The 6 warning signs of overengineering

Estimated reading time: 8 minutes

Overengineered software is a silent killer.

Engineers are often motivated by the desire to build elegant, scalable, and sophisticated systems that can handle a wide range of requirements. But in doing so, may fall into the trap of creating systems that are overly complex, leading to wasted time, increased costs, and more headaches down the line. 

Overengineering may feel like an effort to ensure robustness, but it often ends up creating more problems than it solves.

What is overengineering?

Overengineering is the act of adding unnecessary features, complexity, or layers to a system that are not required to meet the core business objectives. Overengineering happens when the desire to build something perfect overtakes the need to build something that simply works.

But why does overengineering happen in the first place?

• Desire to build impressive systems
  One of the main reasons developers overengineer is the desire to impress others – whether it’s peers, management, or clients. Building a complex system with advanced technologies, new architectural patterns, and a sleek design might look impressive on paper, but often the complexities introduced don’t actually provide additional value. In fact, complexity can often make it harder to maintain the system or pivot when necessary.
• Unclear or changing requirements
  When requirements from stakeholders or management are unclear, developers often take the liberty of overcomplicating things in an attempt to anticipate every possible need. This happens most often in the absence of clear communication, where the developer feels they need to “cover all bases” to avoid failure. But in the process, the solution becomes overly intricate, with a multitude of features that may never even be used.
• Shiny object syndrome
  While it’s important to stay updated with the latest innovations, there’s a temptation to incorporate every new shiny object into projects, regardless of whether it actually solves the problem at hand. This is commonly seen when engineers adopt a new framework, technology, or pattern that promises to solve a problem more elegantly but only ends up complicating the system unnecessarily. Technologies that aren’t fully understood or don’t align with the project’s scope can be a significant source of complexity.

The warning signs of overengineering

Overengineering may not always be immediately obvious, but there are several key warning signs that can indicate you’ve gone too far down the path of unnecessary complexity. Here are some of the most common red flags:

1. Overly complex architecture
   One of the clearest indicators of overengineering is an unnecessarily complex architecture. You might find yourself layering abstraction upon abstraction, introducing more services than needed, or creating multiple tiers of communication where a direct solution would suffice. This often happens when developers build systems in a way that anticipates more use cases than are likely to occur. A multi-layered approach might make the system appear more robust, but it usually adds unnecessary complexity and slows down development.
   
   The truth is, simplicity often leads to better outcomes. If you’re working on a feature that only requires basic functionality, resist the temptation to introduce complicated design patterns, external dependencies, or redundant layers. As systems grow, complexity should only be introduced when it is absolutely necessary, not out of a desire to cover every possible scenario.
   
2. Premature optimization
   Another sign of overengineering is premature optimization – where developers start optimizing parts of the system that are not yet performance bottlenecks. It’s tempting to optimize a system for performance before any issues arise, but doing so without proper data or profiling often results in wasted effort. Premature optimization can lead to complex solutions that are harder to maintain, debug, and scale, without actually providing any noticeable benefits to the user experience.
   
   Before you start optimizing, ensure that there’s a clear, quantifiable problem to solve. Only focus on optimization once a real performance issue has been identified. Until then, focus on delivering a working system, not an optimized one.
   
3. Feature creep
   Feature creep happens when new features are added to a system without a clear need, typically because they might be nice to have or are requested by stakeholders who aren’t fully aware of the impact of these additions. It’s common to see this in early development stages when the team adds configurability, extensibility, or other features that are not necessary for the product’s core functionality.
   
   Each feature requires more testing, more maintenance, and more room for bugs to creep in. Stick to the original goals of the project and resist the urge to add unnecessary features.
   
4. Slow development cycles
   If the development of a simple feature takes weeks instead of days, it’s often a sign of overengineering. When developers are forced to deal with overly complex systems, every task becomes a much larger undertaking. Systems that were designed with more complexity than needed slow development cycles and create a bottleneck for teams.
   
   If you find that happening,  it’s time to step back and reconsider the architecture or approach. Development should be fast and iterative. The simpler the design, the easier it is to implement features quickly and efficiently.
   
5. Hard-to-maintain code
   Another key symptom of overengineering is code that is difficult to maintain. When developers are unable to easily onboard new team members, or find themselves spending more time debugging or updating the codebase than adding new features, the system may have become too complex. A codebase should be easy to understand, modular, and well-documented. If the system has become a tangled mess, overengineering is likely to blame.
   
   Excessive use of patterns like dependency injection, overly abstracted classes, or unnecessarily complex data models can make the code harder to follow and maintain. A more straightforward, simple design is typically easier to understand and modify.
   
6. Excessive use of new technologies
   Choosing trendy tools without carefully considering their relevance to the project can introduce more complexity than it’s worth. New technologies often come with steep learning curves, potential instability, and compatibility issues. Sticking with simpler, proven tools is often the best approach, particularly if the complexity of the problem at hand doesn’t warrant the use of a sophisticated new tool.

The consequences of overengineering

Overengineering has far-reaching consequences, both in terms of technical debt and the impact on the broader business. If left unchecked, the complexity introduced by overengineering can result in:

• Higher costs and longer development cycles
  The more complex the system, the longer it takes to build. Each layer of abstraction or unnecessary feature introduces more work and testing, which leads to longer development times and increased costs. What could have been a simple, straightforward project turns into an expensive, time-consuming one with a far higher cost than initially anticipated.
• Increased technical debt
  Overengineering leads to technical debt. While it might seem like you’re building a more robust solution, you’re often introducing unnecessary layers and abstractions that make the system harder to maintain. Over time, this complexity accumulates, leading to slower development cycles, higher maintenance costs, and more potential for bugs and issues.
• Reduced agility
  The more intricate the system, the harder it is to modify, scale, or adapt to new requirements. In a fast-paced development environment, this lack of agility can be a significant disadvantage.
• Diminished developer morale
  Dealing with overly complex systems can be incredibly frustrating for developers. It’s mentally taxing to work with convoluted codebases that are hard to understand and change. Developers may feel demotivated and disengaged when they’re forced to work on a system that is unnecessarily complex.
• Frustrated clients or stakeholders
  Ultimately, overengineering leads to frustrated clients. They want solutions that solve their problems quickly, not complex, overbuilt systems that deliver no additional value. When the system doesn’t meet their expectations – whether because it’s too slow, too expensive, or too hard to use – they become dissatisfied with the outcome.

---

London • June 16 & 17, 2025

Speakers Gergely Orosz, Camille Fournier and Lara Hogan confirmed.

See who else is speaking

How to prevent or fix overengineering

To avoid overengineering, keep things simple, clarify requirements early, and maintain open communication throughout the development process.

• Clarify requirements
  The first step is to ensure that you fully understand the problem you’re trying to solve. Take the time to meet with stakeholders, ask clarifying questions, and ensure that the scope and requirements are clearly defined. This will help you avoid unnecessary complexity and make sure that everyone is aligned on the desired outcomes.
• Iterate and refine
  Rather than trying to design the perfect solution upfront, focus on delivering small, incremental pieces of functionality. By iterating on the solution and gathering feedback, you can ensure that the complexity is introduced only when absolutely necessary.
• Simplify wherever possible
  Focus on what’s necessary and avoid overcomplicating things. Keep the codebase as clean and simple as possible, and avoid adding unnecessary abstractions or features.
• Use proven, simple tools
  Stick to simple, proven technologies that meet the project’s needs without adding unnecessary complexity.

From a leadership perspective, avoiding overengineering requires a disciplined approach to software design. A guiding principle for engineering teams should be KISS, or Keep It Simple, Stupid. Simplicity is not about avoiding structure or ignoring best practices but about choosing the simplest solution that effectively meets the business requirements. 

YAGNI (You Ain’t Gonna Need It) should also be applied to help developers avoid adding features or optimizations until there is a real, proven need. Many engineering teams waste valuable time building flexible architectures and optimizations for traffic that never materializes.

Another fundamental principle is DRY, or Don’t Repeat Yourself. While code reuse is important, DRY does not mean creating unnecessary abstraction layers. Many developers overuse design patterns, wrapping simple functions into multiple layers of abstraction that make the code harder to understand and maintain. The key to following DRY effectively is ensuring that abstraction is only introduced when it provides clear, immediate value.

Final thoughts

Overengineering can be a significant hindrance to successful software development. It leads to slower development cycles, higher costs, and reduced maintainability. By focusing on simplicity, iterating based on feedback, and clarifying requirements early on, you can avoid the traps of overengineering and build software that meets business needs efficiently.