Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

UX debt in an agile development process: evidence and characterization

  • Published:
Software Quality Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The metaphor of technical debt (TD) has generated a conceptual framework on factors that weaken the quality of software and accumulate a repair cost. However, user-related aspects like user experience (UX) receive little consideration among TD types, for reasons like the substantial focus on code TD, some dynamics inherent to agile processes, and an apparent lack of cumulative cost over time. This article has two main goals: first, to present evidence of the existence of UXDebt as a type of TD, with a cumulative cost for the development team as well as stakeholders; second, to propose a definition and characterization of UXDebt that may serve as a frame for further research on methods and tools for continuous management within agile processes. For the first goal, we have compiled evidence on the current state of UXDebt from three sources: a literature review, a survey among software engineering professionals in agile teams, and the analysis of UX issues in GitHub. All sources have evidenced some form of UXDebt; surveyed practitioners have recognized its poor management with a cost for the entire team that accumulates over time. Moreover, issue tracking systems allow to visualize and measure a technical form of UXDebt. For the second goal, we have defined a conceptual model that characterizes UXDebt in terms of both technical and non-technical aspects. On the technical side, we propose the notion of UX smells which allows us to discuss concrete management activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availibility

The complete datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Complete sample demographics and charts in addition to those presented in Section 3 are available at https://bit.ly/3LeHD8b. Complementary data to those presented in Section. 4 are available at https://bit.ly/44iJjnK.

Notes

  1. https://www.sonarqube.org/.

  2. Complete sample demographics and charts in addition to those presented here are available in a companion document at https://shorturl.ae/OPtwV.

  3. https://www.nltk.org.

References

  • Alves, N. S., Mendes, T. S., de Mendonça, M. G., Spínola, R. O., Shull, F., & Seaman, C. (2016). Identification and management of technical debt: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology, 70.

  • Ampatzoglou, A., Ampatzoglou, A., Chatzigeorgiou, A., & Avgeriou, P. (2015). The financial aspect of managing technical debt: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 64.

  • Avgeriou, P., Kruchten, P., Ozkaya, I., & Seaman, C. (2016). Managing technical debt in software engineering. In: Dagstuhl Reports, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.

  • Baltes, S., & Dashuber, V. (2021). UX debt: Developers borrow while users pay. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06908

  • Behutiye, W.N., Rodríguez, P., Oivo, M., & Tosun, A. (2017). Analyzing the concept of technical debt in the context of agile software development: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 82.

  • Besker, T., Martini, A., & Bosch, J. (2017). The pricey bill of technical debt: When and by whom will it be paid? In: IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, IEEE.

  • Besker, T., Martini, A., & Bosch, J. (2019). Software developer productivity loss due to technical debt-a replication and extension study examining developers’ development work. Journal of Systems and Software, 156.

  • Blair, J., Czaja, R. F., & Blair, E. A. (2013). Designing surveys: A guide to decisions and procedures. Sage publications.

  • Boehm, B. W., Abts, C., Brown, A. W., Chulani, S., Clark, B. K., Horowitz, E., Madachy, R., Reifer, D. J., & Steece, B. (2009). Software cost estimation with COCOMO II. Prentice Hall Press.

  • Brhel, M., Meth, H., Maedche, A., & Werder, K. (2015). Exploring principles of user-centered agile software development: A literature review. Information and Software Technology, 61.

  • Bruun, A., Larusdottir, M., Nielsen, L., Nielsen, P., & Persson, J. (2018). The role of UX professionals in agile development: A case study from industry. In: Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on HCI.

  • Chan, V. (2017). Here’s the reverse: 7 things i wished developers did more of when working with designers. https://t.ly/erXp

  • Ciolkowski, M., Lenarduzzi, V., & Martini, A. (2021). 10 years of technical debt research and practice: Past, present, and future. IEEE Software, 38.

  • Cooper, A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2015). About face. The Essentials of Interaction Design, 3.

  • Cunningham, W. (1992). The WyCash portfolio management system. ACM SIGPLAN OOPS Messenger, 4.

  • Curtis, B., Sappidi, J., & Szynkarski, A. (2012). Estimating the size, cost, and types of technical debt. In: 2012 Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt, IEEE.

  • Da Silva, T., Silveira, M., Maurer, F., & Silveira, F. (2018). The evolution of agile UXD. Information and Software Technology, 102.

  • Da Silva, T. S., Martin, A., Maurer, F., & Silveira, M. (2011). User-centered design and agile methods: A systematic review. In: Agile 2011.

  • Djamasbi, S., McAuliffe, D., Gomez, W., Kardzhaliyski, G., Liu, W., & Oglesby, F. (2014). Designing for success: Creating business value with mobile UX. In F. F. H. Nah (Ed.), HCI in Business. Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdös, F. (2019). Economical aspects of UX design and development. In: 10th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom).

  • Firmenich, S., Garrido, A., Grigera, J., Rivero, J., & Rossi, G. (2019). Usability improvement through A/B testing and refactoring. Software Quality Journal, 27.

  • da Fonseca Lage, L., Kalinowski, M., Trevisan, D., & Spinola, R. (2019). Usability technical debt in software projects: A multi-case study. In: 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, IEEE.

  • Fontana, F., Ferme, V., & Spinelli, S. (2012). Investigating the impact of code smells debt on quality code evaluation. In: 2012 Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt, IEEE.

  • Fowler, M. (2009). Technical debt quadrant. http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebtQuadrant.html

  • Gardey, J. C., Garrido, A., Firmenich, S., Grigera, J., & Rossi, G. (2020). UX-Painter: An approach to explore interaction fixes in the browser. EICS, 4.

  • Gardey, J. C., Grigera, J., Rodríguez, A., Rossi, G., & Garrido, A. (2022). Predicting interaction effort in web interface widgets. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardey, J. C., Grigera, J., Rossi, G., Garrido, A. (2021). UX-Painter: Fostering UX improvement in an agile setting. In: 11th Brazilian Workshop on Agile Methods.

  • Garrido, A., Firmenich, S., Grigera, J., & Rossi, G. (2017). Data-driven usability refactoring: Tools and challenges. In: 6th International Workshop on Software Mining, IEEE.

  • Garrido, A., Rossi, G., & Distante, D. (2011). Refactoring for usability in web applications. IEEE Software, 28, 60–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gothelf, J., & Seiden, J. (2021). Lean UX: Applying Lean principles to improve user experience. O’Reilly Media, Inc.

  • Gregerson, D., & Rizzi, T. (2021). 7 steps to bridge user experience and business value. https://t.ly/gjR4

  • Grigera, J., Garrido, A., Rivero, J., & Rossi, G. (2017). Automatic detection of usability smells in web applications. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 97.

  • Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2021). User experience is all there is i-com, 20.

  • Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User experience-a research agenda. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25.

  • Hassenzahl, M., et al. (2007). Being and doing–A perspective on user experience and its measurement.

  • Hinderks, A., Schrepp, M., Mayo, F. J. D., Escalona, M. J., & Thomaschewski, J. (2019). Developing a UX KPI based on the user experience questionnaire. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 65, 38–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2011). ISO-IEC 25010: 2011 systems and software engineering-Systems and software quality requirements and evaluation. Technical Report.

  • ISO. (2019). ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. ISO/TC 159/SC, 4.

  • Kaley, A. (2018). UX debt: How to identify, prioritize, and resolve. https://t.ly/iUNC

  • Kohavi, R., Tang, D., & Xu, Y. (2020). Trustworthy online controlled experiments: A practical guide to A/B testing. Cambridge University Press.

  • Kuusinen, K. (2016). BoB: A framework for organizing within-iteration UX work in agile development. In: Integrating User-Centred Design in Agile Development. Springer.

  • Lavazza, L., Morasca, S., & Tosi, D. (2018). Technical debt as an external software attribute. In: Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Technical Debt.

  • Law, E. L. C., Roto, V., Hassenzahl, M., Vermeeren, A. P., & Kort, J. (2009). Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: A survey approach. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems.

  • Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. (2003). The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for information systems, 12, 50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenarduzzi, V., Besker, T., Taibi, D., Martini, A., & Fontana, F. A. (2021). A systematic literature review on technical debt prioritization: Strategies, processes, factors, and tools. Journal of Systems and Software, 171.

  • Li, Z, Avgeriou, P., & Liang, P. (2015). A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management. Journal of Systems and Software, 101.

  • Martini, A., Besker, T., & Bosch, J. (2020). Process debt: A first exploration. In: 27th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, IEEE.

  • Maudet, N., Leiva, G., Beaudouin-Lafon, M., & Mackay, W. (2017). Design breakdowns: Designer-developer gaps in representing and interpreting interactive systems. ACM.

  • Nielsen, J. (2005). Putting A/B testing in its place. Useit.com Alertbox.

  • Nielsen, J. (2020). 10 usability heuristics for user interface design. https://t.ly/7VE4

  • Potdar, A., & Shihab, E. (2014). An exploratory study on self-admitted technical debt. In: IEEE Int. Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution, IEEE.

  • Ramirez Lahti, J., Tuovinen, A. P., Mikkonen, T., et al. (2021). Experiences on managing technical debt with code smells and antipatterns. In: IEEE/ACM International Conference on Technical Debt, IEEE.

  • Rios, N., de Mendonça Neto, M. G., & Spínola, R. (2018). A tertiary study on technical debt: Types, management strategies, research trends, and base information for practitioners. Information and Software Technology, 102.

  • Sauro, J., & Lewis, J. R. (2016). Quantifying the user experience: Practical statistics for user research. Morgan Kaufmann.

  • Silva, T. S. D., Silveira, M. S., O Melo, C. D., & Parzianello, L. C. (2013). Understanding the UX designer’s role within agile teams. In: International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability, Springer.

  • Störrle, H., & Ciolkowski, M. (2019). Stepping away from the lamppost: Domain-level technical debt. In: 45th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, IEEE.

  • Tamburri, D. A., Kruchten, P., Lago, P., & van Vliet, H. (2013). What is social debt in software engineering? In: 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, IEEE.

  • Theodoropoulos, T., Hofberg, M., & Kern, D. (2011). Technical debt from the stakeholder perspective. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Managing Technical Debt.

  • Tom, E., Aurum, A., & Vidgen, R. (2013). An exploration of technical debt. Journal of Systems and Software, 86.

  • Tsoukalas, D., Siavvas, M., Jankovic, M., Kehagias, D., Chatzigeorgiou, A., & Tzovaras, D. (2018). Methods and tools for td estimation and forecasting: A state-of-the-art survey. In: 2018 IS, IEEE.

  • Tuch, A. N., Roth, S. P., Hornbæk, K., Opwis, K., & Bargas-Avila, J. A. (2012). Is beautiful really usable? Toward understanding the relation between usability, aesthetics, and affect in HCI. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1596–1607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twidale, M., & Nichols, D. (2005). Exploring usability discussions in open source development. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.

  • Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., & Wesslén, A. (2012). Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Wright, A. (2013). User experience debt. https://t.ly/RHuk

  • Xavier, L., Ferreira, F., Brito, R., & Valente, M. (2020). Beyond the code: Mining self-admitted technical debt in issue tracker systems. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories.

  • Zazworka, N., Spínola, R., Vetro’, A., Shull, F., & Seaman, C. (2013). A case study on effectively identifying technical debt. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering.

Download references

Funding

This research has been funded by the Argentinian National Agency for Scientific and Technical Promotion (ANPCyT), grant number PICT-2019-02485.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LIFIA, Fac. de Informatica, Univ. Nac. de La Plata, La Plata, Argentina

    Andres Rodriguez, Juan Cruz Gardey, Julian Grigera, Gustavo Rossi & Alejandra Garrido

  2. CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Juan Cruz Gardey, Julian Grigera, Gustavo Rossi & Alejandra Garrido

  3. CICPBA, La Plata, Pcia. de Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Julian Grigera

Authors
  1. Andres Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan Cruz Gardey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julian Grigera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gustavo Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alejandra Garrido
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, writing—review and editing: AR, JCG, JG, AG, GR. Investigation: AR, JCG, JG. Formal analysis: JCG, JG. Writing—original draft preparation: AR, JCG. Funding acquisition: AG. Supervision: AG, GR.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andres Rodriguez.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodriguez, A., Gardey, J.C., Grigera, J. et al. UX debt in an agile development process: evidence and characterization. Software Qual J 31, 1467–1498 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-023-09652-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-023-09652-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation