How To Trim The Fat On Software Development: Don’t Waste Millions

Matthew Cloutier is the CEO at Sticky Strategy, a leading product development agency in Los Angeles.

Closed tickets, flashy technologies and growing headcount look good on paper. But without sound architecture and cultural discipline, they create fragility, waste and stalled growth. Here’s how leaders can recognize the traps—and fix them before it’s too late.

The Productivity Mirage

Dashboards glow with ticket counts, weekly reports tout “velocity” and executives are told the team is “moving fast.” The reality is different: one real task spawns ten tickets, and each of those spawns another ten to fix the problems created. Managing that noise becomes its own full-time job. Activity looks impressive, but it rarely equals real progress. The system incentivizes appearing busy, rather than delivering results.

Why Structure Determines Survival

System architecture is akin to a financial structure: it determines whether the business can scale. Developers can ship features quickly, but without strong design, systems buckle under their own weight. No one fully understands what’s happening, and sooner or later, it collapses. A CTO we once worked with couldn’t explain repeated system crashes that had been plaguing the company for years until we, as experts, diagnosed the architecture itself. Weak design doesn’t just cause downtime—it compounds into escalating costs and systemic risk.

The Résumé Trap

When teams push “big-name” technologies you can easily Google—Kubernetes, Rust or whatever’s trending—it often signals résumé padding rather than business alignment. Kubernetes, for instance, requires an entire operations team; without it, the platform becomes a liability, not a solution. A few years back, we had a client who insisted on using Rust to develop an application. Technically impressive, but ultimately the wrong fit for the business. Trend-driven technology choices may impress in interviews but rarely deliver shareholder value.

Headcount Without Impact

Adding more people often increases payroll faster than productivity. Each new “leader” justifies their role by demanding more staff, inflating overhead and slowing decision-making. Success gets measured not by impact, but by how many people someone manages—writing great code? Optional. Solving the real problem? Rare. More resources don’t guarantee more progress—they usually guarantee more cost.

Breaking The Cycle

The solution isn’t purely technical—it’s cultural and structural. Hire architects who understand scale, not just developers who ship fast. Align incentives around outcomes instead of activity. Please resist the urge to chase flashy technologies unless they address the business problem. And keep headcount lean, rewarding impact over hierarchy. With the right people and culture, even entrenched inefficiencies can be corrected before they threaten long-term growth and success.

Executive Takeaway

For financially minded leaders, these issues translate directly into cost, risk and return:

Measure outcomes, not motion. Ticket counts inflate OPEX without increasing revenue. Focus on initiatives that produce measurable business results.

Invest in architecture early. Weak design leads to unplanned CAPEX and ballooning maintenance costs. Solid foundations compound efficiency over time.

Scrutinize technology choices—trendy tools without fit become stranded investments. Adopt technology only when it drives ROI and reduces the total cost of ownership.

Please make sure to keep the headcount lean. Adding managers inflates payroll and slows decision-making. Reward teams that deliver impact per dollar, not headcount growth.

You can also hire an in-house development team, which can teach the product development process and support efficient execution.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?