Comments on: What do you mean, SQA isn’t testing? http://www.rational-scrum.com/2010/02/what-do-you-mean-sqa-isnt-testing/ Making Scrum work: informal discussions on process improvement Sat, 28 Aug 2010 22:57:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=7575 hourly 1 By: Why Agile isn't enough (and why it doesn't work) | Rational Scrum http://www.rational-scrum.com/2010/02/what-do-you-mean-sqa-isnt-testing/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Why Agile isn't enough (and why it doesn't work) | Rational Scrum Sat, 24 Apr 2010 03:38:53 +0000 http://www.rational-scrum.com/?p=164#comment-40 [...] mistakes, such as MIL-STD-498[#], most people think quality assurance is software testing — it’s not). Structured software testing often becomes an afterthought, and risk management programs tend to [...] [...] mistakes, such as MIL-STD-498[#], most people think quality assurance is software testing — it’s not). Structured software testing often becomes an afterthought, and risk management programs tend to [...]

]]> By: Zacharias Beckman http://www.rational-scrum.com/2010/02/what-do-you-mean-sqa-isnt-testing/comment-page-1/#comment-19 Zacharias Beckman Fri, 19 Feb 2010 06:32:04 +0000 http://www.rational-scrum.com/?p=164#comment-19 Actually, and I apologize if this was not clear, my argument is that it's a conflict of interest for Quality Assurance to directly manage any other function. By managing functions outside of Quality Assurance (such as Testing) the QA organization could become vested in representing Testing in a "more positive light." It's a pretty standard argument: If the auditors are also doing the testing, how do you know the testing is being done well? Actually, and I apologize if this was not clear, my argument is that it’s a conflict of interest for Quality Assurance to directly manage any other function. By managing functions outside of Quality Assurance (such as Testing) the QA organization could become vested in representing Testing in a “more positive light.” It’s a pretty standard argument: If the auditors are also doing the testing, how do you know the testing is being done well?

]]> By: John Mac Millan http://www.rational-scrum.com/2010/02/what-do-you-mean-sqa-isnt-testing/comment-page-1/#comment-18 John Mac Millan Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:09:13 +0000 http://www.rational-scrum.com/?p=164#comment-18 Your argument appears to be that, testing is more of a development activity as opposed to a QA activity. What group an organization wishes to put software testing in is entirely their choice as is their testing focus, i.e. are you looking for defects or verifying requirements. I would suggest that an organization be aware of both approaches, know the pros and cons of each approach and find a balance that works for the organization. Your argument appears to be that, testing is more of a development activity as opposed to a QA activity.

What group an organization wishes to put software testing in is entirely their choice as is their testing focus, i.e. are you looking for defects or verifying requirements.

I would suggest that an organization be aware of both approaches, know the pros and cons of each approach and find a balance that works for the organization.

]]>