’s a critical factor in long-term app health, and how to approach managing it effectively.

What is technical debt in mobile apps?

Technical debt is a concept that describes the cost of taking suboptimal shortcuts in code and design, often at the expense of long-term quality and maintainability. It’s the cumulative result of design or implementation choices that may hinder future development, increase the chances of bugs, or degrade system performance over time. In essence, it refers to code that’s outdated or unsustainable.

Often, technical debt is the byproduct of compromises made under tight deadlines or in the rush to implement quick fixes, leading to code or architecture that isn’t built to last. Like financial debt, technical debt grows “interest” over time, showing up as rising maintenance costs and slower development speeds. Just as financial debt can limit personal freedom, unmanaged technical debt can restrict an organization’s ability to adapt and innovate, ultimately hindering growth and competitiveness.

Signs of technical debt in mobile apps

How can you tell when technical debt has started to creep into your codebase? While some signs are obvious, others can be subtle, emerging only as the app grows or when new features are added. Here are key indicators that technical debt may be impacting your mobile app’s quality and maintainability:

Code smells

These are hints that code might be poorly structured, overly complex, or hard to understand and modify. Common code smells include large classes, long methods, or excessive nested conditionals, making future updates risky and time-consuming.

Duplicate code

When identical or similar code blocks are scattered throughout the codebase, maintaining and updating these duplicates becomes challenging. This redundancy increases the likelihood of bugs, as one change may require multiple updates across the codebase.

Lack of documentation

Without regularly updated documentation, developers may struggle to understand and maintain the codebase, slowing down onboarding, troubleshooting, and collaboration efforts, especially in fast-evolving apps.

Inadequate testing

Insufficient test coverage or outdated tests create gaps where bugs or regressions can go unnoticed. Technical debt compounds as each new feature increases the chance of undetected issues.

Deferred refactoring

Putting off essential refactoring or cleanup can lead to code that’s difficult to read, maintain, or expand. Over time, this added complexity makes even minor updates feel overwhelming.

Outdated dependencies

Not keeping external libraries or frameworks up to date can expose your app to security vulnerabilities and compatibility issues, requiring extra effort to patch or resolve conflicts.

Performance bottlenecks

Neglected performance optimizations can cause slow loading times or inefficient resource usage, which often worsens as usage scales, leading to frustrated users and potentially costly fixes.

Workarounds and hacks

Quick fixes and workarounds may bypass best practices but often introduce complexity. These hacks can complicate future updates or integrations, making it challenging to add new features or scale.

Implementation shortcuts

Deliberate choices to cut corners for the sake of time or resources may help meet immediate goals but often add to technical debt. These shortcuts can compromise code quality, creating more work in the long term.

Recognizing these signs of technical debt is the first step toward managing it effectively. But what leads to these challenges in the first place? In the next section, we’ll dive into the common causes of technical debt to better understand how to prevent it from accumulating.

Causes of technical debt in mobile development

What’s behind the buildup of technical debt in mobile apps? Although some debt is inevitable, many common factors contribute to its growth. Let’s look at the primary causes that can lead to technical debt, often in ways that aren’t immediately visible.

Time constraints

Tight deadlines are one of the biggest drivers of technical debt. Under pressure to deliver features rapidly, development teams may resort to shortcuts or quick fixes. While these decisions help meet immediate goals, they often result in suboptimal architecture and lower code quality, setting the stage for long-term debt.

Lack of knowledge

Technical debt can also arise from a lack of awareness about best practices, industry standards, or the long-term impact of certain development choices. When developers aren’t familiar with more efficient approaches or don’t have the expertise to implement them, debt can accumulate without anyone realizing it.

Technological advancements

As new tools, frameworks, and libraries emerge, older code can quickly become outdated. At the same time, adopting new technologies without fully understanding their compatibility with existing systems can lead to poor integration and dependency issues—adding to technical debt with each new update.

Changing project requirements

As a project evolves, new requirements often bring additional complexity, requiring rework or modifications to the original code. When these changes are handled through quick fixes rather than proper re-engineering, technical debt builds up, undermining the app’s overall quality over time.

Chaotic project management

Ineffective management practices, such as poor communication, lack of coordination, inadequate planning, or constantly shifting priorities, often force development teams into compromises. These situations frequently lead to technical debt, as teams are pressured to deliver without fully addressing long-term code quality and maintainability.

Third-party dependencies

Relying on outdated libraries or SDKs can introduce technical debt by creating security risks, performance issues, and compatibility problems with newer mobile OS versions. Updating these dependencies later can require significant refactoring and may make the app more vulnerable to crashes. Regularly managing and updating third-party dependencies is crucial to reducing technical debt.

Popular applications that have a technical debt

Even the biggest names in tech aren’t immune to technical debt. For many high-growth mobile applications, the race to innovate and capture market share often means shortcuts in development—leading to a buildup of technical debt over time. Here are some notable examples of mobile apps that have experienced challenges due to technical debt and the steps their teams have taken to manage it.

Instagram

Issue: Instagram’s rapid growth demanded swift feature integrations to keep up with user expectations. However, the fast-paced development led to a complex, fragmented codebase that began to hinder performance and slowed down feature iterations.
Measures taken: The engineering team faced significant hurdles with their monolithic code structure, making it challenging to update the app efficiently. To tackle this, they began refactoring key parts of the codebase to streamline future development.

Uber

Issue: With global scaling and the addition of services like Uber Eats and ride-sharing features, Uber’s app became bogged down by an oversized codebase.
Measures taken: This bloated code led to difficulties in releasing new features and maintaining platform consistency. To address this, Uber invested heavily in rearchitecting the app, focusing on minimizing dependencies and simplifying code structures to boost performance.

Twitter

Issue: Twitter encountered increasing performance issues and bugs, particularly as they scaled to handle real-time data on a massive scale. Their technical debt, accumulated over years of quick feature rollouts, posed a substantial barrier to efficient updates.
Measures taken: Twitter eventually restructured its mobile codebase to tackle these performance issues and ensure the app could support future scalability needs more effectively.

LinkedIn

Issue: LinkedIn’s mobile app suffered from a legacy codebase not optimized for the latest mobile architectures, resulting in performance bottlenecks.
Measures taken: The company undertook a major overhaul, rebuilding portions of the app to be more modular and maintainable. This refactor took time and resources but ultimately improved the app’s stability and speed.

WhatsApp

Issue: As WhatsApp expanded its feature set to include options like group calling and encryption, technical debt surfaced in the form of occasional bugs and performance dips.
Measures taken: The development team has since worked to improve the app’s architecture, eliminating unnecessary complexities and enhancing both responsiveness and reliability.

Slack

Issue: Slack’s need to maintain a consistent experience across multiple platforms led to challenges with legacy code and performance lags, especially in larger teams.
Measures taken: Acknowledging the impact of this debt, Slack’s developers initiated a major refactor aimed at improving performance and making it easier to add new features without introducing regressions.

Airbnb

Issue: Airbnb’s rapid growth required fast feature rollouts, leading to a fragmented codebase and mounting technical debt due to quick fixes over sustainable solutions.
Measures taken: Recognizing the toll this debt was taking on productivity and app performance, Airbnb invested in refactoring key parts of their code, making the app more maintainable and efficient.

As desperate as it sounds, technical debt in mobile apps is a common challenge, even for industry giants. But is it realistic at all to not have technical debt?

Why zero technical debt in mobile apps isn’t a realistic goal

It’s tempting to imagine a codebase free from quick fixes, legacy code, or maintenance issues—a perfectly streamlined app with zero baggage. But for most digital businesses, that goal isn’t practical. Technical debt tends to accumulate naturally, as teams work under tight deadlines, tackle shifting requirements, and prioritize high-impact features. So, rather than striving for perfection, it often makes more sense to manage technical debt thoughtfully. Here’s why aiming for zero technical debt can be more of a burden than a benefit:

• Reducing technical debt demands significant time and resources, often leading to delays that can make on-time delivery difficult to achieve. In a fast-moving landscape, meeting deadlines is critical.
• Development teams need to focus on delivering business value and responding quickly to changing requirements. An exclusive focus on debt elimination can make it harder to adapt when project priorities shift.
• Not all technical debt is equally risky. Some areas of low-impact debt may not be worth the time to address, making it an inefficient use of resources.
• An excessive focus on technical debt can pull attention from essential tasks, like rolling out new features or fixing critical bugs that directly affect users.
• Aiming to eliminate all technical debt can also limit experimentation, restricting innovation. Allowing for manageable debt often enables teams to explore creative solutions and stay adaptable.

So, what’s the solution? Instead of aiming for zero technical debt, focus on managing it strategically. As a business, prioritize the areas that impact performance or user experience the most, and address lower-risk debt as time allows. By balancing debt management with ongoing development, your team can maintain agility, deliver value, and keep the app’s foundation strong without getting bogged down in a quest for perfection.

Best practices for managing technical debt in mobile apps

Managing technical debt in mobile app development isn’t just about catching issues—it’s about setting up a sustainable development process that balances long-term quality with short-term agility. Here are some effective practices to help you manage and minimize technical debt:

Code quality and cleanliness

Keeping code clean and consistent is fundamental to reducing technical debt. This goes beyond standard practices—establishing team-specific standards, like code formatting, helps maintain consistency. Tools like linters can support clean code across different programming languages.

Code reviews and pair programming

Code quality benefits from regular code reviews and pair programming. These practices create opportunities for developers to catch potential issues early, share knowledge, and uphold quality standards. Pair programming also lets junior developers learn directly from experienced team members.

Incremental refactoring

Addressing technical debt incrementally prevents it from accumulating. Rather than postponing refactoring, it should be an ongoing part of development, with tech leads helping prioritize and manage it over time.

Technical debt management backlog

A technical debt backlog provides a way to track unresolved issues and prioritize them based on impact. An updated backlog enables teams to allocate resources effectively, addressing the most critical debt first and avoiding compounding issues.

Automated testing

Automated testing—covering unit, integration, and regression tests—is essential for scalable applications. While setup can be time-consuming, automated testing simplifies future development by catching issues early and reducing reliance on manual testing.

Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD)

CI/CD practices are crucial in reducing technical debt, offering early issue detection, fast feedback, and smoother development cycles. Automated code integration and frequent testing help maintain quality and prevent debt from piling up.

Documentation

Accurate, up-to-date documentation keeps everyone aligned. As requirements evolve, regularly updating documentation helps developers avoid misalignments that can introduce unnecessary debt.

Open communication

Clear, open communication among developers is essential to prevent misaligned decisions that lead to technical debt. Fostering a culture of constructive feedback and transparent discussions reduces the risk of issues due to communication gaps.

Adopting design patterns and best practices

Following established design patterns supports maintainability, scalability, and code reuse. These patterns help manage technical debt effectively and provide a solid foundation for long-term code quality.

Monitoring and metrics

Tracking metrics like code complexity, bug counts, and technical debt ratios offers valuable insights into the system’s health. Monitoring allows teams to prioritize debt items and make informed decisions on which areas need immediate attention.

Continual learning and skill development

Technical debt often results from limited knowledge or experience. Encouraging continual learning helps developers stay current with technologies and best practices, strengthening their problem-solving skills and adaptability.

With these practices in place, technical debt can be if not eradicated, but at least managed and kept in check, supporting both the app’s growth and the team’s productivity.

Checklist: Is your mobile app free from serious technical debt?

1. The app performs consistently across multiple devices and platforms.
2. The codebase is clean and easily understandable by other developers.
3. The app is scalable and can support future updates or feature additions without major refactoring.
4. Third-party dependencies are up-to-date and well-maintained.
5. The app’s architecture follows modern design patterns for maintainability.
6. The app undergoes regular testing (unit, integration, UI) and bug fixing.
7. Performance issues like crashes, memory leaks, or high CPU usage are minimal.
8. The app has proper version control and well-documented code changes.

How Anadea helps manage technical debt in mobile apps

At Anadea, we assist clients at all stages of mobile app development, focusing on keeping the code maintainable and minimizing technical debt. Whether starting a new project or enhancing an existing one, we emphasize best practices, modern technologies, and regular upkeep.

• For new projects, we create detailed documentation, design scalable architectures, and choose future-proof technologies that maintain relevance.
• For legacy projects, we perform thorough code audits to highlight areas for improvement. Our audits provide actionable insights—such as modular restructuring, dependency updates, and optimized performance—that set a clear path for enhancing code quality.

In our ongoing development process, we incorporate practices like code reviews, automated and manual testing, and regular library updates. Our team also performs continuous refactoring to ensure each feature integrates seamlessly while maintaining the app’s long-term stability and performance.

Conclusion

Technical debt in mobile apps is an unavoidable aspect of software development. Left unchecked, it can hinder performance, increase maintenance costs, and slow down the rollout of new features—all critical concerns in the competitive mobile landscape. But with a strategic approach, technical debt can be managed effectively, allowing development teams to maintain high standards without sacrificing agility.

By adopting best practices like regular code reviews, automated testing, and incremental refactoring, development teams can prevent technical debt from accumulating to unmanageable levels. Additionally, for companies dealing with legacy code or uncertain code quality, a thorough code audit is invaluable. Anadea’s code audit service offers just that—an in-depth technical assessment to identify areas of improvement, ensure compliance with modern standards, and provide a roadmap for minimizing technical debt.

Ultimately, managing technical debt is about finding balance. When debt is addressed thoughtfully, mobile apps can evolve smoothly, meeting user expectations while maintaining the flexibility to adapt to future demands.