Tag: #qualityassurance

  • Who do we tell – Part 2

    We feel that the question of to whom and what to report has to be answered by initially by Quality personnel. We know what information we have, we know what we can get reasonably easily, and how it can be presented. Thus it falls to us to present recommendations to each person and make sure they can be fulfilled throughout the project without issue.

    As mentioned two weeks ago, we encounter two major attitudes to this question:

    1. Everyone must know everything.
    2. How can I avoid being added to this list?

    We strongly recommend against the first one since if everyone gets an email no one ever looks at it. It becomes an SEP (someone else’s problem).

    The second one is not much better. People avoid being told so they can put the blame somewhere (even if they could have been told earlier) when things go wrong.

    So we need to present a hierarchy of reports that consolidate the information as they work their way up and recommend the correct report for each level.

    1. Developers, testers and their direct managers should receive all details of every report. They are immersed in the project and need the information.
    2. Next level up – counts of testcases completed and their priorities; counts defects raised and their priorities; any critical issues should be brought to their attention particularly if they are going to impact the project.
    3. Next level up – Weekly colour coded summaries showing the project status.
    4. Next level up (assuming there is one) – project completion

    We do expect that most of the online reports will be interactive and allow anyone to drill down as required.

    Next blog – How do you decide what to do with what has been reported

     

  • July Events in the GTA and beyond

    Well it is summer time and there are no meetings of TASSQ or KWSQA.

    However, the Board of TASSQ is busy preparing for the President’s Dinner meeting to be held in September. The speaker line up is almost completed and registration should open shortly. Stay tuned for further information or contact NVP to be added to the mailing list.

    Although we cannot prove it, we strongly suspect that the KWSQA Board is busy planning their Targeting Quality Conference. NVP has signed up as a sponsor and we look forward to seeing you there. Stop by our table for your free stress relieving bug.

    Planning education for the fall and want to know what is out there. Check our site and pick your training course.

    Want to keep up on your testing news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

  • Who do we tell?

    In light of some of the comments received, this blog is aimed at the ‘official’ list of people who should be told the results of testing. As per some of the comments, there are lots and lots of unofficial channels and these can be more useful and more informative than some of the official ones. However, (in order to stop the blog going on forever) we are looking at the ones who are listed as requiring the information.

    We encounter two major attitudes to this question:

    1. Everyone must know everything.
    2. How can I avoid being added to this list?

    The above may seem odd and probably depends a lot on the trust factor within the organisation. In some places, everyone gets added no matter how much the notifications and emails pile up. In others people avoid being told. There is an obvious dependency on the sophistication of the notification process and where the information is being stored. Less sophisticated processes will not have the granularity required or no-one to administer them. More sophisticated ones can do almost any desired work flow.

    One other comment that came back was that we need to recall that we have clients and they need to be kept informed of what is occurring (whether or not they look at it).

    In our next blog on this topic we will provide some specific suggestions.

  • What should be reported from your Testing Efforts – Part 4

    Feedback is always welcome and this week we are indebted to Paul Seaman for some very valid comments on the What should be reported from your testing – Part 2. He pointed out that the blog seemed to have a written bias, missed the value of verbal communication and seemed to silo testers.

    We were considering mainly final reports using an independent test team and with the potential need for an audit of the testing. So some bias may have crept in and Paul pointed that out. Let’s look at each of these.

    Siloed Test Team: The more you silo a test team, the less effective they are. Information does not flow to them or from them. So the opportunities to learn from each other is lost. In addition, any information that does flow back and forth will likely be somewhat distorted by the time it gets to the other party. Testers need to be included throughout the lifecycle embedded in the team.

    Verbal Communication: This is an obvious follow on from the previous point. If you are remote, or restricted in communication then the chance to provide and receive feedback is reduced. Non-verbal communication tends to be asynchronous – something is sent and there is a delay before there is a response. Verbal (throughout the project or testing effort) allows instant feedback and may speed up responses and reactions to changing events. The only thing you may lose is an audit trail. Anything crucial needs to be noted and put into a decision log for retention.

    Written bias: This comes down to the same thing as the last comment in the previous paragraph. Crucial information that needs to be retained should be documented and stored. If the report is simply a status that is being provided then it may not need to be fully documented. Point taken.

  • June 2019 QA Events in the GTA and Beyond

    If you are in the Greater Toronto Area or Kitchener-Waterloo you might want to consider these events to network with other QA people or learn some of the new ideas in QA.

     

    NVP Software Solutions will be participating in the following software testing and quality assurance events happening this June in Ontario, Canada. The events are located in Toronto and Kitchener-Waterloo in the coming weeks. Check out the relevant websites for more information and to register. This is a great opportunity to connect with other software testing and quality assurance professionals. We hope to see you there!




    IS DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION A BUZZ WORD OR IS IT A BUSINESS EVOLUTION?

     June 25, 2019 6:00 p.m.  The Albany Club – 91 King Street East, Toronto, Ontario

    Presenters: Kyle Hulme

    See KWSQA.org for details

  • What should be reported from your Testing Efforts – Part 2?

    This seems like an obvious question and many people have successfully conquered it and set up a standard for reporting. Every once in a while it falls apart and people get blindsided by extra requests that they did not expect but for the most part it works fairly well.

    We first mentioned this question a couple of weeks ago. The obvious and simple answer is to provide what your stakeholders want to have provided. The only issue with that statement is that we find a lot of stakeholders:

    1. Do not always know what they want at the beginning of a project.
    2. Change their minds as the project changes it risk profile (Stakeholders start taking more interest as the project risk increases and commensurately less interest as the project risk decreases)

    Since testers and Quality Assurance personnel are in the ‘Risk Reduction’ business we are in a good position to answer that question for them. As part of the anlysis of the project and the required testing, we will be judging the risk of the project and concentrating our testing on that. So we have a handle on the overall risk profile at the start. We can start with a level of reporting reflecting that risk profile.

    Since Software Testers and Quality Assurance personnel are also the ‘canary in mine’ when things start to go wrong, we can ramp up the reporting preemptively when things start to go wrong. For example, if there is a sudden surge in severe defects in a project, then we can start providing more information and recommendations.

    Most of the above seems obvious but when you are busy testing, the temptation is to leave the reporting at the same level (or even reduce it when we are busy). That is the exact opposite of what is needed.

    Next week – Some specifics for reporting.