The IT Service Management (ITSM) platform market has evolved beyond an operational, IT-centric back-office niche into one of the most strategic tiers of enterprise technology.

Platforms such as ServiceNow, Atlassian JSM, and BMC Helix ITSM power everything from incident response to digital workflows that connect IT operations, security, HR, facilities, and customer service.

Annual spending on ITSM solutions is in the tens of billions of dollars, with continued growth expected as more organizations advance digital transformation efforts and position themselves for an AI-driven future.

Since their introduction, ITSM solutions have evolved from simple help desk ticketing tools into comprehensive digital workflow platforms. They now sit at the heart of how work gets done and how experiences are delivered.

Increasingly, they serve as the connective tissue between applications, IT infrastructure, employees, and customers. However, with widespread adoption comes growing pains, and one issue that has become particularly problematic is technical debt.

Technical debt

Technical debt occurs when organizations take shortcuts or fail to adequately invest in the long-term health of their platform. Poorly considered design decisions, unnecessary customization, weakly governed development practices, and improperly migrated processes from legacy systems can gradually create a platform that is fragile, complex, and costly to manage.

Much like financial debt, technical debt builds over time as small decisions accrue interest across the platform lifecycle. It can begin before implementation, when legacy designs and workflows are carried into a new environment, and it often grows as teams introduce shortcuts or workarounds to meet pressure for faster feature delivery.

The result is a snowball effect: upgrades take longer, new functionality becomes harder to deliver, and work that should fit within a single sprint can begin taking two or three. Left unchecked, platform owners are forced to manage an increasingly complex and fragile environment that can eventually become too unstable to maintain.

Preventing this requires proactive management, thoughtful architecture, strong governance, and sound operational practices. Through overseeing hundreds of enterprise ServiceNow environments, we have identified several practices that help organizations maintain long-term platform health.

Being strategic

First, avoid custom development when possible. It is not about eliminating custom development entirely, but rather being strategic about when to use it. Every major ITSM platform includes robust out-of-the-box functionality designed to support common practices and activities.

These platforms are built with specific design and feature capabilities intended to be leveraged across applications. However, many organizations still create custom scripts, UI actions, and even full applications to replicate functionality that already exists within the platform.

Each line of custom code increases the maintenance footprint that must be supported through every upgrade or enhancement. Whenever possible, organizations should rely on native platform configuration to meet business needs. Custom development should be reserved for cases where requirements cannot be met using built-in functionality.

After reducing unnecessary customization, governance becomes the next critical factor in maintaining long-term platform health. Early in a platform’s lifecycle, development practices are often not well defined, and without formal governance, teams may make inconsistent architectural and development decisions.

Effective governance includes architectural reviews, coding and design standards, and clear guidelines on when customization is appropriate.

While governance should still enable teams to move quickly, it also provides the guardrails needed to protect long-term platform health. In this sense, governance acts as an accelerator: better visibility, oversight, and adherence to standards allow organizations to identify and address risk earlier, reduce complexity, and ultimately deliver faster.

Understanding their environment

Organizations must also take time to understand their overall environment. Modern ITSM platforms are sophisticated, interconnected ecosystems. The purpose of a platform is to unify a network of processes and journeys supported by shared elements such as profiles, permissions, and workflows.

This interconnectedness creates the end-user, customer, or citizen service experience. Across shared service areas like HR, IT, security, and facilities, there are shared data models, scripts, and integrations.

Changes to one application can have ripple effects across the platform. As a result, developers must understand how their code impacts other components. A holistic view helps prevent conflicts between custom applications and future platform capabilities.

It is equally important to avoid cutting corners in development practices. While no-code platforms have made development more accessible and accelerated delivery, ITSM platforms remain enterprise-grade systems that require disciplined engineering.

Coding standards, architectural guidelines, peer code reviews, automated testing, change management, and segregated development environments are essential controls that prevent defects, instability, and inconsistency from reaching production.

Under business pressure, teams may bypass these practices in the interest of speed. While this may create the appearance of faster delivery in the short term, it often shifts cost and risk downstream. The result is increased rework, more complex troubleshooting, longer testing cycles, and a growing support burden.

In practice, strong development discipline does not slow delivery; it makes delivery more reliable, scalable, and sustainable. Organizations that uphold these standards are better equipped to move quickly without compromising platform health.

Measure platform health

Organizations should also implement tools and processes that allow IT leaders to measure platform health and identify risks early. Whether through periodic platform health assessments, code analysis tools, or monitoring for environmental drift, visibility enables organizations to address technical debt before it requires significant remediation.

A key advantage is having a unified, end-to-end view of platform activity rather than relying on fragmented, piecemeal insights.

AI-powered tools should also be considered, with the appropriate level of governance and validation. As AI-driven development becomes more prevalent, organizations will face new challenges related to technical debt.

While AI can accelerate configuration and development, it can also introduce poorly governed practices if not properly managed. Maintaining architectural guardrails and rigorous validation processes will become increasingly important as AI-assisted development becomes more widespread.

The challenge of technical debt is not purely technical; it is also organizational. Business stakeholders are often not focused on long-term maintenance implications when requesting new capabilities. Platform teams must balance meeting immediate business needs with maintaining platform health.

Clear communications

Successful platform teams will find ways to clearly communicate the risks of technical debt to business stakeholders.

When technical debt accumulates, upgrades slow down, innovation becomes more difficult, and operational costs rise. Platform health directly impacts an organization’s ability to move quickly and control costs. Building this awareness empowers IT leaders to manage technical debt proactively.

As the ITSM market continues to expand and platforms like ServiceNow evolve into enterprise workflow hubs, effective platform management will become increasingly critical. Governance and architectural integrity will be strategic differentiators that enable organizations to scale their digital operations.

Maintaining a healthy ITSM platform is not about slowing teams down; it is about preventing uncontrolled technical debt so organizations can remain agile and move quickly.

We've rated the best IT asset management software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

CEO and Co-Founder of Dyna Software.