Q-tag archives - Quality Assurance and Project Management

Quality Assurance and Project Management:

Q-tag

Jul 17 2009   10:00AM GMT

Why hit the people? Hit the process if there is a failure in a software project



Posted by: Jaideep
Quality Assurance, Software Project, Project Management, people management, HR, QA, QC, Q-tag, developer, quality, quality control, quality culture, quality building, product, stakeholder, business analyst, project manager, project team, development team, testing team, implementation team, product build

People are not wrong, processes are. People in an organization do what they are told to do. Organizations who hit on people at the time of failure are not doing the right thing. It is the process that is to be blamed not the person with Q-tag. As long as quality is considered to be the child of people with Q-tag in the organization, and the culture is so around, the non Q-tag people will keep themselves enjoying building a product without quality. Why not blame the developers for developing so many bugs along with the requirements building. Why not blame the analysts who could not understand or translate the requirements correctly. Why not blame the management for not putting the right people and process at right place. This blame game itself is merely a scapegoat in any organization until the focus shifts from people to process enhancement.

Analyze the failure as a team involving all the stakeholders. Management, business analysts, project managers, project team, development team, testing team, implementation team have to sit together and brainstorm. Failure is to learn and not fail again. Mainly failure can occur due to following three factors:

Teams do not work and deliver in desired fashion – required innovation, awareness, training, cohesiveness, team building, and collaboration
Wrong people in the team – HR and management has to play a major role and look into the recruitment process.
Failed to build right product – needs training, demonstration, pairing, indentifying right people for right job.

Jul 15 2009   10:00AM GMT

Who owns the Q-Tag in a software development company?



Posted by: Jaideep
Quality Assurance, Q-tag, quality control, Software Project, Project Management, stakeholder, project methodology, project management framework, project implementation, software build, software implementation, product approval, Quality-tag, project team, development team, implementation team, testing team, team, QC, QA, business analyst, re-testing, testing, Bug, bugs report, test report

In any software development and implementation company there is always a need of quality assurance and quality control people who own the responsibility of setting the right methodology and framework for development and implementation (QA), bugs identification and product approval (QC). Usually everyone in the organization has an inherent feeling that the quality is the responsibility of only these few persons belonging to this Q-department of the organization. Business analysts understand the customer and business requirement, hand it over to development team for building the product. Development team develops the product, and hands it over to QC team. QC team tests the product, finds out the bugs, and submits the report to development team. Development team fixes the bugs and returns the product to QC persons for re-testing and verification. After few exchanges between development and QC team, the product is declared as defect free and is released or launched for implementation.

If top management, development team, business analysts, implementation team and all other stakeholders think that quality is just the responsibility of only the persons belonging to quality department, they all are wrong. If Q-tag is limited to only a limited persons belonging to Quality department among all stakeholders, a product can never be built with great control on quality aspect.

Q-tag has to be on each of the stakeholder in a software project. When each and every person wears a Q-tag – the analysis, building, testing and implementation will be more justified. Otherwise there will always be a big question at the time of failure of a product build – that who is responsible?