QA Testing Company: Involvement of The Right Participants in Quality Risk Analysis
Some of the parties interested in the project may not be able to participate in the quality risk analysis. The most important persons are the customers and product users. Ideally, if possible, they should be involved in the quality risk assessment based on requirements; and the companies developing systems for internal use may sometimes use this approach to evaluating quality risks. However, in custom and commercial software systems projects, customers and users typically do not participate in the quality risk assessment process and at that future customers and users are often not known in advance. In this case, those key stakeholders who work most closely with potential customers and users are sales management, marketing, technical support staff, etc., — during the analysis they should represent the interests of users and customers, acting on behalf of missing participants. QA testing company is an organization that deals with software problems effectively and efficiently.
Certain experience with the risk analysis shows that the best results are achieved when the process involves the greatest possible number of stakeholders with different interests and different educational backgrounds, skills and experiences. The more points of view are expressed by the company’s personnel the more complex risks will be on the list, and more accurately the risk priority sequence will be made. Although, it is better to conduct a quality risk analysis based on requirements and architecture specifications, and necessarily with involvement of participants who are specialists from different fields, as it is an important factor which plays a crucial role behind the success of the risk analysis process. Security vulnerabilities are easy to identify and remove through a penetration testing service provided on a regular basis.
Let us consider an example of such a situation.
Leading testers together with a test manager conducted analysis of the specific types of errors and their effect or severity, after the project team had produced high-quality project documents, including the requirements and architecture specifications. However, the project team did not participate in the analysis. Instead, drafts of the documents were emailed to employees of the project working group. Many of the key stakeholders refused to take the time to provide them with useful information. As a result, the test managers and leading testers had to stop execution of the tests that took a lot of their time and effort to develop the data, scripts, test environment, etc., when they were half way through the process, since their risks assessments did not meet the priorities of the project. In other words, the benefits of determining what to test and what not to test had not been gained since the persons concerned did not participate in the process. Project documentation appeared to have been unable to adequately replace the contributions made by different professionals to the quality of risk analysis. Load testing companies check software products for durability and performance and offer the right solutions to help customers improve characteristics of their products.