NVP Software Solutions

Tag: Quality Assurance

  • Quality Assurance Metrics

    In our last post we listed the need for some way of measuring Process Improvement without going into too much detail about how. What we were referencing was Quality Assurance Metrics.

    We define a metric similar to the way Wikipedia does in that it is the degree to which software possesses some desired characteristic. This feeds directly into the comments from our last post about needing to have something to measure in order to know if Process Improvement has occurred.

    More specifically, we can define a Measurement as something that has a single dimension: Height; Weight; Count of defects; Count of Requirements and many others.

    A Metric is derived from two or more Measurements and is often expressed as a ratio or a percentage. For example, we might count the number of defects but we might also count the number at each Severity level and then express that as a percentage of the total. This gives us a lot more information as the following example shows:

    If we have 100 defects and 20 of them are of the highest severity then we can state that 20% or one fifth are of the highest severity. We can watch that percentage over the duration of the project and track its movement up and down. We can also compare our percentage of highest severity defects to other projects directly using the percentage and see if our percentage is out of line with other projects. Note that this removes the bias that might occur with different project sizes. If someone has a much smaller project, they would expect commensurately fewer defects in total but might experience a similar percentage of high severity ones.

    In general metrics normalize the results to allow comparisons.

    As Peter Drucker said “you can’t manage what you can’t measure,”

    Give us a call to see what Metrics you need!

  • Quality Assurance Supports Process Improvement

    Quality Assurance Supports Process Improvement by showing us when the improvement has occurred. This is typically done through measuring the existing process; making the change and then measuring the results of the new process. In last week’s blog we discussed examples of Process Improvement. Now we need to ensure that the Improvement has actually occurred.

    The initial steps to tracking improvement are as follows:

    • Identify the process we want to improve
    • Identify the aspect of that process that needs to be improved
    • Identify a characteristic that will show if the improvement has taken place after the change
    • Find or create a measurement that will show change occurring in the characteristic
    • Measure the characteristic under the current process for a sufficient length of time to get a valid result
    • Make the change
    • Measure the characteristic under the new process for a sufficient length of time to get a valid result

    The above steps are not necessarily easy and will depend on what already exists in the place you are working. In order to do the first three steps you need to have processes in place or be able to identify them and their characteristics. The fourth step requires working out a measurement that validly checks the aspect that is planned for improvement. We then need to wait for while the measurement is taken with the current process. The change has to be implemented and used in the process without any modifications in order to allow us to make valid measurements of the impact of the change.

    Once all this is done, then we are in a position to measure the difference and decide on whether the process was actually improved. Quality assurance supports all of this by defining the necessary measurements, gathering the statistics and analyzing the results. NVP Software Solutions can complete all of the above steps for you.

  • Examples of Process Improvement

    Examples of Process Improvement are sometimes a little harder to find and measure than Product Improvement. As long as you have a standard to compare a product, any change can be determined and it is usually easier to determine if the quality of the product has improved or not. Also, we may not have to actually determine the measurement methodology prior to the product being produced. We can take an existing product, determine a standard and decide if it has met that standard. Future products can then be compared against that standard. A process, on the other hand, does not necessarily have an end product. It is part of what produces the end product and may not ‘exist in the literal sense’ after it is finished.

    There are two ways we can measure Process Improvement and then determine if the Process has improved.

    • Measure the created product. This becomes product measurement and that can be used as feedback to improve the process.
    • Measure the actual process.

    The first has already been covered so we will discuss the second.
    If we make a change to the process, the fundamental question is has the process improved.
    Examples:

    • The process continues to generate product after a change with no reduction in quality. Process Improvement.
    • The process generates the same product while using less materials. Process Improvement.
    • The process generates the same product with less waste. Process Improvement.
    • The process is halted or interrupted less often than before. Process Improvement.
    • Less resources are required for the same quality product. Process Improvement.
    • The process has reduced variation. Process Improvement.

    All of the above require a proper measurement process (another process) to be in place before the process is launched. It is very difficult to measure some of the above process improvements without having an existing measurement process in place. This may eventually remind you of The Siphonaptera!

    However, if you want to find out about your own processes, take a look at our Assessment process which identifies them.

  • 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 and in our last post we mentioned getting the process just right. 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.

    Initially, as mentioned last week, we have to identify the processes that are in existence. Part of NVP’s 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.

    Next week we will provide some examples.

  • Quality Assurance Processes

    Quality Assurance Processes are key to a successful project. Before we get into the where and why, here is  a brief overview of processes as we see them.

    A Quality Assurance Process has several components which are often described via a workbench.
    The following are common to most of the workbenches we have used:

    • Inputs are items that are provided to the workbench. Frequently they are the output from another workbench and they should be subject to entrance criteria.
    • Some Do Process to which the Inputs are subject
    • Some Check Process after the Do Process has completed
    • Tools may be used to assist in the Do and Check Processes
    • If the product or process passes then it is delivered to the next workbench or to the final customer
    • If the product or process fails then rework is undertaken to correct the errors
    • Standards should be applied to all the other components of the workbench

    The key point is to determine where to apply the processes for the most impact and best ROI.

    Too Much Process

    There are companies (some of them no longer in business) who applied processes to absolutely every step and every thing they did. They ‘bogged down in process’ to the detriment of the actual work they were supposed to be doing. There were too many processes to remember and people actually devoted time to working out how to avoid the process.

    Too Little Process

    The opposite of the above are the companies that avoid process entirely. Everything is left to current thought of the day and it can be changed tomorrow. These companies are at Level 1 (or less) of CMMi and very little actually moves each day since everyone knows it can change before. People resort to doing as a little as possible while waiting on the final decision.

    Just Right Process

    The best way is the Just Right Processes. We will talk about that next week.

  • Quality Assurance Supports Validation

    Quality Assurance supports validation for a number of reasons not least of which is the potential for cost savings for you! The key is to know where to apply the appropriate level of validation. It is quite possible to validate too many items and also to validate the wrong ones. There are some organizations who believe that if a little testing is good, then a medium amount of testing is better and a huge amount of testing is the best of all. The testers (and anyone else who can be brought into the process) test as much as they can or for as long as they can before the release date. The end result is a product that has been tested for some items but no one knows what was done or missed. As usual, these problems show up in production with depressing regularity and sometimes horrific consequences.

    Some projects have problems identifying the correct place to implement validation techniques and wait until it is too late in the project. The other mistake that some organizations make is matching the correct validation technique to their level of process maturity.

    Many people can test but not all can test effectively or efficiently.

    Both are necessary for a positive ROI.

    For all of the above reasons, it is critical that an assessment be carried out on the existing processes to determine the following:

    • The appropriate places to use validation techniques in your projects.
    • The appropriate types of validation to complete and when to do them.
    • The level of Validation to be carried out at each phase.
    • The relevant stakeholders who gain from the process and can see the benefits.
    • The use of the correct techniques based on SDLC maturity.

    Once all of the above are known; then an effective validation process can implemented for your benefit. NVP Software Solutions completes that assessment and provides Recommendations and a Roadmap to get you there. You realise instant benefits in reduced rework and reduced cost.

  • Examples of Validation

    Examples of Validation are one of the easier items to find as long as the definition referred to in the some of the earlier posts is used. Validation covers all active testing where code has been generated and we are able to run it actively.

    So it includes at least the following list of Test Phases:

    • Unit Testing
    • Integration Testing
    • System Testing
    • Acceptance Testing

    And the following list of Test Types:

    • Initial Testing
      1. Configuration Testing
      2. Compatibility/Conversion Testing
      3. Installability Testing
    • On-Going Testing
      1. Functionality Testing
      2. Facility Testing
      3. Security Testing
    • Performance Testing
      1. Volume Testing
      2. Stress Testing
      3. Load Testing
      4. Speed of Response Testing
      5. Storage Testing
    • Post Functional Testing
      1. Usability Testing
      2. Reliability Testing
      3. Recovery Testing
    • Post Installation Testing
      1. Serviceability Testing

    Despite the length of the two lists above, they are not that hard to deal with since they break the testing into several disparate groups and make it easier to ensure that everything is addressed and not omitted from consideration.

    The two key points are to determining into which phase the Types of Testing fall and whether they are worth doing. The second question is much harder to answer than the first.

    If you ask the stakeholders for most projects, they will simply answer that all Types of Testing should be full completed with all possible depth and speed. If you ask them to budget for it, you usually end up with a minimization statement asking for the cheapest testing. The best answer we have found to deal with this type of conundrum is to provide the following:

    1. Provide the above list of Validation testing types.
    2. Define each one briefly.
    3. List the recommended phase.
    4. Provide the recommendation for inclusion or exclusion.
    5. Provide the risk of failure to include them.

    This provides the stakeholders with all the information they need to make the correct decision and weigh the various merits of completing the various types of testing. In the event that they still cannot come to a decision, then add a recommendation based on the project.

  • Validation Applicability in Software Testing

    Many people believe that Validation is Software Testing and that is all there is to the profession. As was stated in our earlier blogs Validation is only half of it. It is the more expensive ‘half’ but has had far more effort put into it by many people.

    Validation is applicable in Software Testing as soon as you have any code at all to test. So it cannot launch until some development has been completed and some code generated. However, once that is completed, it is possible to launch Validation techniques and start to apply them.

    Validation can be applied at the Unit or Module level. This is the most cost effective place in which to use the technique since any error discovered at this stage is reasonably easy and cheap to fix and retest. A single module can be tested by the use of Drivers and Stubs and executed while the tester watches the progress of individual variables and conditions.

    Validation can also be applied at the Integration level where individual modules are strung together. There will still be a need for Drivers and Stubs to drive the calling and called modules but the effort will center on testing the interfaces between the modules.

    Validation can next be applied at the System and Acceptance Testing Levels although there will be more emphasis placed on some of the non-code aspects of the system.

    Lastly Validation can be applied to the Non-Functional testing aspects of the system. This requires some consideration as to what is important and what is cost-effective to test at this stage. A lot of funds can be expended with little results if due consideration is not given to the payback. If you have questions about this type of Validation Testing and would like to determine what to do, give us a call or email us at neil@nvp.ca.