NVP Software Solutions

Category: Quality Assurance Consulting

  • The need for Proof in Software Testing

    The need for Proof in Software Testing

    One of the problems QA has is deciding how much proof is enough.

    Proofs are expensive and time consuming to generate. Even with new tools saving everything in video and screen shots, there is still a need to confirm that the correct items appear, and they can be found later. This is particularly true in Projects with regulatory requirements. AI can certainly help with this and reduce a lot of the manual work. But we still need to set guidelines about how long, and where the proofs are kept. They must also be secured from unauthorized access and manipulation. Any mistrusted proof will cause issues at audit time. Lastly, they must be able to be found when required.

    Proofs are also helpful when we come to testing the new version of the software. Detailed actual results can not only pinpoint unexpected and detrimental changes in the new version but they can also guide other testing that may need to be done.

    Two questions arise:

    1. Are proofs necessary – Yes.

    2. How long should they be kept – that depends on the industry and requirements but (as should be the case for all documentation) a policy for document retention needs to be written, filed, and applied.

    Either way we do not keep everything for ever.

    Proofs are a crucial part of software testing and will be called upon in the future as software testing faces scrutiny in how they tested in the event of problems in production.

  • TASSQ November Meeting is just under 2 weeks away

    TASSQ November Meeting is just under 2 weeks away

    The session will focus on the ISTQB certification and how the CSTB supports it.

    ISTQB – Vision, Syllabus Scheme, Working Groups, Partner Program

    CSTB – Goal, History, Local activities, International Activities, Volunteering

    When: Tuesday, November 25th starting at 6:15 p.m. (until 7:30 p.m.) EST
    Cost:  $10.00 CAD

    Register at https://tassq.org/events

  • Software Quality is Everyone’s Responsibility

    Software Quality is Everyone’s Responsibility

    Last month we talked about how October was Quality Month. We want to follow on from that with a comment about how “Quality is Everyone’s Responsibility”.  This came up repeatedly at the conference last week (amongst all the talks on AI in QA)

    If you have heard any of the following statements you may be in trouble.  Our response is in the second line of each listed comment.

    1. We are doing quality.
    Quality is not done. It is a process that is on going.

    2. We have a Quality Assurance department and Quality is their concern.
    Quality is not just one department.

    3. We have finished the Quality Assurance.
    Quality is never done.

    4. Quality Assurance is built into our processes and we have no need to change.
    You were perfect from the start?

    5. We have never had a Quality Assurance problem.
    Now is a good time to stop the first one.

    Quality cannot be added to a product that is poor quality from the start. It is not something that can be inserted into a product after it is built.

    If you feel that this is you, get in touch to discuss where you can improve.  www.nvp.ca/contact

  • TASSQ November 2025 Webinar

    TASSQ November 2025 Webinar

    The Toronto Association of Systems and Software Quality (TASSQ) is pleased to announce the Webinar for November 2025.

    Topic: CSTB in a Nutshell

    Presenter: Amanda Logue

    Location: Online, Zoom

    When: Tuesday, November 25th @6:15 pm (until 7:30 pm) EST

    Cost: $10.00 CAD

    Register at https://tassq.org/events






  • QA – Why Bother?

    QA – Why Bother?

    If you get the feeling that this is a question you encounter a lot, you are not alone. We get a lot of calls and emails asking us to explain this question. Of course, the answer is dependent on who is asking the question.

    People want to know why they should consider it and, more importantly, the benefit. Sometimes they are simply looking for something to carry back to the project or department.

    In order to answer the question, we need to appeal to the broader costs calculated over multiple projects.

    We define QA as Process Improvement and processes generally apply to multiple projects (or at least can be applied to multiple projects). Hence the need for long term measurements and metrics.

    The simplest example is Defect Management. A simple process to ensure all defects are addressed and handled only once by each member of the team would remove a lot of redundancy.

    Other examples include Testcase creation; Testing; Summary reporting; Development; and Requirements management.  With the advent of AI, this has become much more critical to get right. The chances of going off track at high speed have increased substantially.

  • Are you satisfied with your testing?

    Are you satisfied with your testing?

    Most people we speak to answer that question with a resounding NO; they are not satisfied with their testing. The answer may vary from stakeholder to stakeholder, and the intensity and source of the dissatisfaction may be different.  However, doing something about it is a different matter.    The most recent of many examples involved someone who complained about the testing and was promptly put in charge.  Not the result they were aiming for at the time!

    Solving the dissatisfaction is very difficult. Process improvement is resisted on many levels and there is usually a large number of potential improvements that may impact the perception.  The starting point is with a stakeholder survey and process assessment; this gives the basis for supportable incremental changes to improve satisfaction. 

    Take a look at Assessments for a starting point on what to include.

  • Isn’t there a better way to Test?

    Isn’t there a better way to Test?

    This is a question that gets asked very frequently especially at the end of projects that have not gone well.

    While there are many people who will advocate one methodology or another for testing and tell you their way is the only way, every method must adapt to the project at hand, the risks and the desired outcomes.  There is no one way to test but there are ways to improve the testing.

    The first need is time at the end of the project to evaluate what went right and wrong before people forget.

    Some common concerns:

    1. Too much documentation:  It is acceptable to reduce documentation if the same testers will be available for the next project but not so effective if the next project will be staffed with new people unfamiliar with the project.
    2. Too little documentation:  This can be solved but it takes time or can be fed through AI to generate the complete documentation.  Always review anything produced by AI.
    3. Too much repetition:  This is a process error that can be solved by RCA and then implemented but is not likely to have much effect for at least a project or two.
    4. Unused testcases:  This is a classification issue that can be solved with AI at this point.
    5. Too many escaped defects:  Again RCA with the aid of AI can address this but it is too late to implement the solution for the existing project.
  • Mentoring

    Mentoring

    Frequently organizations encounter a roadblock on their Quality Assurance Processes. Most tasks are progressing well but there is a hitch or a stumble somewhere. The problem is not large enough to warrant a full consulting contract but it needs to be resolved. This is where Mentoring helps.

    Issue: A client, who creates websites for government departments and high profile clients, was having trouble with their Quality Assurance process.

    Please take a look at Case Study 11: https://nvp.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Case-Study-11-Mentoring.pdf to see how this was solved quickly and cheaply.