Who decides if the product ready?

In my career I have often been in the situation when I was asked whether or not the product is ready to be shipped. After so many times I was through it I still hesitate when I am asked this question. The reason why I couldn't answer it for sure is that I do not have all the required information to draw a decision.

Being a quality manager all I can judge upon is the quality. But the quality is not the mere criteria to take into consideration when trying to figure if you are ready to release. There are also business demands and limitations, promises made to customers, market situation, corporate strategy, and so on. All those questions are beyond the authority of a quality manager.

So, what to do if you are asked this question yet. Below is how I would behave at different positions.

Quality manager

Above I mentioned that the only criteria you can asses is the quality. You have to start answering this question since the very start of the project. You have to build this answer with all the activities on testing and QA throughout the project timeline. Start building it up from the very beginning - test strategy and keep it in sight all the time. Assess and mitigate quality risks. as you learn new information about the product do the corrections of testing course.

When it's time to answer this question, use all the information you have collected. Just compare metrics against previous similar releases (or against you previous experience with similar systems) and state things as they are, without too much of optimism. If the product is a crap say so. Don't be afraid. You will not be punished for the truth in case you kept saying so all the time when you were asked. Saying that everything is fine during the project and demanding that it's a crap in the end looks unprofessional.

Providing your answer make sure that everyone understands that you are talking of QUALITY CRITERIA ONLY. So that no one can bear an incorrect opinion that you are taking the responsibility for a BUSINESS DECISION.

The best way to say it IMO:
- All the testing we have planned is completed. No issues that are considered critical for the release are open. Latest cycles of testing did not reveal many regression issues. The changes in the latest builds were scarce and undergo all a strict process of risk assessment and regression testing. Fixes which were too risky to do have been moved on to the next version. I can say that we are in good shape from the quality perspective.

In case it's not as good you may also add:
- However, we have experienced significant problems with testing the system under high load. The tools that we have used did not allow us generating required load capacity. So, we do not know how system reacts to peak load. It is a risk for the system operation. After discussion with management we decided that this risk can be accepted.

In the case when it's not good at all:
- Every time we start testing the system it brings many new issues. Defect arrival rate is at almost the same rate all the time. It stays as high as X defects per day till the very end of testing cycle. I would strongly recommend analyzing the reason why we introduce so many defects, improve the process and do another cycle of development and testing to create a product of acceptable quality.

Project manager

As a project manager you have to be sure that your quality manager is confident with the quality of the release. If it is not the case then try to find out the nature of the risks. Assess those risks against project goals and made a decision. It can be a hard one nonetheless you are in better position to make it than anyone else on the project team.

Software tester

I knew several top managers who liked asking it to software testers. They believed that they can get to know the information from first hands, thus testing the correctness of information provided by middle level managers. I don't think this is a good idea. Anyway, as a tester, you need to be prepared. Before giving the answer, make it clear that you can answer only based on YOUR experience with the system. Your experience may be limited to some module or type of testing. If it went good then say that only that system's feature is OK. Do not pretend you possess all the information to say so about the whole product. This may be a killer. I also was in the situation when I was asked "why do you say that everything goes smooth if your guy told me that his module is full of bugs and he sees no end to it?" or opposite "why do you keep telling me that things go so badly when your guys report the system is fine?". Do not put your manager in the situation like this.

Top manager

Well you have someone to report to (board of directors or something) you also need to weight your words. The most dangerous but exciting about your position is that this decision is completely yours. So, don't show a weakness and don't expect that someone else will step up and do it for you. All the responsibility as well as all the fame is yours.

Before making a decision, ask your managers (quality and production). But don't be pushy. Do not force them saying what you want to hear. Be as objective as you can.

It's all for now. Sorry for a mess in thoughts I wrote it real fast. Hope this helps you avoid embarrassing situation when you are asked if the product is ready to be released.

Making the testing better

Despite unit testing has formal metrics that can prove at least minimal level of thoroughness; many organizations struggle to uncover measurement that can help telling how much of unit testing is enough. The minimal level of testing can be measured in terms of code coverage. Code coverage can be as weak as statement to as strong as du-paths. But this is not my goal to explain each of those. My goal is to help those who try finding an alternative measure of unit testing quality.

One of ideas is measuring it post-factum. Well it may be too late to know the truth. Nonetheless this knowledge can be used in the following project to reduce number of defects of a specific sort. I mean the feedback that you receive from testing.

Software is being developed in several stages. Even in Agile, there are stages; but they are shorter and tightly intertwined. Defects injected at a given stage can be found at that stage or at the following ones. Depending on how many defects injected at the stage escaped quality control, we can draw our conclusion about testing quality.

For example, we have created a unit and performed unit tests. In result of testing we have found and fixed 16 issues. But later when a unit comes to Integration and System testing, we discover additional 4 issues attributed to unit. This means that defect removal efficiency of unit testing for that module was:

DRE = (1-4/(16+4))*100%=80%

To enable this measurement you need to analyze issues found at later stages of development. If you have a defect tracking system (and I hope you do) then you can simply introduce the field that will denote to what of development stages a defect can be attributed. The biggest problem here is having defects found at unit testing stage filed somehow. Many developers see it as an additional unneeded paperwork. So, if you are going to implement this metric be prepared to the resistance. You may decrease the pain by claiming only brief information on unit testing defects to be filed (summary only). There are tools that can be integrated into development IDE to soothe this pain for developers.

Other testing stages' effectiveness can be measured the same way. All you need is to collect this information continuously. Two or three projects later you will have plenty of interesting information to think of:

- Why is this module's unit testing is lower in effectiveness than others?
- Why developer A usually produces higher effectiveness than others? Can the latter share the experience to the team?
- Who is responsible for most of the issues down the road? What can you do about it?

Hope this helps! :)