Coming up with better terms for "tech debt" seems like a good exercise. Here are some:
Improving the flexibility of our code base.
Investing in future execution speed.
Performing final cleanup tasks on the previous round of features.
Also, when a report comes and asks for time for "refactoring," I ask them what they want to improve. Having a particular goal or target area for the refactor makes it more successful, and has the side benefit of making it easier to communicate the benefits to the rest of the company.
I agree, the narrative is important. Cleaning up "technical debt" may sound like a big cost and delayed eng schedule with no clear benefit for non-eng teams, despite being crucial to day to day operations.
As it should, honestly. What's really happening is that, usually due to deadlines, a job is left unfinished, and the undone tasks (like cleanup, optimization) are then labeled as "debt" just in order to push a ticket do "Done" earlier.
Improving the flexibility of our code base.
Investing in future execution speed.
Performing final cleanup tasks on the previous round of features.
Also, when a report comes and asks for time for "refactoring," I ask them what they want to improve. Having a particular goal or target area for the refactor makes it more successful, and has the side benefit of making it easier to communicate the benefits to the rest of the company.