NVP Software Solutions

Tag: Small business

  • A Better Way – Case Study 1 – Thinking Outside the Box

    A Better Way – Case Study 1 – Thinking Outside the Box

    In our last several blogs we have discussed ‘A Better Way to Test”.

    The issue is to apply this to actual situations. We have 5 Case Studies we plan to use over the next several weeks to address this. The first one revolves around a junior QA, a very successful (small) company and a need to test effectively and quickly for a large final client. The issue that came up was the ability to “Think outside the box”.

    We received a call from the President of the company indicating that the new junior QA was having trouble considering things “Outside the box”. They were good with what was presented in the Use Cases or User Stories. Most people can generate testcases based on what is provided and the happy path from the Use Cases and User Stories. Experienced testers will apply other techniques and may specifically try Exploratory testing. However, you cannot explore or test what you don’t know or don’t think of at the time.

    Rather than dictating “Outside the box” which is a contradiction in itself, we decided to go with more of a checklist approach listing some of the areas that would be considered to be non-Happy Path and see if it could lead to further extensions. We did not dictate everything but started with more of a charter and guidance list to see what would come of it. The process had two advantages:

    1. We would have some coverage of everything “inside” and “outside” the box.
    2. We could use the results to evaluate the suitability of the junior QA for further roles and projects.

    The President came up with the basic list and ran it from there.

    If you want to discuss this further contact us.

    Take a look at some of the seminars that we offer that address this situation and see if they apply to you. Testing can be better.
    Contact us for further information.

  • Selecting Software to run your business – 2

    As mentioned in the last blog, there is any number of packages that are available to do some or all of what you want the business to do. Whether that is to track Goods-in-Transit, Maintain Financial Records, Generate a Sales Catalogue, Create and send an email blast, Retain Customer Information, Track needed Repairs or Write a Document, there are many choices and all the choices have their advantages and disadvantages. Some are cheap, others expensive. Some provide functionality you will never use, others will leave you wishing the software did more.

    If you are facing this conundrum, there is a solution. There are methods to evaluate what you need, then to evaluate what is available and then to finally bring the two together to make a quantified decision about what to buy (or build).

    The high level process is:

      1. Survey all the areas in your organisation that will be affected by the new software.
      2. Document the stated requirements from each group and give them weights (example follows).
        • Must have = 5.

          • Note: Any technical requirements that cannot be changed are given a 5 or you can simply set them up as initial questions and remove anyone not matching them.

        • Should have = 4.
        • Nice to have = 3.
        • Minimal need = 2.
        • Unimportant = 1.
        • Not relevant = 0.
      3. Create a scorecard based on the above.
      4. Survey the existing tools (there are many sites on the internet).
      5. Select the top 4 and bring in the vendors for a demonstration.
      6. Fill in the scorecard.
      7. Bring in the two highest scorers for a more indepth presentation.
      8. Make your selection knowing with certainty that you have made the best choice.

      Now comes the more interesting part: Implementation. That is a subject for the next blog.

  • Selecting Software to run your business

    We recently spoke to a municipality about their current IT practices and came away with several interesting pieces of information that point to the probable future of a lot of the software industry. (more…)

  • Startups and Small Companies Need QA

    There is a common view that Quality Assurance is restricted to larger companies like Banks, Utilities, and Telecommunications organisations. This view is misleading: Startups, Small Companies and Not-for-profit groups also need QA. As a matter of fact, in many ways they need it more than some of the larger companies because larger companies have the resources to recover from a problem and often have the reputation to ride out many issues that could flatten a small company.  A Startup or Small Business is often riding on limited dollars, time and staff and does not have the resources to recover from a large problem that could affect their product or their reputation.

    Quality Assurance that a smaller organisation needs does differ from that of a larger organisation. A large organisation requires Quality Assurance processes and procedures that will allow it to continue in business while minimizing the risk to their existing systems. A smaller organisation requires Quality Assurance processes and procedures that allow it to react rapidly to market requirements and grow quickly if necessary. A small organisation does not usually need extensive Quality Control or Software Testing – they know their product inside and out and and can quickly make changes as required. Startups or small businesses need Quality Assurance that ensures that any changes made fall directly in-line with the long term growth plan of the company and the product. This might involve some of the following:

    • Design considerations for the product to allow for future growth
    • Guidelines on how enhancements are going to be added to the product so that the overall product direction is not lost
    • Coding standards to ensure future flexibility of growth

    None of the above require a huge investment in time or resources (both of which are usually in short supply in a new company). They just require some consideration and the discipline to go back every few months and make sure they are effective and efficient.