We talk a lot about software testing methodologies around here. And for good reason—they’re a primary component of a consistent and efficient testing and QA organization. But what is a methodology built upon? At Lighthouse, it comes down to 3 things: People, Process, and Tools.
Software is never 100% defect free, so how far should responsible testers go before wading into the murky seas of cost overruns and diminishing returns—and what methods should they use to draw the line?
In today’s world, software testing is increasingly seen as a commodity. But as companies’ reputations become increasingly dependent on their digital presence, is poor quality really acceptable anymore? And if so, isn’t it worth finding a high-quality outsourcing partner to protect it?
Just like New Year’s resolutions, it’s easy to give up on driving changes in software testing and QA because of a lack of short-term success. Isn’t it time we changed this mindset—and started focusing on the journey as well as the destination?
Every year, the holiday shopping rush reminds us of a fundamental truth: make sure your website performs under load. But in the haste to perform load testing, it’s worth considering adding another equally-important arrow to your quiver: code analysis.
The success of your software testing and QA team comes down to one thing: having the right people in the right roles. That can be quite a challenge, though—which is why we developed the Gauntlet™ to ensure our clients get the best personnel out there.
If the 3 Perils of Software Development™—Defects, Delays, and Dollars—are regularly driving your projects off schedule and over budget, getting your QA and testing team back on course can be hard. That’s why applying a metrics-based testing methodology is so important—it’s the most reliable course correction there is.
For some IT leaders, software development projects can feel like an endless cacophony of defect-related rework and delays—especially for people involved In software testing and QA. But as frustration mounts, pinpointing a path to improvement can prove difficult. Our solution? Start with quality exit criteria.
Every software project is judged by four factors: time-to-market, agility, quality, and cost. But while those are typically seen as your developers’ domain, aren’t your software testers and QA engineers the ones really responsible for them?
