[ Sponsored Links ]

Advertise here »

Cost of no QA or Testing

reply to message » post a new message » e-mail to a friend »
Subject:  Cost of no QA or Testing
Author:   RosieSherry:   view profile | all posts by this author | add to favourites
Date:   15:46:23 5 April 2006
 
Here is a dilemma for you:

When project costs are too high, how would you cut costs?

People? No chance – we need all hands on deck.
Advertising? You’ve got to be kidding – it has to sell or we’re sunk.
Cut the coffee budget? *sound of knives being drawn*
Abandon the project? Get your coat.

WAIT! I know - we don’t really need all that QA testing do we? Let’s reduce it. No, in fact - lets half it. Or maybe we don’t need it at all?

OK, so you probably kept your job but the project is now on a collision course with failure. If everyone knew the truth about Quality we wouldn’t all avoid it at all costs.
Quality does not cost the earth
There is an industry wide perception that Quality and Testing costs the earth. This is entirely false. Failure is what eventually ends up being the burden, the whole point of QA and Testing is to prevent failure and non-conformance.

Rather than trying to argue that quality is not an unnecessary expense, consider the cost of NOT delivering as expected:
• Loss in revenue
• Brand damage
• Reduction in productivity
• Liability costs
• Increased support costs

Now consider the benefits of preventing the above points from occurring. QA and Testing aims to prevent non-conformances. Prevention is key, and this relates to any aspect of life.

For example: If you want a quality and healthy life, there are certain things people should avoid, such as, live on a diet of fast food, smoking and drinking. Therefore, in order not to suffer the costs and suffering of a heart attack or lung cancer, you would PREVENT it by not living on an unhealthy diet.

In fact “Prevention not Cure” became a cornerstone philosophy of the early National Health Service, during which time sanitisation was paramount. The idea of prevention over cure is as old as Washing your Hands!

The same can be applied to any project. Prevention is key. The prevention of non-conformances will ensure that additional costs will not occur during or after a project lifecycle.

QA is responsible for ensuring conformance to requirements are met. It doesn’t mean there has to be the burden of lengthy procedures. It means ensuring greatest efficiency possible and reducing costs, by recommending and implementing practices that will prevent the high costs of:
• Rework
• Maintenance and support
• Productivity
• Client dissatisfaction

Increasingly, clients are becoming more accepting that there are ‘bugs’ within a system. That it’s only natural that they find issues with what is delivered and report them back to the ‘creators’. They may not be completely disappointed with the fact there are issues within a system they have paid for, they get by like the rest of us BUT….

Imagine how they would feel if they found no issues at all.

Here are a couple of words you might remember from the past, as a clue:

Happy Customers. 


Rosie Sherry
QA Consultant
www.drivenqa.com
 
« Back to Internet Marketing Forum Previous Thread »  |  Next Thread »
  • Cost of no QA or Testing, RosieSherry, 5 Apr 15:46
    Here is a dilemma for you: When project costs are too high, how would you cut costs? People? No chance – we need all hands on deck. Advertising? You’ve got to be kiddin ...
« Back to Internet Marketing Forum Post a new message »
Subscribe for only €299