I wish I had a pound for every time a work around is implemented in a BizTalk solution to make up for some issue with an application your trying to integrate with. This is often referred to as technical or architectural debt. One of the good things about BizTalk is that as an integration platform it has a number of way that this "dirty" side to integration can still be managed effectively but one of the problems customers often have is the long term implications of this debt. BizTalk often becomes an easy place to implement integration workarounds rather than deal with the core issue.
With this anti pattern I have related it to a common phrase in the world of diet and health. The phrase relates well to this anti-pattern because you may get a project where a workaround (which in a lot of cases should be referred to as a "hack") is implemented to deal with an immediate project issue and it can often be a very quick thing. People often don't think of this as cutting corners but often it is and the implications of this short term workaround is that you inherit additional maintenance overhead for a very long time afterwards.
In my experience I think that less than 25% of the times a project implements a workaround does this technical debt ever get repaid properly and with a lot of projects an organization isn't even able to track the level of technical debt it has.