Technical debt is best understood by identifying the gap between current capabilities and the desired future-state architecture. CRISC states that this is done most effectively bycomparing the current environment to the target enterprise architecture (EA). This comparison identifies outdated technologies, unsupported platforms, integration issues, and areas requiring modernization. Reviewing business cases or investment trends provides financial insights but does not quantify technical debt. Comparing standards with policies highlights compliance issues, not architectural deficiencies. EA comparison allows organizations to quantify how far they are from the strategic architectural roadmap, making it the most accurate method.
Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). You can switch to a simple comment. It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Submit