5 Root Causes of Technical Debt in Salesforce

5 Root Causes of Technical Debt in Salesforce

In Salesforce, technical debt usually doesn’t result from a single mistake, but from a series of decisions regarding configuration, automation, and the data model.

As an environment grows, more processes are added. This increases the number of dependencies between Flows, Apex, validation rules, integrations, and data relationships. As a result, every change affects multiple components at once.

The most common causes are:

1. Lack of architectural ownership
2. Changes without an analysis of usage and dependencies
3. Complexity in CPQ and sales processes
4. Outdated and overlapping automation
5. Reactive governance and a lack of standards

In practice, it is almost always a combination of these factors that leads to a less stable and difficult-to-maintain environment.

1. Lack of architectural ownership

In many Salesforce organizations, the focus is on delivering new functionality. Less attention is paid to how those changes affect the system as a whole.

This leads to situations in which:

• Fields are added without taking the data model into account
  
• New record-triggered flows are being built alongside existing automation
  
• Apex triggers are modified without analyzing their impact on other processes

Because Salesforce uses a fixed order of execution, additional logic can directly affect transaction processing time and behavior.

Without a central architectural vision, the system becomes increasingly complex, leading to longer transaction times and a higher risk of errors.

2. Changes without data-driven analysis

Decisions about modifying or removing components are often made without an understanding of how they are actually used.

For example:

• A field is being deleted while an integration is still using it
  
• A flow is modified without analyzing how often it runs
  
• Validation rules are being updated without affecting existing data

Without tools such as debug logs, field usage analysis, or automation monitoring, it is difficult to determine what is critical.

This increases the risk of disruptions in processes such as quotations, approvals, or reporting.

3. Complexity in CPQ and sales processes

In environments using Salesforce CPQ or Revenue Cloud, complexity increases rapidly.

Configurations often consist of:

• Product bundles and dependencies
• Pricing Rules and Calculation Logic
  
• Approval processes
  
• Contract and Amendment Logic

When these processes are built on top of an unstable data model or inefficient automation, performance issues arise.

This can lead to:

• Slow quote calculations
  
• CPU limits during transactions
  
• Errors in price calculations
  
• Inaccurate data in contracts and billing

Technical debt arises here because the underlying architecture was not designed to handle the volume and complexity of these processes.

4. Outdated and overlapping automation

Many Salesforce environments contain a mix of Workflow Rules, Process Builder, and Flows that are active at the same time.

This leads to:

• Multiple automations running at the same time
  
• Unnecessary repetition of logic
  
• Longer processing time for record updates

Every time a save operation is performed, Salesforce runs through all relevant automation. The more processes that are active, the greater the load on CPU time and database queries.

Without consolidation and cleanup, it becomes difficult to understand which logic is being executed and when.

This not only increases complexity, but also the risk of errors and performance issues.

5. Reactive governance and a lack of standards

Standards for development and configuration are often not implemented until problems arise.

Consider:

• Naming conventions for fields and objects
  
• Documentation for Flows and Apex
  
• Testing bulk transactions instead of just individual records

Without these standards, there is variation in how solutions are built. This makes the system harder to maintain and increases the likelihood of conflicts between components.

In addition, a lack of governance can lead to inefficient use of platform resources, such as non-selective queries or excessive API usage.

In summary

Technical debt in Salesforce arises from the way an environment grows and is managed.

• Key factors include:
• Lack of architectural coherence
• Decisions made without understanding usage and impact
• Increasing complexity due to CPQ and automation
• Accumulation of outdated and overlapping logic
• Lack of proactive standards

By systematically analyzing and managing these causes, a Salesforce environment can continue to operate in a scalable and reliable manner.

Maudy van Eldik

CEO & Founder

Maudy van Eldik is founder of CaseNine and CEO of the organization. In this capacity he is responsible for the overall processes, but also closely involved in the various customer projects.