Martin Fowler has another great post where he opines on the value of “design” before “construction” regardless of the design philosophy. He revisits “Technical Debt” which is what you pay for the adding functionality in a technically messy manner. The key is determining how much design improves the overall quality of your product. Good luck doing that. I am still trying to figure that out.
While the post talks about design in general, I feel it focuses on actual technical design. I believe that putting no effort in functional designs almost always leads to severe Technical Debt and subsequent “Functional Debt” regardless of how much technical design is done. Is it only me that gets the sense that “upper management” believes that technical designs can make up for a lack of depth in functional design. This is a complete fallacy and never works out that way.
When will we learn?