Comments on: Walking the walk, but can you talk the talk? http://mavericktester.com/walking-the-walk-but-can-you-talk-the-talk The startup's software tester Fri, 03 Sep 2010 12:43:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Anne-Marie Charrett http://mavericktester.com/walking-the-walk-but-can-you-talk-the-talk#comment-1110 Anne-Marie Charrett Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:44:59 +0000 http://mavericktester.com/?p=623#comment-1110 Thanks Thomas. I come across it a lot when I talk to business people about testing. It's fine if they come for a tech background, but any other field requires we as testers to change our language. Thats an interesting document by the way some interesting projections. Something worth commenting on. Thanks Thomas. I come across it a lot when I talk to business people about testing. It’s fine if they come for a tech background, but any other field requires we as testers to change our language. Thats an interesting document by the way some interesting projections. Something worth commenting on.

]]> By: Thomas O' Shea http://mavericktester.com/walking-the-walk-but-can-you-talk-the-talk#comment-1109 Thomas O' Shea Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:23:42 +0000 http://mavericktester.com/?p=623#comment-1109 This has also been raised in the World Quality Report 2009. http://www.sogeti.ie/Documents/Reports/tl_2009_World_Quality_Report%5B1%5D.pdf To directly refer to it - "Inconsistent terminology: Another issue hampering QA is the difference in the terminology being selected. Sometimes the terminology that QA uses does not present the same meaning in the business world. Therefore the two worlds of IT and business are not speaking the same language." I, too, have been occupied with this thought for sometime. It is definitely something worth investing time in to grasp a better understanding on how to bridge this gap. This has also been raised in the World Quality Report 2009. http://www.sogeti.ie/Documents/Reports/tl_2009_World_Quality_Report%5B1%5D.pdf

To directly refer to it -

“Inconsistent terminology:
Another issue hampering QA is the difference in the terminology being selected. Sometimes
the terminology that QA uses does not present the same meaning in the business world.
Therefore the two worlds of IT and business are not speaking the same language.”

I, too, have been occupied with this thought for sometime. It is definitely something worth investing time in to grasp a better understanding on how to bridge this gap.

]]> By: Shane MacLaughlin http://mavericktester.com/walking-the-walk-but-can-you-talk-the-talk#comment-1104 Shane MacLaughlin Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:09:49 +0000 http://mavericktester.com/?p=623#comment-1104 The analogy to survey becomes even more interesting when you look at the client. Notice it is the buyer rather than the seller, as is typically the case in IT. I've been chairing a working group hosted by Dublin City Council over the last number of years, concerned specifically with quality assurance in the provision of survey services, where I borrowed many ideas from the SQA world. The testing in this case relates to the fitness for purpose of services provided, and is a measure of value of those services. The point here is making the jump from cost to value; Testing is all too often seen as a cost to the vendor, whereas proven reliability is of huge value to the client. I think in the software industry, reliability is undersold, possibly given its horrific track record. I think in selling testing, you add considerable value by making all your test results visible to the final client in a well presented format. This is also of value to the marketting team, as they can wave the test results about as proof of how seriously they take reliability. There is also value to the sales and support staff, in terms of having confidence in their product. If risk is a stick, then added value is the corresponding carrot. Look at Toyota's track record in Ireland; the no 1 best selling car by a country mile. After a massive recall due to QA issues, it remains the best selling car. Why? Not because it goes faster, uses less fuel, or has a better stereo system. Nope, it's because it is successfully marketted as the most reliable car out there. I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere. The analogy to survey becomes even more interesting when you look at the client. Notice it is the buyer rather than the seller, as is typically the case in IT. I’ve been chairing a working group hosted by Dublin City Council over the last number of years, concerned specifically with quality assurance in the provision of survey services, where I borrowed many ideas from the SQA world. The testing in this case relates to the fitness for purpose of services provided, and is a measure of value of those services. The point here is making the jump from cost to value; Testing is all too often seen as a cost to the vendor, whereas proven reliability is of huge value to the client. I think in the software industry, reliability is undersold, possibly given its horrific track record.

I think in selling testing, you add considerable value by making all your test results visible to the final client in a well presented format. This is also of value to the marketting team, as they can wave the test results about as proof of how seriously they take reliability. There is also value to the sales and support staff, in terms of having confidence in their product. If risk is a stick, then added value is the corresponding carrot.

Look at Toyota’s track record in Ireland; the no 1 best selling car by a country mile. After a massive recall due to QA issues, it remains the best selling car. Why? Not because it goes faster, uses less fuel, or has a better stereo system. Nope, it’s because it is successfully marketted as the most reliable car out there. I’m sure there’s a lesson in there somewhere.

]]>