QA Verified

(I wrote this on 17th of September, 2012)

I subscribe to how Cem Kaner clarified the difference between testing and quality assurance.

Testing is a technical investigation of a product, done to expose quality-related information.

Testers dig up useful information. This is good. But it doesn’t ensure quality.

Quality Assistance–that’s what testers do. We help. We investigate. We learn things. We report them clearly. We make sure that people understand what we have found and what its significance means. We provide the good data that is so important for understanding and improving the quality of the product.

That’s important, but it’s not “quality assurance.” (emphasis mine)

– Cem Kaner, The Ongoing Revolution in Software Testing (2004), p. 6-7

Over the past month, I designed proposed user story and bug workflows in JIRA for use in our organization. A couple of days after I submitted it for review, I realized I marked the statuses for testing as “QA”, “QA in Progress”, and “QA Verified” consistent with how our development teams referred to what we do.

Big mess. I could have potentially institutionalize roles I never wanted us to play:

  • Every user story needs to be ‘signed off’ or ‘QA Verified’ by my (Test) team (IMO should be the role of the product owner or project manager or by the Agile Team)
  • My Team becomes ‘gatekeepers’, where stories or issues needed “QA” sign-off before being released
  • So we’re now supposed to do more checking rather than testing?

I immediately sent out an email to my boss to propose the change from “QA” to “Testing”, where workflow transitions end with “Testing completed”. This should communicate clearly that:

  1. Everyone‘owns’ quality;
  2. The Test team cannot and does not assure quality; and that
  3. We test, not perform quality assurance

What did I get?

I agree. “Quality” starts with the gathering of requirements and should be part of everything we do from then on.

Great boss.

What’s your thoughts on testing vs. quality assurance?

Tagged: , ,

2 thoughts on “QA Verified

  1. Jaya R. Carl April 10, 2013 at 5:02 AM Reply

    If they didn’t understand your concern then you could have redefined “QA”.

    Quick Analysis Complete
    Quick Ass Verified
    😉

  2. ianp April 10, 2013 at 11:27 PM Reply

    Excellent point. That’s a good tester mindset there – change the way you look at the problem. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Context + Agility

Developing leaders in agile, lean, and software quality - in context

Developsense Blog

DevelopSense Blog

Peak Performance

Business. Technology. People. And testing for them the lean and agile way.

TEST3D | Software Analysis and Testing in Startups

Business. Technology. People. And testing for them the lean and agile way.

%d bloggers like this: