SPONSORS:






User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Cost Of failure

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Perambure
    Posts
    7
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Cost Of failure

    If the Cost of testing is more than the Cost of failures, we are the alternatives, we should go for.


    Thanks in Advance.
    Deepak

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    1,480
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    a) reduce testing, make more failures (they are cheaper! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] )
    b) try to make your testing more efficient
    c) use another calculation method, in which the cost of failures will be more expensive...


    Seriously: Could your company survive without testing? Are the developers that good? Or is your application that uncritical that there is no possibility of a severe bug?

    Regards,
    Juergen

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    The answer (the wrong one) that is embedded into question is to fire tester and hire support engineer (to fix production bugs).
    However you should understand that cost of shipped bug is not just a cost of fixing it in production. If you will be shipping too much the software will loose reliability: your customer/user will consider either using different software or increase the penalty you have to pay for shipped bugs.
    ?:the art of a constructive conflict perceived as a destructive diagnose.
    Ainars

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    West Coast of the East Coast!
    Posts
    7,756
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    Deepak,
    I do not believe the scenario, unless, as Juergen said, "is your application that uncritical that there is no possibility of a severe bug?

    If someone told you that, though, get your resume ready, because when upper management makes a decision, there's not much you can do about it.
    Personal Comment

    Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.
    ~ Winston Churchill ~


    ...Rich Wagner

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Charlotte, NC, USA
    Posts
    617
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    To Rich's point. This is not a believable scenario.

    Deepak.
    Who determined that the cost of testing was higher than the cost of failures? What was their methodology? It appears to be counter to recognized norms.
    Resistance is futile.

    SuperK

  6. #6
    SQA Knight
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Highlands Ranch, CO, USA
    Posts
    2,860
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    Deepak,

    When talking about the cost of Testing vs. the cost of Failures the one thing that is always missed in the equation is the affect it has on the bottom line to the company. Meaning how does it externally affect its bottom line (P&L, Earnings before debits credits interest taxes amortization, lost revenue due to poor/lost sales and non-renewal of licensing fees). There is also the additive affect in money terms due to rework after release and during construction. Internally it is the rework time & money that can kill a project/company. Ever heard of Ashton-Tate dBase IV?

    Testing (And Quality Assurance, but don't confuse the two as one in the same. Testing is part of QA, not the other way around) is a minor investment in a companies future to ensure that the product is produced as defect free as is possible. Notice how I said defect free as is possible, you will never find all the defects/bugs in the product. You will need to look closely at Risk Management in relation to the product. How do you reduce risk to the project, company, and end-user. By doing this you will hopefully produce a better product and minimize the impact/risk to the bottom line of the company.

    Testing is insurance for the company and end-user. Sure it costs, but in comparison to the potential cost of not doing it it is a minor amount.

    Whoever is saying that the testing is costing more than the cost of a failure is a blithering pillock wanking idiot who needs to be shot. But that is my humble opinion. [img]images/icons/cool.gif[/img]

    Good luck.

    Jim

    [ 10-25-2005, 08:09 AM: Message edited by: jimhazen ]
    Jim
    -------------------------------------------
    For all the general stuff to know about QA/Test go here http://www.softwareqatest.com/

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    What if the software is never released to the public, what if its only inhouse?

    Then it could be very buggy and only minorly cost the company in time.
    Dont force me to hit you with the motivational stick again.

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    1,878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    Originally posted by DeepakBhalotia:
    If the Cost of testing is more than the Cost of failures, we are the alternatives, we should go for.


    Thanks in Advance.
    Deepak
    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Hi Deepak,

    If the above statement is true, IMO it suggests that your software project may not be a commercially viable proposition for your company. The cost of testing can be broken down into two parts, the cost of acquiring the technology and expertise to test efficiently, and the ongoing cost of maintaining that technology and expertise. The cost of the former can be very high, so high in fact that it cannot reasonably be absorbed by a single project. The cost of the latter is very reasonable, and IMO, greatly reduces the overall development costs and increases product longevity. The cost of software failures may appear low at the start of a given project, but it can only go up.

    Software projects are becoming progressively more complex, laws of entropy and all that, such that investment in up to date testing methodologies and tools is now necessary if you have any hope to succeed.

    For my 2c worth, your choices are buy into testing, outsource all your development and testing, or abandon the software development industry.

    All just my opinion of course,

    Best regards,

    Shane

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    1,878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    Originally posted by LORD Milez:
    What if the software is never released to the public, what if its only inhouse?

    Then it could be very buggy and only minorly cost the company in time.
    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Not really true. Sure, if the software falls over and is crashy, but if the nature of the bugs is that incorrect results are propagated, even in-house, this will be expensive. Particularly if the software is in use for a long time prior to the bug being noticed.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Charlotte, NC, USA
    Posts
    617
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Re: Cost Of failure

    Software projects are becoming progressively more complex, laws of entropy and all that
    <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">Eh? This is counterintuitive.

    The laws of entropy would tend to less complexity, not more. The trend towards complexity should rather be leveraged as a proof for evolution, survival of the fittest, adaptation to the environment, the drive to reproduce - oh, wait, maybe going a little too far there [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
    Resistance is futile.

    SuperK

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.36 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 8.11%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise v2.6.4 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.8 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBNominate (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
BetaSoft Inc.
Digital Point modules: Sphinx-based search
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:23 PM.

Copyright BetaSoft Inc.