NVP Software Solutions

Tag: Quality Assurance

  • Quality Assurance Process Improvement – Part 3

    Quality Assurance Process Improvement – Part 3

    Quality Assurance Process Improvement is the current topic in our Blog Series. A lot of organizations won’t act on the Assessment results if they don’t have a plan for moving forward. This is particularly true if the Assessment has not been tailored to the particular company in question. A standardized Assessment process generates standard recommendations which may not be applicable. Make sure you detail your expectations at the beginning of the Assessment so you get value from the process and your expenditure of time.

    Last time we looked at Why Carry Out Process Improvement and now want to address the question of “How to do it”. First we need to identify the processes that we want to improve. We will assume that this step has been completed already. Then we need to measure the existing process for what we want to improve. If we want it to be faster then we need to measure the time it takes. If we want it to be more consistent, then we need the measure the output against some standard. Once we have a baseline of measurements (you will probably be measuring more than one item since we do not want to improve one at the expense of another), then we can decide how we want to improve it. If we want the process to be faster, we might try to get the inputs to it at the right time or before they are needed. We might try cutting out any extra steps. While doing this we do not want to reduce the quality of the output so we will want to measure that as well. if you want it to be more consistent you might look for places where the product deviates from standard and try to improve those while making sure that does not make any other pieces of the product worse.

    The post improvement measurements should always be carried out after the process has had a chance to settle down and achieve some stability. Measuring too soon may lead to erroneous conclusions.

    The objective is to save the overall organization funds; not just the current project. As such the results of an Assessment and the activities done as part of Process Improvement must be assessed at the corporate level and not at the project level.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072
  • Process Improvement

    Process Improvement

    Ongoing Process Improvement is the second critical aspect of process implementation. Last week we identified the components of a process. Once they are identified and it has been determined if they are applicable then the next step is Process Improvement.

    Many organizations identify the need for Process Improvement but they seem to say it as statement sliding the two words together as if it is something that will occur without effort and frequently without results. Philip Crosby’s book “Quality is Free” talks about this. Getting it just right is not a one step process. At a minimum it is a 4 step process and those steps contain a lot of subsidiary detail.

    We have to identify the processes that are in existence. Part of an assessment process is to identify the existing processes. This can be done internally although that can be more difficult since people tend to live through the process and cannot see it ‘from the outside’.

    Once the processes are identified, then we need to see how they can be improved. This requires thinking ‘outside the box’ and coming with fresh insight to existing processes. A critical piece of this is to determine how the suggested processes can be measured. Without measurement it is impossible to know whether improvement has taken place. Peter Drucker – “you can’t manage what you can’t measure,” and extended to say “if you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it.”

    The next step then falls into place. We take the recommended improved process and try it out while taking measurements. Once the process has had some time to be tested, the measurements are collated and it is determined if the process has improved.
    There are two possible outcomes:

    • Process Improvement has occurred. In which case then we look for further process improvement.
    • Process Improvement has not occurred. In which case we discard the suggested process and look for some other way to obtain process improvement.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072

  • Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence – Part 4

    Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence – Part 4

    Today we want to focus on the root cause analysis.

    Focused on Root Causes – This can be applied to both of the previous posts. When it comes to being proactive, the Quality Assurance CoE could look at Root Causes of potential issues and plan around them or else they could look at Root Causes from their analysis and work to understand and solve them. Regardless of which way this is dealt with, the problem could be solved at different levels. We could be looking at Root Causes for software development and deployment or we could be looking at root causes that impact the entire organization (structure, culture, management).

    There are two challenges that a Quality Assurance Specialist usually faces with respect to Root Cause Analysis:

    1. The Root Cause may be difficult to find.
    2. Once found, there may be resistance to fixing the Root Cause

    An example of the first occurs when someone is supplying information to another group and in the process of supplying it the information is manipulated or reformatted in some way. The manipulation adds in an error which is not obvious. The next group uses the erroneous data to make decisions. The error is not large enough to cause major problems but it has an impact further along. No one notices the problem until much later. This makes the Root Cause difficult to find and difficult to correct since no one is recognizing the initial error.

    The second is a much worse problem. The Root Cause has been identified and the solution created. Then there is resistance to making the required changes:

    • The problem may be outside your department.
    • Someone may have to admit they are wrong and have been wrong for years.
    • There may be costs attached to making the change and they will fall on someone else.

    All of the above can lead to resistance to the change.
    Next:  Process Focus

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072

  • Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence

    Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence

    Recently we discussed a misconception about Quality Assurance. Judging from some of the feedback we received, the post struck a nerve. Many people talked about the how they had encountered a similar misconception and what could be done about it. Although education seems to be the answer, it is ongoing and can be frustrating from time-to-time. Does one just leave it alone when people make these comments (even if the one I heard was probably not entirely serious)? Does one attempt to correct the misconception? That usually means starting a long dialogue (monologue?) with sometimes frustrating results. Either people start to glaze over, have something pressing to do somewhere else, or else simply misunderstand what was said (wilfully at times).

    So with all that in mind, we are going to start into a series on what is a Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence. This is different from a Testing Centre of Excellence. A Testing Centre of Excellence had to have a delivery component. A delivery component for a Quality Assurance Centre of Excellence is going to be a little harder. This means that this is going to be slightly more of a challenge. We will work through the same hierarchy insofar as it applies to this situation but obviously the emphasis will be different.

    So, having started the plan for the plan which always reminds me of The Siphonaptera next week we will start into the real classifications.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072

  • Testing for System Integrators – Part 2

    Testing for System Integrators – Part 2

    Two days ago we asked two $10,000 dollar questions and this week we promised the possible answers. Unlike the questions, which are specific to the final client and the suppliers, the answers are more general and apply to both.

    1. The contracts state the following specifically about Quality Assurance and everyone is in agreement
    2. The contracts says nothing about it so far but we have Quality Assurance as a topic and the contract will not be finalised without this discussion
    3. The contracts says nothing about Quality Assurance so far but now that you have brought it up we will add it.
    4. There is something in the contracts about Quality Assurance and we can look it up for you (contracts are signed).
    5. There is nothing in the contracts (contracts are signed) and there is no intention of putting anything in the contracts about Quality Assurance
    6. We don’t know (but that is a good question)
    7. We don’t know (and we don’t care)

    Suffice to say the items in the above list have an obvious gradation from good to terrible in the order they are presented. If you get the first answer, you’re well on your way. If you get some of the middle answers you have some work to do, but you may be in time to effect some change. If you get the last few answers, you are in trouble!

    Next: What to do with the answers.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072
  • Quality Management

    Quality Management

    Is there any difference between software and manufacturing?

    We recently participated in a preparation session for an upcoming webinar. The person we will be presenting with is involved Quality Management for Products while I was representing Software.

    It was quite surprising how similar we sounded in terms of what we do:

    1. Product Planning Phase turning into Requirements.
    2. Design Phase
    3. Testing Phase
    4. Production Phase
    5. End-of-Life
    • We both wanted measurements and opportunity to institute process improvement.
    • We both looked at the entire lifecycle.
    • We both looked at training as a method of attaining Quality objectives.
    • We both end up with a product.
    • We both wanted to add process improvement at all stages.

    There does not seem to be a lot of difference. But, then again, we took our Quality Assurance from Crosby, Deming and Juran.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072
  • QA as an Afterthought

    QA as an Afterthought

    Why QA is so often an afterthought?

    1. Is it because QA is ‘traditionally at the end of the project”?
    2. Is it because people have too much else going on at the beginning of a project and cannot think about QA?
    3. Is it because QA does ‘not fit anywhere’ at the corporate level so ends up nowhere?
    4. Is it because QA is regarded as a necessary evil which no one wants to acknowledge?
    5. Is it because we do not know when QA is needed and by the time we find out it is too late to make a difference?
    6. Is it because QA does not do a good job of selling ourselves?
    7. Is it because …

    We could certainly go on with all the reasons that QA seems to be frequently ignored. 

    Not surprisingly, when people do take the time to consider the Return on Investment for QA, they are often shocked by how much it benefits them.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP

    https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7399187902221443072
  • The purpose of Meetings

    The purpose of Meetings

    Recently I was asked to provide a short history of a local Quality Assurance organization.

    Starting with the previous organization, I went through the 25-year history in about 5 minutes. The one major overriding change in those 25 years was the advent of the internet that created a vast information trove that is free to all. Prior to that, people were isolated within their organizations with limited contact with people with the same interests in other organizations. Solutions to problems were generally home-grown.

    Having provided that very brief synopsis we were left with three questions about the purpose of the organization:

    1. Are we an organization dedicated to networking?
    2. Are we an education organization?
    3. Are we a social organization?

    Unfortunately we do not have enough of the history documented to determine what has been the best use of the time. Clearly my synopsis was based on what I remembered and I was not always in attendance at all the meetings or always on the board. So the question is still open.

    #QA,#QualityAssurrance,#SoftwareTesting,#SoftwareTestingStrategy,#TASSQ,#NVP